Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about

No. That is completely wrong.

PV has reached price parity with coal in most parts of the developed world.


BTW: "heat" has nothing to do with it. It is sunlight that makes PV work. Not temperature. Germany is not usually considered a "hot" country

Germany is one of the world's top photovoltaics (PV) installers, with a solar PV capacity as of 2011 of almost 25 gigawatts (GW). The German solar PV industry installed about 7.5 GW in 2011,[2] and solar PV provided 18 TW·h (billion kilowatt-hours) of electricity in 2011, about 3% of total electricity.[3] Some market analysts expect this could reach 25 percent by 2050
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

 

Here you are:

Global atmospheric downward longwave radiation over land surface under all-sky conditions from 1973 to 2008
We found that daily L d increased at an average rate of 2.2 W m−2 per decade from 1973 to 2008. The rising trend results from increases in air temperature, atmospheric water vapor, and CO2 concentration.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD011800.shtml

Spectral signatures of climate change in the Earth’s infrared spectrum between 1970 and 2006 – Chen et al. (2007)
Previously published work using satellite observations of the clear sky infrared emitted radiation by the Earth in 1970, 1997 and in 2003 showed the appearance of changes in the outgoing spectrum, which agreed with those expected from known changes in the concentrations of well-mixed greenhouse gases over this period. Thus, the greenhouse forcing of the Earth has been observed to change in response to these concentration changes.
http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/papers-on-changes-in-olr-due-to-ghgs/

Global Change in the Upper Atmosphere
The upper atmosphere is cooling and contracting as a result of rising greenhouse gas concentrations.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/314/5803/1253.summary

See? Downward longwave radiation is increasing in the wavelengths absorbed by CO2. Outgoing longwave radiation is decreasing and the stratosphere is cooling.

There is mountains more evidence if you are genuinely interested. All you have to do is ask. After all - virtually every scientist on the planet has accepted these results for decades now. There is no shortage of the evidence you require.

 

Because of the Inverse Square Law (look it up), the sun can not be responsible for any warming on planets farther from the sun than earth. Because of the Inverse Square Law, any change in sun's output is, at best, negligible or non-existent.

 

Of course it matters. What an idiotic question! There are changes in climate caused by natural forces that happen slowly and then there are the current climate changes that mankind is causing that are massive and happening very rapidly. The current changes in the Earth's climate patterns would not be happening "regardless" if mankind had not raised atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, a powerful greenhouse gas, by 40%.

So what??? Were you unable to comprehend the analogy about forest fires that I just presented to you. Saying that climate changes have happened in the past without man's input may be true, but that does not in any way imply that the current climate changes are not the result of mankind's activities or that we can do nothing about them.

There is nothing even remotely "rational" about your position or suggestions. The world is facing an enormous looming crisis that could easily result in mass starvation, hundreds of millions of climate refugees, wars over resources and a general collapse of civilization. The longer we continue with a 'business as usual' policy of pumping tens of billions of tons of fossil carbon into the atmosphere every year, the worse the crisis will be in the long run and the more suffering and death it will cause for ourselves and our descendents.

 

Well..what can I say.

That will teach me to enter into debates regarding subjects I know far too little about. 'Wipe' and 'floor' spring to mind..

One aspect I will not budge on though...and that is...until those authorities dictating all that we the 'minions' have to; and are expected to do; and the sacrifices we have to make.. start really 'doing' and 'making the same sacrifices' ; and demonstrate this to be the case re: the same lifestyle changes .. then I will too.

You all know what I'm talking about here..no excuses..I wonder if you can be honest too.

 

Thank-you for retaining your position and considering our evidence

This is not about big changes - a lot of what we are being asked to do is about little changes - turn off the light when you leave the room, recycle when you can, and more is being asked of industry in the way of innovation

Solar panels are becoming cheaper and more efficient (I own an 80 WATT) panel that I only paid $300 for and that price is set to start going down further

But again do not be misled by tabloid hype - going back to the castle and the carbon footprint of same - please consider this

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090518121000.htm

Pld buildings have a much lower carbon footprint

 

Well common sense is one thing but boondogles like Solyndra, halting all drilling in the Gulf, not allowing the pipeline, not opening up new oil fields and keeping the 'peak oil' lie alive are much more egregious liberal-leftist policies upheld by the current administration.

BTW some recycling can cost more and use more energy than it saves and may even become economically not feasible with rising taxation and economic woes.

Personal recycling of green waste (as with a compost pile) does make sense to the individual. Aluminum cans are also cost effective to the individual however, can be offset with higher taxation for needed recycling infrastructure.

