What’s the cause and what’s the effect of more CO2? Is the issue settled? 
Here is an interesting Video Link on Global Warming from last year that just came my way.
Reputable scientists at Harvard and MIT challenge the notion that Carbon Dioxide causes global warming,
They look at ice samples, the same ones Al Gore used to justify his theories and claim Gore has everything backward. All the ice core samples show the same thing.
I gave the above video link to a friend of mine who offered these reasonable thoughts.
I did some reading and it seems that the conclusion that temperature leads CO2 is in dispute. (Logically, if one proves CO2 always follows temperature, there could be no dispute.). Opponents indicate that more CO2 certainly is created by higher temperature — indeed, that’s part of their feedback loop argument. They agree that drops in temperature are historically unrelated to CO2 concentrations, but that CO2 once increased drives the temperature up.
This looks like a high level scientific disagreement, well beyond my competence.
In my research, there’s another wrinkle. No one disputes that, prior to the industrial age, temperature preceded CO2 . So, Al Gore’s graphs really were all screwed up. But advocates of the CO2 increases temperature theory point to data post-industrial age, where CO2 levels seem to begin to precede temperature rises. This is where the scientific disagreement lies. Obviously, none of us is qualified to assess the scientific papers assessing this relationship.
But I don’t remember seeing a refutation of this point in the interesting video that Mish circulated. The point about a reduction in temperature after WWII is actually used by climate change advocates. WWII largely destroyed the productive capacity of Europe and Japan, then the pre-war bulk of world industrial production. Once that ramped up, temperature began to rise very quickly. Or at least that’s the point they make.
Anyway, this is indeed fascinating. It would be wonderful to have a real debate.
Al Gore and the climate crowd do not want a reasonable debate.
This is just what happened with the Covid panic shutdowns and vaccination of kids totally not at any risk.
Real or not, and to what extent, my baseline scenario remains the same: Government will not do anything sensible about it.
Al Gore, AOC, and others want to spend over $100 trillion on this.
AOC’s Green New Deal Pricetag
In 2019, I commented AOC’s Green New Deal Pricetag of $51 to $93 Trillion vs. Cost of Doing Nothing
Since then, the price has gone up.
Last year, I commented Don’t Worry, It Will Only Cost $131 Trillion to Address Climate Change
Let’s just say, that won’t happen.
Why It Won’t Happen
Please Consider an Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin
Is Kisin’s Video For You?
- If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will do anything that matters about climate change, the video is for you.
- If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will not do anything that matters about climate change, the video is also for you.
The video is less than seven minutes long. Please play it.
Then if you are still worried about hurricanes, fires, mudslides and everything else that has been happening for hundreds of thousands of years, I have a suggestion:
Don’t live in areas prone to hurricanes, fires, or mudslides because nothing will be done about any of this in our lifetimes, even if it is theoretically possible.
And if you still insist on doing “your part”, the number one thing you can do is not exactly practical.
The number two thing you can do is practical. Don’t have kids. That’s followed by no car, no travel, no air conditioning, and in general, no things.
But I am with Kisin. If there is a problem, government mandates won’t fix it. Look no further than Biden’s solar panel bankruptcies, wind turbine fiascos, and Ford and GM running away from EVs.
There would be more hybrids on the roads and more solar panels installed if this administration had done nothing at all.
Conflicting Goals
- Fix the environment
- Force the world to fix the envirnment
- Buy US
- Build US
- Appease the unions
- Appease the environmentalists who don’t want mines in the US
- The conflicting regulations are so intense that nothing is getting done.
- All of the above needs to happen at a cost that consumers are willing to pay without political backlash
Explanations Needed None Delivered
No one has explained yet where we get the minerals for batteries, or at what cost to the environment when we have little to no mining or refining capacity in the US.
No one has factored in the carbon requirements of mining whether in China or the US.
No one has factored in grid upgrade costs.
No one has figured out how to appease consumers who want cheaper cars and the unions who accurately see that EVs are going to reduce jobs.
We have asinine mandates and China has refused to go along. No one has looked ahead to what happens when India and Africa industrialize.
