brenthutch

Members
  • Content

    11,005
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by brenthutch

  1. Yes let us get back to some good ol peer reviewed science. "This research failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 14 temperature data sets that were analyzed,” the authors say in the release for the second edition of their peer-reviewed work. http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/24/exclusive-new-study-calls-epas-labeling-of-co2-a-pollutant-totally-false/#ixzz4fCgzCPuh
  2. Agreed, and it only makes sense that a Progressive Democratic administration moved to the bar to the left and now a Republican administration is making some corrections in the other direction.
  3. I was unaware that volcanoes, epidemics and earthquakes were caused by climate, or that mass catastrophes were the only way that climate killed people. Should I bother asking you a third time if you can support your claim or should we just assume that you can't already? [/url]http://www.newsweek.com/nepal-earthquake-could-have-been-manmade-disaster-climate-change-brings-326017[url] http://www.livescience.com/25936-climate-change-causes-volcanism.html https://www.seeker.com/could-climate-change-cause-deadly-epidemics-1769022653.html Climate change can do it all apparently
  4. The blue and black lines are a function of population growth and better reporting. What you need to be looking at is the number of deaths! Another poster said, "I would be very surprised if there weren't many more climate related deaths now, if only because there are vastly more people living in places where climate can cause problems." As you can clearly see, he was wrong.
  5. If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it continues to move nationalize it. It is all on a continuum and not as far fetched as you may think. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0BdKkEKTrs&autoplay=1
  6. I agree with these scientists. David Bellamy, botanist.[18][19][20][21] Lennart Bengtsson, meteorologist, Reading University.[22][23] Piers Corbyn, owner of the business WeatherAction which makes weather forecasts.[24][25] Judith Curry, Professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.[26][27][28][29] Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society.[30][31] Ivar Giaever, Norwegian–American physicist and Nobel laureate in physics (1973).[32] Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University.[33][34] Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences.[35][36][37][38] Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.[39][40][41][42][43][44][45] Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics and CBE Chair in Sustainable Commerce, University of Guelph.[46][47] Patrick Moore, former president of Greenpeace Canada.[48][49][50] Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003).[51][52] Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University.[53][54] Roger A. Pielke, Jr., professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder.[55][56] Tom Quirk, corporate director of biotech companies and former board member of the Institute of Public Affairs, an Australian conservative think-tank.[57] Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science.[58][59][60][61] Harrison Schmitt, geologist, Apollo 17 Astronaut, former U.S. Senator.[62] Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.[63][64] Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London.[65][66] Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.[67][68] Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor of atmospheric science at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.[69][70] Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry.[71][72] Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.[73] These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles. Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences[74][75] Sallie Baliunas, retired astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[76][77][78] Timothy Ball, historical climatologist, and retired professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg[79][80][81] Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[82][83] Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland[84][85] David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester[86][87] Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University[88][89] William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy; emeritus professor, Princeton University[90][91] Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo[92][93] Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.[94][95] William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology[96][97] David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware[98][99] Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri[100][101] Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[102][103] Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[104][105] Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of mining geology, the University of Adelaide.[106][107] Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego[108][109] Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University and University of Colorado[110][111] Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University[112][113][114] Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo[115][116] Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem[117][118] Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia[119][120][121][122] Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[123][124] Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville[125][126] Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center[127][128] George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University[129][130] Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa[131][132] Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.[133][134] Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).[135][136] Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.[137][138] Pål Brekke, solar astrophycisist, senior advisor Norwegian Space Centre.