NASA Study Indicates Antarctica is Gaining More Ice Than It's Losing - (5 Viewers)

[Uncle Gizmo]

Questioning? Or simply denying what they have no knowledge of?

Greg, You're beginning to sound like one of those people that try and tell us that a man can be a woman just because we can't understand.

In pure essence the "scientist" is a person who always reports exact scientific facts. In reality they are just humans like the rest of us and they are driven by many things some are driven by greed and will make up facts to gain funding and maybe a myriad of other things they will do outside of what you would expect a scientist to do to get fame fortune whatever. So you need people with common sense and general knowledge to be able to challenge them that's what I'm saying don't be fooled, be sensible, and question everything..

 

[Galaxiom]

some are driven by greed and will make up facts to gain funding

Yes. Some will deny the science for money but they are the minority. They are often paid by big industries who have a lot to lose by change such as tobacco, chemicals and fossil fuels. However the vast majority of scientists are good people who value truth above personal gain. They would not choose careers in science if they just wanted to get rich. The vast majority of scientists with climate relevant qualifications agree that climate change is being caused by human activity.

So you need people with common sense and general knowledge to be able to challenge them

There are many people with lots of general knowledge who deny Relativity and Quantum Mechanics because it conflicts with their common sense.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

There are many people with lots of general knowledge who deny Relativity and Quantum Mechanics

This is true, and I'm sure you are aware that there are many conflicting and competing theories on relativity the big bang theory, and that's why it's called a theory!

It's not cut and dried at all and recent observations are hinting at areas where theory does not match the observations.

Mind you, I would say that the people that believe the world is flat are probably wrong!

 

[Galaxiom]

there are many conflicting and competing theories on relativity the big bang theory, and that's why it's called a theory!

So you clearly don't even understand the difference between a Theory and a hypothesis. You have failed kindergarten science. Clearly not much point discussing the details of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics with you so I'll keep it simple.

There is nothing that even holds a candle to Relativity. It has been around for a century and not a single observation has ever scratched it. But you apparently feel the need to believe it might be wrong to help you doubt the science of climate change, despite knowing nothing about Relativity at all.

The Big Bang has stood well too. It is consistent with observations such as the relative abundance of light nuclides such as Deuterium, Tritium and Lithium. It is totally consistent with the known laws of physics back to when the Universe was just short of a millimetre in diameter. The complete nature of the Inflation which happened before this is not fully comprehended but Inflation is consistent with what is observed and there is still no better explanation. Any advances from here will be minor refinements or alternative explanations to Inflation.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

So you clearly don't even understand the difference between a Theory and a hypothesis.

No I don't know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis and to be honest I don't care!

I do know that general relativity has not yet been proved beyond all doubt, that's the point I was making.

But yet again you twist the knife, you attack me personally, as you do other others here. I think it's best I do not engage with you as you do not have the capacity to to conduct a respectful forum discussion.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Science has been hijacked and weaponized. One only needs to look at our current "plandemic" to understand how we are being manipulated. One-way governments interferes with science is through grants and funding, they maintain control over the information, not the scientist.

Science and world governments have a symbiotic relationship, likewise with news and many other forms of information. Governments are in the information game, always have been.

 

[AccessBlaster]

When Nikola Tesla died in 1943 the US government raided his hotel room and seized his life's work under the guise of national security. Why was the government interested in Tesla's life work? One of Tesla's stated goals was to give the world free energy, how was giving the world free clean energy a threat to national security? It isn't, It would make the populace of the world less dependent on their government for energy and could spiral out of CONTROL with less and less dependence.

 

[Pat Hartman]

The vast majority of scientists with climate relevant qualifications agree that climate change is being caused by human activity.

The money goes to those examining this position. So if a scientist thinks that humans have any effect on climate they can take this position with a clear consentience. There is evidence that humans affect micro-climates and we can work to minimize our impact, especially in cities. So, even I would agree that humans contribute.

The hard left insists that humans are the ONLY cause of climate change and therefore WE must do something to reverse it. As with most of their positions, this is idiotic because it assumes that the climate never changed without us which people who are not science deniers recognize is impossible. Do we contribute, likely. How would we stop it? Stop breeding. There are too many people in the world. I think China is still building a new coal plant every week. But there is no pressure from the left for them to build windmills and solar farms instead. It's perfectly OK for China and India to burn coal because that doesn't pollute. Now Germany is reverting to coal because Russia is restricting their natural gas. Trump told them that would happen We burn off a lot of natural gas, we could have worked to capture that and send it by sea. That would mitigate Europe's dependence on Russia. It is always dangerous to have only a single source for something so important as fuel to generate electricity. How would you like to live in New England or the northern tier of states and be forced to heat your home with electricity? What happens when a snow storm takes out your power? Oil and gas are far harder to disrupt in addition to being far cheaper. Do we all have to install fireplaces and store wood so we can avoid freezing to death like they did in Texas a couple of years ago?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Greg, I don't want to get into a tinkling match with you. But the infamous "hockey stick" graph author, is unable to reproduce his results because he LOST HIS DATA. I'm sorry, but that smells to high heaven of an attempt to prevent someone from digging into his data to reveal a cover-up or false finding. You have what could be the most important graph in the history of modern climatology - and you lose the data. HOW can I call Dr. Mann a reliable researcher? The man is a hack. As far as I can tell from new reports, this whole issue COULD be a ploy to somehow bleed capital from more industrially advanced nations because the UN has a LOT of industrially backwards nations who are probably jealous.