In regard to point seven, the administration has allocated tens of billions of dollars to put in chargers, and in two years has put in a grand total of seven. The same is happening with high-speed internet mandates of the preposterous Inflation Reduction Act.
It is is tough enough to have one direct goal and get it done. It is virtually impossible when you have eight conflicting parts and you need the whole rest of the world to cooperate.
China is the leader in EVs hooray! But it is still building coal plants to charge the cars and refine the minerals.
Even if you 100 percent buy into the global warming thesis please play the Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin then address all eight points I mentioned above.
Wow Mish. You seem to have a penchant for digging up the most obscure news bits like the ONE example of a cat apparently being eaten by African immigrants. Is this the get’cha that keeps people coming back for more??? This video seems very old, like a decade or more. I’ve never seen it before and why wouldn’t naysayers give it more attention? They also leave out some details and even give incomplete and incorrect information. They really don’t explain any actual mechanism’s by which this is possible but simply give some statistics. Well I’ll give you the most important stats. Over the last 150 years the ppm of CO2 has risen from 280 to 420. It’s a very steady and uniform rise. Its rise is in direct proportion to the increase in use of fossil fuels. Now the long term weather is influenced by the oceans as the heat capacity of water is about 3000x that of air. HOWEVER, CO2 in the air acts like a jacket. The more you add the thicker the jacket. The important bit is the amount of energy in during the day and the amount out at night. As the imbalance increases, energy builds up in the atmosphere. If the this continues for decades then the water also starts to warm, especially the surface water! Hence the Gulf is warming mightily. Increase the temperature, and you increase evaporation. This is why the storms there are so energized this year. You can also see this in the melting glaciers and sea ice forming later and melting sooner among other indicators.
Now about what to do? Thanks for asking about twenty years too late. The world has been much warmer before and the flora and fauna will adapt or die including humans. The thermodynamic momentum already in the system is HUGE. We are past the point of deferring pain. There are as yet less understood effects like changing the ocean’s water cycle and the melting of large amounts of sea ice. Greenland could dump enough cold water into the Gulf Stream to shut it down and cause colder winters in Europe. Who knew? But what are far too addicted to the comforts of modern life and the fossil fuels creating it. Everyone wants more stuff and a better standard of living. I really see nothing happening in the future other than a world wide depression which might ease the demand for fossil fuels. Fusion technology is far away. There were cries for more nuclear and breader reactors which fell on deaf ears. Hydrogen fuel cells are STILL not ready for prime time. We are building electrical infrastructure very, very slowly. But you must have a need before you build so slow and steady is the way it will work, for now.
Ironically, in the past, the earth has had no ice at the poles and the weather was presumably less dramatic as liquid makes for a good moderator. The only problem is that the atmosphere will be much warmer and the coastlines of all the continents will be greatly changed, humans displaced, and islands disappeared. Anyway, have a great weekend everyone!
Spoken like a religious zealot. Thanks!! You belive in things that are crazy, not true, but what does that matter. You “believe” that’s awesome!! Glad you belive in something.
This is scientifically incorrect: “CO2 in the air acts like a jacket. The more you add the thicker the jacket.”
Radiative trapping by CO2 acts in specific spectral bands (“colors of infrared”). Once you have enough CO2, radiation doesn’t escape in those bands. Past that point, adding more CO2 doesn’t affect global warming. We are past that point.
In your analogy, you already have one heavy jacket on. Putting on another jacket won’t make you warmer because you forgot to put on hat and snow-pants, and so the heat of your body is all escaping from your head and legs. Further slowing the already minimal loss from your torso won’t have any effect on how hot or cold you feel.
Sorry Wisdom seeker. You are incorrect. While at certain wavelengths there can be saturation; that is meaningless in the overall picture.
In fact, since we are increasing CO2 so quickly, the warming is lagging by several decades. The last time CO2 levels were 420 ppm was 3-5 million years ago during the Pliocene. Temperatures were 3c higher than today and sea levels were 10 m higher. That is where we are headed in temperature over the next few decades. That much sea level rise will take much longer.
Going back to periods where CO2 exceeded 1000 ppm shows temperatures that were as much as 15c higher than today.
so the sun is around 11,000 degrees F. and the center of earth about the same temperature…………what does that tell us?