If you really want to cut down on waste, start with the big cities where most liberals live. Make them PAY for polluting their own environment.

 

I already answered. I quoted your words exactly. Somehow instead of the exact quote I see deleted.

http://www.politicalforum.com/envir...25-we-need-worry-about-27.html#post1060876791

I also pointed to your copy-paste-bold- color red sources you draw your data from.

So, let me quote the data submitted by you again

brainwashed,
politically motivated,
scientifically ignorant
dupes
really brainwashed
denier cultists
mentally incapable
idiotic
denier cultists
ignorant
clueless
get lost
silly drivel

You repeatedly submit the same data again and again.

It clearly shows that Hemingway was right when he described the common denominator for fascism and AWG, - both are lies told by bullies.
One may not be a history or social/political studies professor, but the fact that AWG is a lie told by bullies should be easily recognizable in posts of warmists.


The repeated attempts to bully me by warmists are a good thing for me – they prove Hemingway’s and my points.

And I already said, I don’t care how many nobodies do not care. No matter how many zeros add to each other the result is the same, - zero, nobody, the overwhelming majority of the scientific community. Zeros are very well aware of their incapability and cannot stand success and real achievements of those who are capable in a free society. That’s why they become fascists.

I do not compare AWGsts to Nazis, but I show the common denominator, that both are “a lie told by bullies”. And AWGists keep on posting confirmations.

Fascism trying to take over the US is no joke. But history shows that no matter how much blood it spills it will be beaten. See Hemingway.

Thank you for another confirmation of the fact stated by Hemingway and repeated by me.

 

"Answered" what exactly, quisi? I didn't ask you anything. I just pointed out that your posts are all just meaningless drivel.

You're referring to your post #269 where you tried to quote my post #265, which is just a bit above yours on page 27, so it's all still visible to you even if you're seemingly too incompetent to manage to quote it directly. My post concerned the virtually unanimous affirmation of the world scientific community for the conclusions of the world's climate scientists as reflected in the IPCC reports. The info is on wikipedia and the statements of the various scientific academies, societies, and organizations are all linked to the sources.

So you imagine that you "pointed at" my sources but you actually didn't do anything but make some really idiotic and pointless remarks about "neo-nazis". The "data" that I presented in that post was in fact the statements by the various scientific organizations and my actual sources in that post are the National Science Academies of 32 nations, the InterAcademy Council, the International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences, the Royal Society of New Zealand, the United States National Research Council. and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. There are quite a few more listed on the wikipedia page. You seem unable to comprehend that.

This isn't "data", it's just, IMO, some valid descriptions of the anti-scientific, ignorant posts submitted by clueless denier cultists like you. You have no idea what the term 'data' even means do you?

Actually, I repeatedly submit real scientific information from valid and reputable scientific sources that debunks the propaganda, misinformation and lies that fossil fuel industry spews out and their bamboozled dupes parrot on forums like this.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL......I guess everybody else missed the parts in Hemingway's books where he talks about anthropogenic global warming....your understanding of what Hemingway was talking about is as messed up as your understanding of AGW....you obviously have no frigging idea what you're talking about in any area of discussion...

Your repeated whining, complaining,and completely mistaken fantasies about being "bullied" only make you look ridiculous. If you can't handle having your ignorant myths and cherished delusions getting debunked with actual evidence, then you shouldn't come to debate forums.

More clueless nonsense. The statements of the world's National Science Academies, etc., are very real and very significant in affirming the reality of AGW. Your equating "the overwhelming majority of the scientific community" with "zero" just demonstrates that your opinions on the subject are the meaningless "zero" in this debate. Your continual ranting about fascism when you very obviously don't understand squat about that subject either just shows how far off topic and confused you are.

All you ever "show" or "confirm" is the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.

This whole post from you is just more meaningless drivel and off-topic nonsense, as usual.

This worthless thread started with a fraudulent, lying OP headline and article and some clueless, ignorant claims based on that article and a total misunderstanding of what's happening.

The OP was repeatedly debunked by others on here and then I completely debunked the lying OP in post #56 with a response from the scientists that the sleazeball liar denier cult reporter had misquoted. Too bad you're too confused to get that. Try reading it again.

 

I've no idea what "authorities" do we live in a free society being environmentally responsible is very much a personal choice as is hypocrisy... I live right in the heart of one the world's major oil production regions and even the people involved in the oil/energy industry here are striving to reduce their carbon footprint...I've personally spent 20K in home upgrades to reduce energy use...

