What will determine man’s future is his ability to think, not his ability to force others to think as he wishes.
Zharkova. Well known. Her theories are overwhelmingly rejected by the rest of the scientific community. Just last year she was predicting hundreds of years of...wait for it...warming!
And more warming. BTW... just like CO2 isn't the only thing that modulates the climate it's also not the only that modulates plant growth. Many factors play a role. Some vegetation like corn which is a C4 plant does not benefit from higher CO2 concentrations but can be negatively impacted by changes caused by global warming. Like I said...plant growth is modulated by many factors some of which are themselves modulated by the climate system.
Never mind the massive stores of CH4 that are now being released as the arctic permafrost thaws and methane clathrate hydrates are exposed to warming oceans. The release of this trapped methane is a potential major outcome of a rise in temperature; it is thought that this might increase the global temperature by an additional 5° in itself, as methane is much more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_feedback
What so horrible about being arrogant and brilliant? It’s a beautiful thing, being brilliantly arrogant, or for that matter, arrogantly brilliant. Both are good. Try it. You’ll like it.
I can report, with absolute certainty, in my 68 years, the essence of the climate I live in hasn’t changed at all—it’s still cold and snowy in the winter, wet and mild in the spring, warm and sunny in the summer, and cool, colorful, and pleasant in the fall. Same as it was 200 years ago—though I have noticed a cooling the last few years. Not to worry though—I’ve heard a warming is coming. Right?
Ice Age, or Global Warming, or, if you prefer, climate change, is not a justification for enslaving humanity in the name of the birds, the bees, and the polar bears. Nor, will it be the end of the human species. Not even the end of life as we know. All it means is, dress properly for the weather. There is only one answer to all of humanity’s problems, ideas not guns, thoughts not brute force, reason not feelings. Get a grip people, the human mind is not inventing itself out of existence; it’s creating a universe of wonders and amazements that makes human existence a paradise on Earth. Good bless the capitalists, their fossil fuels, and their marvelous inventions. They make life wondrous.
It still uses C4 carbon fixation. And it is still subject to a wide variety growth modulating factors other than just CO2.
You could start by showing us an alternate model that explain and predicts the climate over both the paleoclimate and instrumental record than what we already have. That's your challenge. And its a tough one. People have been coming up with alternate models for decades. Most of them are so astonishingly bad that they can't even get the direction of the temperature change correct. And the narrow few at least get the direction correct fail quite miserably at explain other observations like the cooling stratosphere. And worst of all the no-GHE candidates require physics defying explanations. Maybe Starjet's self proclaimed arrogant brilliance can stumble upon a revolution that has remained invisible to the collective intelligence of the worlds entire population and which would certainly shake the very core science itself? Let's find out.
What models? How can one predict the future with computer models with no past data? Once again the earth is 4.5 billion years old not 30 years old
Any model that you feel best represents reality. We have data about the climate going back more than a billion years. And model's don't necessarily have to be run by computers. Arrhenius developed a simple climatic temperature model back in the late 1800's and predicted that doubling CO2 would increase the global mean surface temperature by about 4C which happens to be inline with modern understanding and current observations. And he did this before computers were even a thing. What about data other than just GHCN? Your perception of what is available seems myopic. But let's just assume (incorrectly) that GHCN is the only data source. We can still compute a global mean temperature from it and it alone with enough accuracy test any model you want. I'll propose the challenge again...present an alternate model of reality that does a better job of matching observations than what we already have.
No one cant, once again we only recently have ocean temperature data through Argo, before that it was just Submarines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_(oceanography)
We have ocean temperature data going back to the 1800s via ERSST, HadSST, etc. And we have data going back much further than that using proxies. ARGO is a high precision network that was deployed in the 2000s. What it told us is that the existing lower precision datasets are accurate and more than acceptable for drawing conclusions about the global mean SST and its use in computing a global mean surface temperature as well. It also tells us that our proxy techniques are reasonably accurate as well. I'll propose the challenge again...present an alternate model of reality that does a better job of matching observations than what we already have. So far all you've done is post what I call "nuh-uh" arguments to the forum. "nuh-uh" arguments are not very convincing to skeptics like me. When forced to choose between two models we pick the one that best matches reality. Not only is any model infinitely better than no at all, but how would you even be able to justify your "nuh-uh" position of the consensus if you don't even have an alternate model that can be used to test your position? Nevermind the fact that your "nuh-uh" isn't even right.
No we dont, just subs and shipping lanes, to say we do is just not understanding how big the oceans are, heck we couldn't even find Tom Hanks stuck on a island for 10 years
So you think the various groups that have actually done it were too stupid to account for how big the ocean is? Seriously?
Silly children, eating burgers, sucking coke through a straw, and making out in a car on Lover’s Lanes at the Heavenly View Overlook is not going to destroy the planet, nor cause the species to go extinct. But it will put a zip in your step, a sweet beat in your heart, and heavenly happiness in your satisfied soul. And remember: In the history of mankind, humanity thrives better in warm times than in cold times. So, if climate change is global warming caused by human activity, then that’s a good thing and we should count our blessings that we are such a creative and productive species. So, don’t surrender your life to paranoid delusions; think, act, love, and enjoy
Oh yes....I remember. Experience trumps education. That is why a lot of us "boomers" understand the hoax of man caused global climate change.https://www.naturalnews.com/055151_...vJKlMAXVFtdJcSdeyCdMLhrVCkwmg0bk-4LxRzwfq1sjA
This is only true if other constraints don't exist. Agriculture is being affected more by changes in weather and water than by CO2. For example, Bangladesh is producing less food because of climate change. That's seriously bad news, because it means that people there are reaching the point where they believe they need to leave Bangladesh - as evidenced by the wall India has built against Bangladesh. Food scarcity is a national security issue - a fact noted by our own military.
Hong Kong and Japan have no agriculture to speak of, but they aren’t starving. Is it climate change or lack of capitalism that’s destroying Bangladesh? Is it the weather or the Socialism starving them to death? Mankind’s greatest threat is not the climate; it’s the climatologists demanding the power of government’s gun be used to enforce their vision of life without the virus, Homo Sapiens.