The sun is about a million degrees in its center. What’s that tell us???
sounds hot. my question was genuine. i don’t have the answers. but found it interesting that our core temps are similar to sun’s surface temps. what does that tell us?
That Lil’ Mr. is very determined to be right?
That coincidence is not causation!
humans are like fleas on an elephant……..when considering the health of the planet. we’ve been around for a wink of an eye, in time. study some astrophysics, some anthropology, and remote sensing, geomorphology, and geology. hell even a rigorous botany class will explain how great plants thrived under huge amounts of CO2 hundreds of thousands and millions of years ago. anyone recommending not having kids to help the planet and humanity is a fool. like another flea on the backside of an elephant for a nanosecond.
I’m no scientist but I have seen interesting studies about the collapse of the Mesoamerican and South American civilizations in the 1600’s causing a mini ice age as the jungles grew back over all of the cultivated and cleared land. The article discussed both carbon sink potential and increased water vapor as being possible drivers. Would be interesting to check solar activity over that time period as well.
Regardless of cause the climate is 100% warming, I’m old enough to see the short term trend. Based on geological records the southern third of the U.S. was a rain forest during the last warm period. Humans are mobile and adaptable but still there will be lots of barriers to migration. I don’t know if anyone has seen the recent satellite photos of the greening Sahara desert but it’s pretty cool.
As far as the government solving anything it’s like the homeless issue here in Cali, just another way for the politicians to get new forms of graft. We are spending close to $1,000,000 per person to get them temporary housing.
It has been known for a long time that temperature changes lead CO2 levels.
Both methane and CO2 are minor greenhouse gases. By far the most important is water vapor. Both absorption spectra are overlaid by water vapor absorption which is why they do not matter much, methane in particular.
Simply put, there is no climate problem. We’ve been in an interglacial for 11,000 years. Enjoy the warmth, the ice will be back soon enough and then things will get grim.
Lol! “The ice will be back soon enough!” How about in 60,000 to 80,000 years. Don’t you know your Milankovitch cycles?
And what would be the mechanism for this? The video fails to address this satisfactorily. Living plants don’t create CO2. How is it the CO2 ppm has risen from 280 to 420 in direct proportion to the increase in fossil fuel use in the last 150 years? Why is ALL of the ice melting at the same time? If anything, the temperature is catching up to the increase in CO2 which is thermodynamically sound. Even if CO2 increases lagged temperature increases in the past, we are in the present, anthropomorphic era. There are no other past models for this rapid change except volcanic activity. Which, I believe, belched CO2 and sulfur, whereupon temperatures THEN increased.
All true. But beyond the grasp of many folks here who think global warming is a scam and would rather believe the misinformation in that video.
Mark Twain once said, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.”
And what about the current anthropomorphic age and the increased use of fossils fuels in direct proportion to the increase in CO2 ppm from 280 to 420?
This may have been discussed / addressed before but…. can someone tell me the exact process for getting rid of the EV batteries once no longer viable. I still remember the toxic waste dumps of the 70’s. Are we heading for an instant replay?
Same thing we do with existing car batteries, recycle em. I currently recycle my bad Prius NiMH cells. Buy good used off EBay for $35 slap em in and keep on driving at 45 mpg all over he!! and creation
The power utilities will be buying the recycled batteries that are still 50% good.
After that, it doesn’t look good. Tesla had to put some extra material to insulate the batteries from each other, and it makes recycling infeasible.
CO2 (0.042% of the atmosphere) is something we call a “trace gas” because of how extraordinarily small a fraction it is of the atmosphere. People like to panic about things they don’t understand, so. Man-made hobgoblin like ‘global warming’ gets progressives’ panties in a twist.
Your ignorance is showing.