[139][140] John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.[141][142][143] Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[144][145] David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.[146][147] Stanley B. Goldenberg a meteorologist with NOAA/AOML's Hurricane Research Division [148] [149] Vincent R. Gray, New Zealand physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes[150][151] Keith E. Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change[152][153] Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.[154][155] Kary Mullis, 1993 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry.[156] Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment. Indur M. Goklany, science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior[157][158][159] Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [160][161] Sherwood B. Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University[162][163] Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia[164][165]
  7. I sit next to/work with a Venezuelan girl, as in born and raised and her entire family is there. What exactly should I ask her? Ask her how well Socialism worked out? FIFY
  8. So now you agree with me when I said, "modernity, powered but fossil fuels, has largely insulation Man from the ravages of Mother Nature."??? It was only a few posts ago that you took the opposite position.
  9. You really are a glutton for punishment. https://ourworldindata.org/natural-catastrophes/
  10. Oh really? It's an easily confirmable fact that many times more people died from climate related effects 100 years ago than now? Go on then. Worst flood 1931 4-5 million deaths Worst drought 1907 24+ million deaths Worst hurricane/cyclone 1737 300,000 deaths Too easy.
  11. Amen brother! If solar can stand on its own, without training wheels I am all for it. The more economic the better.
  12. Juxtaposed to the deaths from cold? Net net....yawn. Oh oh, now I get it. The deaths from cold are also a result of global warming. Wow you guys are very clever!
  13. Apparently a lot of reality sounds abnormal to you. All of my "wild claims" can be readily confirmed with a quick google search. The problem with you and yours is that when you hear of a weather event that is "the worst in a hundred years!!" you take it as proof of AGW, while I look at the same event and realize that is was just as bad or worse a hundred years ago.
  14. What "other stuff" would you be referring to? I already addressed hurricanes, floods, droughts, disease, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves and cold spells. Nothing that is happening today is outside of historical norms.
  15. I would be very surprised if there weren't many more climate related deaths now, if only because there are vastly more people living in places where climate can cause problems. One might think that however modernity, powered but fossil fuels, has largely insulation Man from the ravages of Mother Nature. That said, the worst floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves, cold spells, and disease outbreaks and the deaths associated with them occurred long ago. They are not happening now. Oh BTW cold kills about twenty times more people than heat. So forgive me if I don't get my panties bunched by a three one hundredths of a degree rise in temperature.
  16. FACT, climate related deaths are a tiny fraction of what they were one hundred years ago. Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a onetime event, in one part of the globe, two years ago is your evidence?!?! Where was the deadly heatwave last year or this year? Why don't you cite the deadly heatwave in Europe in 2003 which killed ten times as many people? Oh that is because CO2 levels were much lower then and that "inconvenient truth" would blow your little theory right out of the water. BTW the correlation between CO2 levels and temperatures occurs only after "corrections" are made. The raw, unadjusted numbers show no such agreement. I celebrated Earth Day, by smoking a pork shoulder for ten hours, loading up the SUV and going to a giant tailgate party with 70,000 of my closest friends, then I put a big fire in the fireplace. Don't worry though, the wood I burned is considered renewable energy.
  17. Good luck with your green 20 cent per kwh vs our dirty 12 cent per kwh. Congratulations on saving the planet.
  18. Now you're conflating a third thing. Why do you think I give a rats ass about AGW if was merely an esoteric academic exercise. It is ALL about policy. Actually no, whether or not AGW is actually happening is not a question of policy, it's a question of reality. Your problem is that if there are three questions; 1) Is AGW happening? 2) What are the consequences 3) What policies should be enacted because of it/do I like those policies? You try and make the answer to questions 2 and particularly 3 affect the answer to question 1. It doesn't work like that. There is ZERO proof that any of the observed/adjusted warming is a result of man made CO2. There is ZERO evidence that the slight warming is anything other than beneficial. And conceding points one and two there are no proposed solutions othat would have anything other than a negative economic impact, while doing nothing to prevent bad weather. But that does not prevent a bunch of quixotic leftists from trying. After all "we have to do SOMETHING!!!"
  19. Now you're conflating a third thing. Why do you think I give a rats ass about AGW if was merely an esoteric academic exercise. It is ALL about policy.
  20. OMG you were right! Trump and Tillerson just approved a sweetheart deal for ExxonMobil and Russia, exempting Big oil from sanctions.
  21. [url] h You're conflating two different issues. 1) Is AGW happening? 2) What are the consequences of AGW? If someone did provide an incorrect answer to Q2, it doesn't follow that the answer to Q1 must therefore be 'no'. It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy. If AGW is real and it is happening but there is no real downside and its effects are largely beneficial; has completely different policy implications than, AGW is real it's happening and we are all going to die.