 

Look Wyly..my point is this..if we are in the midst of anthropogenic runaway CC and if the planet is in precarious danger; and if this situation has reached a point of no return as has been stated on more than one occasion by certain advocates, then why are world governments doing so little?

Just don't start giving me anecdotes on free society, personal choice; and how companies in your area are reducing their carbon footprint; and all the rest of the measures that say a lot and demonstrate almost nothing. It won't do.

If the situation was as serious as we are given to believe, then why are governments spending trillions on pointless wars, when this money could ensure every home in America reduces it's carbon footprint markedly.

If the situation was as serious as we are given to believe, the UK government would not be spending 10 billion and probably much more in reality, on the Olympic Games; they would be investing that money in the public transport system for example, or other measures that acheive something tangible.

These are just tiny examples. If the situation was as grave as we are told, then any divides would be crossed, nothing would stand in the way of 'saving the planet'. Any financial cost would be too little, instead what we get is carbon trading and other ridiculous mechanisms that sound good, but mean nothing.

Being' evironmentally responsible' through free will is all well and good in a world where the planet is not in grave danger (as you say it is). In reality you are saying we cannot chose to decide whether to be environmentally responsible, if we actually rely on personal choice we are buggered are we not?

Once again I say, when authority starts taking this seriously..so will I.

 

Why be rude if you need to resort to so many fallacies to make a point you don't have? Did the dinosaurs become extinct due to a slow moving Ice Age, or was it the suggen change in climate that was not induced by Man? In either case, that climate change could be said to be catastrophic.

Are you claiming that Ice Ages and warm periods never happened on Earth, without Man's input? Those global climate changes occurred even without Man's input.

Why not obtain more perfect knowledge and create an (stargate) Atlantis type of city on or under the oceans of Earth, regardless of climate changes, instead of merely playing shell games with Statism that does not actually solve any problems?

 

Why don't governments take this seriously ?

Seriously ? Because it never was/is a serious issue. It was designed to scare you, with the sole purpose of seperating you from your wallet, and to be used as a stepping stone for a world governance.

That said, environmental issues are pretty much irrelevant. Not in the sense that we all need to be good stewarts of our planet, but irrelevant in the catastrophic outcomes so many portray or wish us to believe will happen because of our behavior.

The way I see it, there is only one issue determining the human species fate. That is getting off this rock we call Earth. It's only a matter of time for some cosmic calamity to happen to wipe the slate clean here. We should focus on space, technologies that will get us to another planet. Thats the only way to keep humans from going extinct.

 

As a side note, The Global warming community has now pretty much adopted any change in weather patterns to be the cause of global warming. So I ask those who subscribe to this....Did you really expect weather patterns of this planet to stay the same....forever ? Really ? Even when proof of such changes that have occured over time exists ? Before man even stepped out of his cave to boot.

 

It's too bad you're so confused, danny, but if you would actually listen to what people are saying to you, instead of projecting your own ignorance, you might learn something for a change.

You claim I'm "resorting to so many fallacies" but your attempts to point them out just reflect your own misunderstandings and confusion.

I've already told you several times that just because the Earth's climate has changed due to natural factors in the past, there is absolutely no reason that the climate can't be changing now due to mankind's influence. What about that fact are you unable to comprehend. Why do you keep on bleating about past climate changes? Of course I don't think that "Ice Ages and warm periods never happened on Earth, without Man's input[". How could you ask such an idiotic question when I just said that there were previous natural climate changes?

Are you seriously claiming that because there were previous natural climate changes, then any current changes have to be natural too? Sorry, dude, but that is really retarded. Scientists have found an enormous amount of evidence that indicates that it is indeed humanity's influence that is changing the climate this time. Scientists are aware of the natural factors that have caused climate changes in the past and none of them are driving the current abrupt warming trend that is changing the Earth's climate patterns. A 40% (and still climbing) increase in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, a powerful greenhouse gas, has been clearly identified as the primary driver of the current warming/climate changes.

 

Sorry don't buy it. More scientist are jumping ship from that theory than one can count.

I guess by your logic, those pesky co2 exhailing humans need to go too along with those pesky pig and cow farts.

Life forms need co2, plants need it. To feed a growing population, you would think a warmer climate would be desirable, more crops would be able to grow. But since Nasa seems to think no significant rise in world temps in the last 15 years puts a damper on your theory, I suppose they will be discredited somehow.