Methane is a trace gas at a far lower concentration than CO², but it is a more powerful green house gas. The green house effect (largely water vapor) is not proportional to the amount of (trace) gas, but to 3 other factors:
Absorption/emission properties of long wave radiation for the gasApplicable wavelength apertures: if these coincide with those of H²O, almost no effect, but if they are in “open” apertures, they will increase the greenhouse effect.Concentration of the gas. Note that the effect is inversely exponential, which counter-intuitively means going from 0.01‰ to 0.02‰ has more effect than going from 2.00 to 3.00‰ (2.00 +0.99‰ has less effect than 0.01+0.01‰ )
[Edit: should read]
… 3 other factors:
Hmm… let’s see. Oxygen is about 21%. Humans need about 16% content to live, depending on the elevation you are accustomed. You are right, CO2 is currently at 420ppm. But all the F’ing plants in the world, land and sea, use it. Last I checked the flora outnumbers the fauna by a BIG margin. A little bit of CO2 goes a mighty long way! So I think a major change, like 280-420ppm in the last 150 years, is going have a major influence…
The good news is, global warming pushes off the date of the next ice age by several tens of thousands of years. We’ve been in a long ice age, interrupted by warm periods, for about 2 million years now. The amount of cold-weather land on Terra is quite substantial, including the north of Canada and the taiga of Russia. Even more “temperate” areas like Italy and Kazakhstan suffer from real winters.
I’m frankly surprised the Canadians and the Russians aren’t more enthusiastic about greenhouse warming. Shorter winters with milder days, and growing crops farther north than ever before. Win-win!
— Greg (my blog: dark.sport.blog)
That is an overly simplistic view; the reality is far more complex. Russia’s permafrost is melting. And it’s causing a lot of problems.
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/worlds-biggest-permafrost-crater-russias-far-east-thaws-planet-warms-2023-07-21/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2023/08/30/sinking-permafrost-sinks-pipelines-in-russia-and-canada/
https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/blessing-curse-melting-permafrost-russian-arctic/
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/11/07/as-russias-permafrost-thaws-ancient-pathogens-risk-re-awakening-a82985
Hey Greg, that is really great for Russia. But Florida and Texas are going to pay as well as other states and nations. I think it will open up Siberia though. What might they find? Raw materials? Great wealth? Greater influence on the works stage? That’s certainly a win for Putin and the next tsars, but not for democracies.
AOC believes in climate change because she can hear the wind whistling in her head.
When you don’t” believe in GOD, you’ll believe in anything
I intensely dislike the politicization of climate science. Yes, we can disagree about the right climate policies given the facts and causal models provided by climate science. There seems to be very little disagreement among serious scientists about what’s going on, and there is no need to drag the science into the political arena as has happened. The way American politics works right now, I expect we will soon start disagreeing about mathematical formulas based on our differing political values.
math is racist.
‘Consensus’ is not science. Testable, repeatable evidence, is science. Democraps used to understand that.
Have you ever been through climate change? I don’t think there are, as yet, any repeatable experiments to do. You must use sound science to make predictions. The thing about predictions is, it’s really hard to get the timing right, even if you do know what the eventual result will be.
And here I thought there might be mention of the Sun at center of Solar System which provided the energy which warms this Earth.
The sun’s output is remarkably stable over millions of years. We have been measuring the output for a long time. Satellites have been measuring the sun’s output for the last 40 years. The output has never varied more than +/- 0.1% in all that time.
Given the earth’s distance from the sun, the average temperature on earth should be -18C and we should be a ball of ice. That is how much energy we receive from the sun. This has been understood for the last 200 years. The reason the average temperature is actually15C is because our atmosphere holds onto the sun’s heat with greenhouse gasses and distributes this heat all over the world.
In addition, orbital changes (Milankovitch cycles) vary how much of the sun’s steady energy reaches the earth’s surface. These cycles are what determine the seasons, and glacial/interglacial periods.
took an astronomy class at the desert botanical garden in AZ about 15 years ago. the professor said there was a 100% certainty a meteor large enough to kill all life on planet would hit within 500,000,000 years……….and if that was not accurate we have only a few billion years left until the sun bursts and burns us up, and then it goes dark and we are that frozen rock falling in space…………i’ve been going to college for 46 years now, to learn what i don’t know and what i thought i knew was so, just is not so. A to Z topics……….anthropology to zoology…………and always an art or woodshop class to make things with my bare hands for pleasure as a human primate………..the cost is now zero at my age, as is my health care including free aspirin. somehow i think someone else is paying for all this free stuff. i’m like a flag officer in the free shit army.
