A thread for proving or debunking climate change

To begin, http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/19/global-warming-is-good-says-president-trumps-science-guru/

"The predicted warming from more CO2 is grossly exaggerated. The equilibrium warming from doubling CO2 is not going to be 3° C, which might marginally be considered a problem, but closer to 1° C, which will be beneficial. One should not forget that the “global warming” is an average value. There will be little warming in the tropics and little warming at midday. What warming occurs will be mostly in temperate and polar regions, and at night. This will extend the agricultural growing season in many countries like Canada, Scandinavia, and Russia. More CO2greatly increases the efficiency of photosynthesis in plants and makes land plants more drought-resistant. So, the net result of more CO2 will be strongly beneficial for humanity." --William Happer, PhD, Princeton physicist and professor, and former Director of the Office of Energy Research at the US Department of Energy

William Happer is the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Emeritus, in the Department of Physics at Princeton University. A long-time member of JASON, a group of scientists which provides independent advice to the U.S. government on matters relating to science, technology, and national security, Happer served as Director of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science from 1991–1993.

Best known to the general public as a vocal critic of the U.N. IPCC “consensus” on global warming, he has been called frequently to give expert testimony before various U.S. congressional committees on the subject of global warming (climate change). In 2015, he found himself at the center of a new controversy involving a so-called “sting” operation organized by Greenpeace.

A list of some of Professor Happer’s major research publications may be accessed here (http://physics.princeton.edu/atomic/happer/Publications.html).

Compile your data and arguments in this thread and we will have it all battle it out until there is a clear winner.

Well, we are still exiting the last Ice Age so it should be a given that there will continue to be global warming until the cycle reverses and we start toward a new ice age.

I rarely use the term "global warming" but rather use "climate change". And climate change is a natural event of the Earth's tilt on its axis.

I am sure we humans are adding more CO2 to the environment than humans did a million years ago. But I doubt what we are doing makes any significant difference.

How dare you! Some bureaucrats have just received huge bribes to say that global warming is directly correlated to CO2 emissions! They have promised us that they have an exact handle on how much the temperature will rise! They promised us ok? So you are a woman hating pussygrabber.

Plus did they even have instagram in the ice age? Iiii didnt think so. No one cares.

-

Anyway,
if CO2 amounts to global warming, then the worst we can do (if we dislike global warming, which Canada does not, as it will make it the most powerful harbor nation on the planet) is to buy electrical cars and solar panels.

The CO2 emission profile of an average Tesla car exceeds by 5 times or so a normal car as it comes from the factory. Putting these shitpieces together is radically disastrous in its cost. Official numbers have a electrical car becoming marginally cleaner than a gasoline engine after 20 years of driving. Considering all this is new technology and batteries arent well known for their lasting power, it seems entirely unlikely that these cars will averagely last even half that long.

Haha.

The mark of a rational society would be that it can use all available resources to its benefit. CO2 emissions are a potential resource, we need to figure out how to use them. CO2 can be split into useful carbon and oxygen for example.

Thats more like it!

Value increases as value is exchanged. This is how the universe 'came together', how the planet works, what an ecosystem is.

So yes, why not build a device that captures the emissions, compresses them, so as to be processed into something useful?

How much volume do emissions constitute? Say I burn 20 gallons of gas with an average car, and compress the exhaust into fluid form.

Nature already has a nice model for carbon dioxide capture: photosynthesis. We need to be making machines that photosynthesize oxygen out of carbon dioxide, so you get a double effect: for every unit of CO2 recycled you not only remove it from the atmosphere but you get a unit of oxygen in return.

It shouldn't be too hard to design an artificial biomass of considerable size, I always envision massive floating balloons way up in the sky, each one dozens of miles wide. Up above the clouds where sunlight is always plentiful. Then here on the ground we can have massive electrolysis plants drawing in atmospheric CO2 and splitting it into carbon and oxygen atoms. Just like how Israel is already getting half its water supply from desalination plants, we can do that too and solve the drought problems around the world. Also there are already small machines that run entirely on solar power and create drinking water from the air. Imagine that, a machine the size of a water cooler in your living room that produces gallons of drinking water every day without any need for electricity.

So scale up production processes for things like this and we can address all these environmental problems in a wise way.

Fixed Cross wrote:

The CO2 emission profile of an average Tesla car exceeds by 5 times or so a normal car as it comes from the factory. Putting these shitpieces together is radically disastrous in its cost. Official numbers have a electrical car becoming  marginally cleaner than a gasoline engine after 20 years of driving. Considering all this is new technology and batteries arent well known for their lasting power, it seems entirely unlikely that these cars will averagely last even half that long.