Man is but an ant on this vast planet and we will be long gone by other means while the planet lives on. Reminds me of a skit Goerge Carlin did on saving the planet, funny yet true. He had a unique way of getting his point across. Look it up on youtube.

 

Sunlight doesn't heat Mars and Titan?

The inverse square law is real, but without a souce of energy (nuclear, tidal, or solar), the steady state temperature in space is just above absolute zero.

Io is a good example of tidal heating, Jupiter of nuclear, but the temperature of Mars and Titan, low as it is, depends on sunlight.

(The other Not Amused)

 

Because most of the world governments are run by democracies and they are voted in by people and people do not like to pay taxes.........

The other half of your answer lies in the responses from the right wing Americans on this board - the radio shock jocks have been spewing anti-science hatred for years

I know - we have been told that "capitalism" would be responsible and do the responsible thing without carbon taxes or emission trading schemes and it has not worked

The armaments industry in America is VERY powerful. But look at recent history - the last American president - Right wing - did everything he could to deny that AGW was occurring up to and including trying to silence scientists. Started not one but TWO wars and huge cost and bloody near bankrupted the country

I

.

AH! But getting the Games makes them look good, because of more jobs, and that means more votes and that means they get re-elected

187 countries signed the Kyoto treaty - and we saw some progress but then there started a concerted program of denialism funded mostly by the oil industry who saw their beautiful big profits going down the gurgler if they did not do something.

2007 there was a an international conference in Bali - the American delegation stalled, obfuscated, and generally tried to derail the whole process until the delegation from Papua New Guinea stood up and said

tp://thinkprogress.org/romm/2007/12/16/202200/bush-team-humiliated-by-papua-new-guinea-blinks-in-bali-sort-of/

See the Bali Conference was in part about deforestation which is causing 1/5 of climate change and Papua is rapidly being deforested

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1398

They are taking it seriously but this is a HUGE problem affecting more than 187 countries in the world. It does not just cover a couple of dirty power stations but is about rich first world countries that have basically become rich by polluting the environment versus poor third world countries that would love to do the same but are being told by the still polluting rich third world countries that they cannot do so

See SOME of the problems?

 

Oh! PLEASE, please, please, please link to the OISM to "prove" that point. This is one of the biggest falsehoods on the planet - nearly EVERY scientific organisation on the planet has issued a statement saying global warming is occurring and it is man made
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

.

Not worth responding to

BARRRP! WRONG!

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Can-animals-and-plants-adapt-to-global-warming.htm

Do your own bloody homework! If you want people to look for links provide them yourself

 

Does it really matter what climate changes Man is making, if merely playing shell games with Statism will never solve that problem? Why not find actual solutions that can enable Man to establish habitable zones, anywhere on Earth or even beyond?

 

Laughable at best.......

The site you link to is run by GW cronies. Thats ok though, everyone can believe what they want, but the second any of the tinfoil hat crowd comes near my wallet, then all bets are off.

 

Maximum solar irradiance for the earth from sun is about 1367w/mm. Saturn is about 9AU from the sun so the maximum solar irradiance is (1367w/mm)/81 = 16.88w/mm. Minimum for earth: ~1365w/mm. For Saturn: (1365w/mm)/81 = 16.85w/mm. So the change in solar radiance between min and max on Titan is about .03w/mm. To put it into perspective, radiative forcing of CO2 from 1750 has been about 1.43w/mm.
So now the deniers that claim that CO2 cannot have much of an effect and claim that the sun is responsible have a problem .

 

quite simple really, jobs/re-election/money

I live in the center of a major oil region, many of the population are ultra conservative(the world is 6K years old, man lived with dinosaurs types)our PM is one of them and so are a number of his party. These are not the most sophisticated/educated people, they're dumber than a bag of hammers, they confuse party politics with science, if you support science and evidence of CC you must be a godless commie. The remainder of the population may care about CC but not enough to give up their lucrative oil related jobs, they'll vote for short term financial gain vs the planets long term health. As long as they have enough cash to retire on let the the next generation worry about the consequences of climate change.

Politicians only worry about their jobs as well. two terms in office and they get pension the rest of us can only dream of and it grows with each re-election so they do nothing to p**s off the voters. Greed prevents serious meaningful change and that's personal choice by voters and elected officials.

 

and beyond? finding habitable zones for 9 billion +(2050) people? seems to me it would be much less expensive and simpler to reduce CO2 emissions...

 

your post only confirms the stereotypical imagine people have of construction people absolutely no clue...

parroting denier fallacies from denier blogs and tabloids, do you offer anything based on actual science? nada...