Lifelong learning. Good for you! Many of us have an insatiable thirst for knowledge.
Thanks for posting this Mish. I am surprised that you haven’t seen videos like this before. I have seen many of them. They are all very clever. They present a few scientific facts, ignore many other scientific facts, throw in a few blatant lies, and sprinkle in a few scientists who are shills in order to spread FUD about global warming and climate change. And they are pretty successful in doing so because the average person is not scientifically literate enough to know that they are being scammed by these videos. It’s reminiscent of how the tobacco industry tried to spread FUD. Bring in a handful of “scientists”, who present a pretty convincing argument that smoking is actually good for you, in order to offset the thousands of scientists who are telling you that smoking is bad for you. Just enough misinformation to spread FUD among the smoking population that wants to believe it’s okay to smoke.
Your friend did a pretty good job of picking it apart, but I will add in a few comments of my own anyway. Though even this ‘short’ presentation will be too long for many of your readers.
Many thousands of scientists have been studying the climate for 200 years now. They have peered back into the entire history of earth’s climate, and presented us with volumes of data and knowledge about how the climate has changed over billions of years, and why it has changed.
Yes. Scientists know that warming precedes CO2 increases almost all the time. That is nothing new. Even though the video claims otherwise. For example, in the last million years, scientists tell us there have been ten times when the planet cooled and ice expanded down towards the equator. Each cooling period is followed by a warming period which melts most of the ice. The orbital explanation for these warming and cooling cycles was first proposed by Sir John Hershel in 1830, and mathematically proven by Serbian scientist, Milutin Milankovitch in 1920. These now well-known Milankovitch Cycles bear his name. When a warming cycle begins (roughly every 100,000 years), the initial warming is followed by more CO2 release into the atmosphere. The addition of this greenhouse gas then captures more heat from the sun, which then causes more CO2 release, and so on. This is called a feedback loop and it continues for roughly 20,000 years. Without the CO2 release, the planet would only warm up by only 1C or 2C over the 20,000 years and very little ice would melt. But because of the CO2 feedback loop, the planet warms around 10C over those 20,000 years, which melts most of the ice.
There are of course, the occasional exception to warming leading CO2. Like during the Cryogen period 600 to 750 million years ago, a period of time we now refer to as “snowball” earth. The earth was a frozen ball covered in ice, with very little CO2 in the atmosphere. And the Milankovitch orbital cycles could not melt the ice, because everything on the planet was frozen over and there was no source of CO2 to add to the atmosphere to create the feedback loop. So how did the earth get out of this frozen predicament? Millions of years of massive volcanic eruptions which pierced through the ice and began adding CO2 to the atmosphere. Which then allowed the Milankovitch cycles to have the effect you see today.
This is one example of when CO2 led the warming rather than following. And the last 200 years is another example (more on that later). But these are the rare exceptions.
During the last ten Milankovitch cooling cycles CO2 levels drop from 280 ppm to 180 ppm over 80,000 years, temperatures drop 10C, and ice expands from the Arctic till there is a mile of ice over New York. The warming cycle then begins, and over just 20,000 years (yes, warming cycles are shorter than cooling cycles), CO2 levels rise from 180 ppm to 280 ppm, the temperature rises 10C, and most of the ice melts. The last cooling cycle ended around 23,000 years ago with a mile of ice over New York. The last warming cycle that melted the ice ended around 5000 years ago. And the next cooling cycle began. Yes, we are in a cooling phase now, and over the next 80,000 years, the planet should be cooling, CO2 should drop from 280 ppm to 180 ppm, and the ice should expand to cover New York again.
But we are not cooling. CO2 is not dropping. Instead, CO2 has gone up from 280 ppm to 418 ppm in just the last 200 years. And we know where the extra CO2 came from, because we can measure the Carbon Isotopes in the CO2 that have been added. And like a fingerprint, the Carbon Isotopes tell us the extra CO2 came from mankind burning fossil fuels.
So, for the first time in 600 million years, CO2 is leading the warming, rather than the other way around. The last time CO2 led the warming, it took millions of years for it to warm the planet. This time, thanks to man, we are doing it in a few hundred years. And the worst part, is that the CO2 has increased so quickly, that the warming is now lagging badly. Which means, even if we could snap our fingers today and stop all emissions, we have another hundred or so years of warming ahead of us, as it catches up to CO2 levels that are already in the atmosphere.