I've never been a climate change denier. I've always been in the "cause doubter" category. There is always this to consider: Regardless of our energy source, the laws of thermodynamics continue to predict that we will spew waste heat into the air because we have no such thing as 100%-efficient energy cycle.

Everybody ran away from nuclear power because it was oh, so dangerous. So we built coal plants. Whoops, too dirty. Let's do hydroelectric power. Except that now that the USA West and some other areas are in the midst of a drought, reservoirs are down 40% or more and that translates to reduced power from the affected hydroelectric dams. California has banned sales of new gas-powered cars but they don't have enough charging stations for the expected surge in EVs, not to mention that other bizarre new regulations will require MORE electricity - from a state that has banned or overtaxed their best methods of generation. England has reported that their EV police cars can't hold a full-day charge because of the need for extra power for lights and sirens and flashers and such. And the lithium batteries in the oldest EVs are now dying, unable to hold a charge and so they must be replaced, except for two little side effects - the batteries being discarded are more poisonous than lead-acid batteries, and the new batteries are more expensive than the depreciated value of the car.

At this point I don't care about whether it is CO2 or methane or H2O vapor or waste heat leakage. I know that governments aren't competent to do anything good about it because they always act with partisan blinders on. So I have to taken the zen attitude. To do my part, I will eat fewer beans in my diet. And in New Orleans, giving up your red beans and rice is quite the sacrifice.

 

[NauticalGent]

You're a class act, Tony. Let no one tell you differently...

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

See! It's all lies!!! We are running out of CO2:-

Craft breweries shutting down due to national carbon dioxide shortage

Breweries have already been facing higher costs for raw materials like aluminum and barley as a result of inflation.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

The Big Bang has stood well too

The big bang is under threat....

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

What a wonderful summer we have had! And again, we are due another week of Mediterranean like weather.

This Global warming is fantastic. Bring it on CO2,...

 

[Grumm]

I start to think that all we know, is wrong or they missed the timestamps by a lot of years.
What is the meaning of history if it is not accurate or true ? Everything is based on a guess or estimate.
Why should we accept that as correct and true ?

 

[Galaxiom]

This Global warming is fantastic. Bring it on CO2,...

One step forward. At least you are now admitting that Climate Change is being caused by the C02 being emitted by humans.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

At least you are now admitting that Climate Change is being caused by the C02

No...
What I actually said was I can't believe that such a tiny amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is responsible for the increase in temperature, it doesn't make sense. CO2 levels are obviously increasing, as we are burning Coal, Oil and Gas which release CO2 into the atmosphere. But it is naïve to believe that such a small percentage increase, what, a 100 parts in a million is causing the warming we see. It just smacks of leftist democratic Green Party activists using it as another way to attack the capitalist economy.

And to be clear I'm not taking a political position on this I just object to idiots rounding on some little thing without any understanding of what's really going on. Indeed they have no interest in what's really happening they just want to stir up the shit..

There is another aspect to burning fossil fuels which isn't taken into account. When you burn the fossil fuels you release vast amounts of energy and this energy is heating up the atmosphere.

This leads to another problem, if we replace fossil fuels with solar, the solar heat eventually finds its way back into the atmosphere. There should be a significant improvement in using solar, because you're not adding energy from a stored resource (fossil fuels), it's solar, which would have arrived here anyway. But it does suggest that it might be better to reduce our energy consumption.

This could be achieved by building efficient electric cars (which is already being done) Insulating houses, factories and shops to a very high standard, similar to the properties in Norway. These properties are insulated to a very high standard, not necessarily to protect the environment but to keep the families warm. A side effect being the use of far less energy. That might be a better route to take, but who knows?

The problem is in just stating CO2 is the problem means that nothing else is considered. You have your scapegoat, you fight the wrong battle and end up losing...

The other problem is the UK produces about 2% of the global CO2, if we cut that in half we reduce global CO2 by 1%.... I think we can do that, but what about the other 200 countries out there? Do you think North Korea is going to do anything? And there are a rake of other countries that won't have much interested in reducing CO2. I mean there are many that rely on fossil fuels for their vast income...

To be clear I have no answers, I just have questions. That's the point, question everything. If you follow the CO2 banner waving lemmings over the cliff, well that's not going to solve the problem.

 

[Galaxiom]

What I actually said was I can't believe that such a tiny amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is responsible for the increase in temperature,

No. What you said in Post #853 was:

This Global warming is fantastic. Bring it on CO2,...

There can be no other interpretation of your comment than an admission that CO2 is causing Global warming.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Well Greg, if you can't see the comic irony in my comment, then there's no helping you...

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

There can be no other interpretation

Exactly... You are unable to see any other interpretation.

 

[AccessBlaster]