Actually, I have a solar-electric car. It is a 1984 Honda Wagovan. It was converted in 1989.

I bought it six years ago and restored it to pretty good condition. I drive it locally to do shopping. It has lead/acid batteries so they are not as efficient as the lithium batteries but considering I use it on average once every four days the solar panel do most of the battery charging and I rarely have to plug it in to charge it.

When the batteries were new, gas prices were at $3.50/gal, and before I put the solar panels on it got the energy equivalent of 90 miles per gallon of gas.

The batteries are aging so it isn't that great any more but with the solar panels I use little external energy.

The only way in which I am ahead of you guys is in aggression about getting this message out there, meaning to Trumps energy department.

These massive balloons, I can breathe deeper already.

The archetype of Nietzsche's Child can be related to this phrase / there comes a time when 'politics' will have a different meaning through this vision.

I don't even like the word "politics". Is there perhaps a better word for those who are supposedly serving the people?

Dr. Patrick Moore, taking about how and why “climate change” is a scam.

Very nice. Want to put his name here for when Gulag eventually removes this video from youtube.

I'll go on record claiming it's hogwash and sometimes I wonder if the hoax is engineered for a "greater good" (ie to push and subsidize solar, which couldn't compete in a fair market, for the good of humanity as an eventual free energy source.).  I'm just not sure if they are smart enough to think that far ahead.

Good info ozonedepletiontheory.info

I've dug into the issue with a bit of spirit and tenacity to essentially discover that earth's climate is determined by the sun and cosmic rays which change over time as the solar system orbits the galaxy, drifting in and out of spiral arms.  CO2 is not even a variable, being only .04% concentration of the atmosphere; it's ridiculous that anyone would buy that without "extraordinary evidence to support such an extraordinary claim" (which there isn't).

It's solar and galactic weather that largely affects earth's climate which governs animal behavior and when the climate is warm, animal activity increases which increases the CO2 content of earth (and explains the lag of CO2 vs temp increase).  I've even toyed with the idea that CO2 could play some "medicinal" role in mediating the heat, though it's hard to imagine how that might play out.

Cosmic weather could have ended the reign of the dinosaurs, who grew too big for a cooler earth with less O2.  I heard one paleontologist claim that by the time the meteor hit, the dinos were already dead.

I'm pretty sure that it's the galaxy first and the sun second that determines what happens on earth.

Good points. Yes it’s crazy this silly climate change nonsense, by their own measures we should all be dead now lolz.

Plus as Dr Moore says, more CO2 is actually beneficial because it causes more plant growth and more heat opens up more habitable farmable lands and causes more moisture in the atmosphere leading to more rain. More vegetation and more food is good for animals like us, who eat that stuff. And I want more trees, I am pissed about places like the Amazon being cut down for soy beans or whatever the fuck.

Thrasymachus wrote:

Good points. Yes it’s crazy this silly climate change nonsense, by their own measures we should all be dead now lolz.

Plus as Dr Moore says, more CO2 is actually beneficial because it causes more plant growth and more heat opens up more habitable farmable lands and causes more moisture in the atmosphere leading to more rain. More vegetation and more food is good for animals like us, who eat that stuff. And I want more trees, I am pissed about places like the Amazon being cut down for soy beans or whatever the fuck.

I love trees!  My life somewhat revolves around them with my management of a small personal forest.  People have no respect for trees... they bulldoze them, shoot them, destroy the roots, hack the tops out, piss on them and then think I am weird because I appreciate something that's been there for 50-200 yrs.  Yes, the more CO2 the better... bring it on!  

Did you know it's illegal to buy or sell older woodburning stoves in some states because of emissions?  Makes me want to start a slow smoldering fire just to piss them off

Ive met some trees that are

More real than most people

Thrasymachus wrote:

Ive met some trees that are

More real than most people

I've met people who make me feel as if I were talking to a tree.

FC, Cool pic!

Breaking down the 97% consensus lie.

I simply cannot talk to so-called normal people on this issue anymore. And a search online reveals so much government funded narrative and repeating of idiotic statements like “hottest year in history” and I can’t even trust any of these NOAA or NASA or IPCC or similar websites anymore.

I choose to use my brain, my reason, when interpreting his issue. I will accept some small warming has seemingly occurred in the atmosphere or near surface, although even that seems reasonably able to be doubted. But still. That doesn’t even mean anything really, on multiple levels his all seems so much propaganda for useful idiots to swallow.