In addition, if we could snap our fingers and stop all emissions today, it would take nature several thousand years to reduce CO2 levels from the current 418 ppm level to the 280 ppm level that we enjoyed for the last 10,000 years.
What I am saying here, is that there is f*ck all we can do about this problem. The world cannot stop emissions without crashing the global economy and living standards. It is going to take centuries to achieve net zero no matter what the wild eyed optimists try to tell you. And in the meantime, CO2 levels will keep rising and temperature will keep following. Ice will keep melting and oceans will keep rising. And extreme weather events will keep getting worse. And the costs of all this will keep going up.
And one last thing. The biggest lie in that video is this: “volcanoes emit more CO2 than mankind does”. Hahahaha! That is so f*cking stupid. Mankind’s emissions each year are 60x the emissions from all the volcanoes on the planet each year.
Cheers!
good stuff, poppy. thanks. how about some more stock picks from ya.
not much change in my largest holdings, though I day trade portions of them all; mostly Canadian oil and gas firms such as: Canadian Natural Resources; Tourmaline; Whitecap; Suncor; Cenovus; Baytex, Arc Resources; Tamarack; Headwater; Meg; Athabasca; Strathcona; Peyto; Enbridge; Freehold; Surge; Valeura; Veren
thank you sir. much appreciate you taking the time to answer. i enjoy your opinions and market calls, too.
You’re welcome!
Well it looks like at least someone here is well educated!
Sometimes that’s a curse. It makes it difficult to read most of the comments from many here who don’t have a clue.
so the solution is what, Zero Humans?
Nope. There is a solution, but it won’t happen. See my response to Mish in his next post titled “Assume Climate is 100% ManMade”. Though it’s another long one. Trying to discuss something this complex in a few paragraphs is difficult.
CBS news report from 1982. We are all doomed. Special guest appearance by Al “the magnificent” Gore.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2024/05/28/a-cbs-news-report-from-over-40-years-ago-proves-global-warming-is-the-ultimate-hoax-n2639588
The best aggregation of skeptical perspectives on climate change https://wattsupwiththat.com/
There’s some political garbage there, too. But plenty of solid stuff in the mix.
Potholer54 on youtube mentions them quite often. If you like the blog, go check his youtube channel 🙂
200 years ago people could observe that birds can fly, but the majority of the population thought it was ludicrous that people could fly. Obviously they were wrong.
Today we can observe the temperature swing wildly from day to night (10F, 5C). I’m of the belief that the climate problem will be solved by human technology that may be ludicrous to think about for most people today. This is why I don’t get worked up about climate change.
As for reducing CO2 and CFCs into the air, and nitrates, PFAS and chemicals into our waterways I’m all for it because it makes for a healthier planet. Its a positive side benefit of todays climate change strategy.
I watched the Kisin’s speech. Good stuff. He claims that the impoverished, 3rd world countries will determine how climate change goes with CO2 emissions.
I remember when the India’s Minister of Energy was interviewed by Leonardo DiCaprio. She went on to say that the developed countries want to impose their CO2 sanctions on emerging economies such as India and China. She states that India and China were not responsible for the vast amounts of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere. It was the USA and European countries with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. She basically said the the collective West has advanced economies. The 3rd world desires to join that club. The West has a big piece of the prosperity pie. The 3rd world should not now be subject to sanctions formulated by the West that would limit their ability to have a piece of the prosperity pie.
The 1st world has a over-consumption problem, but the 3rd world has a ballooning population problem which counters any reduction measures by the 1st world.
The high priests would rather sell their mother to slavery than touch the subject.
They are not “problems”, just symptoms.
The Dems had their minions out the other day with talking points. Kerry ,Clinton and others that now want to criminalize free speech because it is impeding the government and their MSM from controling the narrative. After all the lies about covid, Russia collusion Hunters laptop was Russian disinformation, Global warming , Ukraine pushed by the alphabet agencies and MSM people are beginning to wake up so they want to start jailing people who have different views from them . Look at all the people who had accounts canceled for conspiracy theories that turned out to be true You have your Pappas amd MP who worship these people like gods even though they fly around and live lifestyles that contribute thousands of more C02 than the average human . They have no intentions of sacrificing their lifestyle for the crusade they claim that needs to happen . Their followers are idiots !
The money has run out for censorship – when the cupboards are bare very few care about what the regime wants, we all go feral.
don’t forget the lies of WMD, and saddam, and the biggest of all the bush crime family writing the project for the new american century in 90s, desiring a new enemy as USSR had folded. they wanted a new pearl harbor and thought saddam would be a perfect boogie man with oil. amerikan oil under his nation. 9.11.01 was the biggest act against amerikans by amerikan MIC looking the other way and basically waving in the jihadi hijackers………..and spiriting out of country the bin laden family while all ofnaiton on lock down
This discovery deserves a Nobel prize.
I mean, look at all the economic Nobel prizes that the academia has collected. As a result, we have a robust economy, and rock solid finances.
The climatologists must be green with envy when looking over at the department of economics.
Lol
I humbly suggest an alternative course of action with potentially even greater government subsidies. Since the sun drives temperature and thus wind on this planet maybe we should declare war on it. If we can unite our planet against the sun we can spend trillions trying to figure out how to extinguish that star that warms our little home. Think of all the purposeful globally united GDP we can create and when we are finally successful we will have a new world without any climate change at all. It will then be a frozen barren rock forevermore. Amen.
On the other hand maybe we should try being reasonable (I know hope springs eternal) and stop spending money we don’t have trying to control that which we have no control over. Climate scientists revealed two years ago that they couldn’t model clouds (a major input to climate) without exponentially more powerful computers. So if they can’t model it and they can’t figure out what comes first CO2 or warming then they don’t really know. We have sadly created an entire climate change industry built by government subsidies that employs thousands. None of those folks are going to willingly obviate the need for their continued employment. Universities need the funding after all.
Wondering if that is your real name… Charlie Crocker was a man in full. Back as strong as a jersey bull!
Hmm, these more frequent and bigger Hurricanes and toasty Gulf of Mexico water fueling the hurricanes is starting to make the Repub climate deniers nervous … maybe the liberal pantywaists were right???
See first comment. You have options.
NOAA has stated that storms are less frequent and no more powerful. Please stay current and mixing politics with name calling isn’t helpful either. This country would be a fair bit better if folks could manage to turn down their tempers, respectfully let others speak and finish their thought without needless interrupting/screaming and considering others input come up with a measured intelligent reply. Somewhere once upon a time that was considered just good manners.
The denial of climate change from 2000-2015 made real by oil company advertising in the media of the time delayed us by 20 years doing anything about this. Florida is a few feet above sea level. Can you imagine how many billions of dollars in property value will be lost because the old white men who think they know everything were successful in us doing nothing?
Omg. Should all old white men be killed pepe le pew.
Oooohhhhh, somebody has THREE NAMES! :-). Waaay smarter than me.
Show us a non-old, non-white, non-man who knows everything?
I refer you to the OceanGate disaster, where innocent non-white millionaires were ruthlessly murdered by ocean physics, partly due to a refusal by genius management to hire “old white men who think they know everything”.
…the ocean must be racist.
Stewards of the earth is all we can be. I believe we Americans understand that belief and have worked most admirably towards that end. Government mandates are often initiated by guilt. Stewardship and guilt are incompatible
Humans are not stewards of the earth, bacteria are. Humans are a parasite that mostly votes left-wing in order to earn karma.
Fear not! Kamala’s weather machine will smite the unworthy!
Her PhD in verbal reforestation is seminal.
most mainstream science is bullshit. most studies are irreproducible by independent 3rd parties. “Science” is part of the propaganda stream. All federal funding for “Science” is controlled by the CIA via the National Science Foundation. This was done under the auspices of controlling research for weapons and war purposes, it has the effect of destroying or elevating individuals and ideas based on who has the money to research and publish, and who does not.
one should understand who writes and performs the symphony, if one is going to listen to the music.
They certainly like harping on… (Bu-bum, tish!)
Anyone that argues government can influence the climate for good or bad has rocks in their head. The amount of energy involved is really mind boggling. If they can’t even produce a CO2 buffering reaction for the ocean then they don’t really know what is going on and they don’t know if CO2 leads temperature or temperature leads CO2.
The Canute Party knows that censoring wrongthink is the best way to ensure public safety from right-wing science and physics.
We’ve known that for twenty years.
Oh God. This debate was over 100 years ago. Give it up.
“Al Gore and the climate crowd do not want a reasonable debate.”
To Gore it is not about science, it is about political control. As Emma Tucker of the WSJ said, they were the gate keepers of the facts. Actually, gatekeepers of the propaganda, the official narratives.
My latest report from city water and power said my “energy use was lower than efficient homes by 74%.” 205 KW, compared to efficient homes at 775 KW, and similar homes with 1,214 KW. What is Gore’s KW usage for the same time period?
Good to see there are some people interested in Science analysis and can set aside emotional appeal based upon fear and driven by political agenda.
Nobody serious takes this debate seriously any more. The regime science/medical & media machine has lost all remaining credibility with recent hoaxes and debacles.
In the end, money talks, and the pullback from “green policies” already started with the scrapping of windfarm plans.
Of course, it could be both – that CO2 causes warming and vice-versa. And both could also be caused by something else entirely. Something virtually never considered. Remember it is 11,000 degrees Fahrenheit beneath our feet. If you have the time and willingness to think hard, consider this: https://theethicalskeptic.com/2024/05/12/exothermic-core-mantle-decoupling-dzhanibekov-oscillation-ecdo-theory/. The author does not entirely disbelieve or dispute that man’s action is affecting the climate.
Correlation does not equal causation.
The greenhouse effect is real and can easily be measured even in lab, CO2 absorbs more solar energy than other gases.
There is a considerable amount of CO2 trapped into our planet that gets released because of global warning. Therefore yes, global warning causes an increase of CO2 in the athmosphere.
But that doesn’t mean that CO2 doesn’t is one of the causes of global warming.
Methane also causes global warming. A lot of methane is released in the atmosphere from the soil because of global warming. Methane is 25 – 30 times more effective than CO2 in causing global warming. Apparently, methane is destroyed by the radiations from the sun so it is less problematic than CO2.
Either we decide that we can try to do something to counter global warming, or we can come to the conclusion that it is too big a problem and we cannot handle it, and probably that’s the truth.
Nevertheless, global warming is there and is going to severily damage our economies in the future. Thinking that global warming will not have dire consequencies is naive.
How do you know that global warming would damage to economy? Perhaps it will help. What is it always doom-porn with you people?
Naïvety is believing that lab experiments accurately replicate the enormously complex, unknown, and uncontrollable real world.
“Reputable scientists at Harvard and MIT challenge the notion that Carbon Dioxide causes global warming,”
Who was it that said, follow the science? Who smeared scientific experts during Covid? Narratives must be protected by those in charge. Everything else must be claimed to be misinformation and those people censored by the media gatekeepers. Democracy dies in censorship.
They are not reputable any more.
One world government, Star Trek stuff. Anyhow, the narrative has moved past global warming, to “climate crisis”. Any large climate event, like drought, floods, hurricanes etc. is part of the crisis. Its man, not nature. Causality and empirical science need not apply.
I read that temp rises cause more CO2 years ago.
If people want to delude themselves then they should believe that the current trend is “Global Warming”. That may be the general trend right now but the underlying trend right now is that there is a thing called “Gloabal Cooling” going on.
Excellent post. What I’m doing about climate change is paying attention to what all the actors are doing (government, private equity, businesses, etc) then positioning for profit from whatever boondoggle is moving forward. That’s why I come here everyday to scoop up the data, analyze it, then position for profit.
It’s really the only sensible thing to do then you can take those profits and cash out to where you think you’ll be safe and sound away from all the noise.
WEF: imagine it is 2030 and you own nothing, even your clothes, and you are happy.
That’s nonsense but if you’re a boomer reliant on social security to live off of then yeah, you’re screwed because you made the choice to be 100% reliant on someone else to feed you, cloth you, etc.
Liberals be the change you desire! Suicide pods now.