OT: Climate Change Bullshit

e:

It's about 8% of the economy in the US.

But clearly, nobody does.

Enron filed for bankruptcy in 2001. It's main business seems to have been s ystematic fraud.

"An Inconvenient Truth" was released in 2006. It filmed a presentation that Al Gore had been giving for years. Enron had ceased to exist by then. Earl ier, it had joined the Al Gore climate change bandwagon, but it was clearly exploiting what Al Gore had been doing for years rather than bribing him t o anything he wasn't already doing.

If it talked that loudly, the fossil carbon extraction industry wouldn't to pay for the all the denialist propaganda you lap up so uncritically.

You seem to swallow climate change denial propaganda without noticing their hidden agenda. Your life experience seems to have formed you into a gullib le sucker.

Whereas Donald Trump, and Vladimir Putin do?

But the natural philosopher hasn't noticed who is actually lying to him, or worked out why they are doing it.

That's exactly why the international socialists ejected Karl Marx and the the proto-communists in 1871

Mikhail Bakunin was remarkably prophetic at the time.

Socialist states are democracies and remarkably free from corruption.

The natural philosopher is really remarkably ill-informed.

te:

pm (0.04)

CO2

e.g.

re

will

this

itive

ould

es is finite.

erm, but still finite.

n't make us extinct.

, we should be able to put off the next ice age as long as we've got fossil carbon to dig up and burn - another argument for not digging all of it up and burning it right now.

Nudging an asteroid at all would takes a great deal of energy. They might b e smaller than planets, but the smallest class listed is 0.1 km in diameter

which is half million cubic metres. It were nickel iron, that would be abo ut 4x10^9 kilograms, or four million metric tons. Persuading one of them to get close enough to Jupiter for a sling-shot at earth would take a a great deal of energy, and the difference between the grazing orbit you'd want an d the impact you'd want to avoid would be all that large.

Dream on

Carbonaceous asteroids could be allowed to burn up on the way down to the s urface, if what you wanted was to prevent an incipient ice age.

If either actually existed.

And you could buy them - or at least have them made - but they are expensiv e.

John Larkin has this mantra about poorly understood chaotic systems, but his own understanding of what the modellers are doing is remarkably sketchy.

Who is this wealthy and powerful climate modeller that John Larkin invokes?

I've not met one, nor heard of one that John Larkin might have met.

That's revealing. 'Nuff said.

What thermostat is that?

I've not seen a decent explanation for the practicality of "geoengineering" "solutions". The unintended side effects are not understood, and could be as bad as the problem.

That's not a thermostat, any more than opening a widow is a thermostat.

The perpetual myths of free-marketeers are that - if you transpose the same people into a different organisation, the people problems will disappear. Mensch ist mensch. - the market is wise

"Animal Farm2 doesn't just apply to communism.

They will if the people are trained, given incentives, and organised differently.

They seldom get any interference from the vulcanism. Mostly they get very clean dry high altitude oceanic air in smooth laminar flow - one reason why so many telescopes are also located on the summit.

They can tell if they are seeing any volcanic contamination because the volcanic gasses invariably include SO2 (its rare). There are plenty of other sites around the world but Hawaii was the first continuous record in part because it already had a scientific community of technicians on hand and infra structure to look after it day to day.

Scripp's at La Jolla (lovely place) was the very first in 1957 during testing of the equipment but their record is incomlete and close to San Diego you can get big shifts in local CO2 pollution if the wind changes.

The annual variation of CO2 concentration with latitude is informative.

Actually in your arrogance and ignorance *YOU* stepped onto a bear trap that I had not even intended to set. I was posting to inform but since you are clueless about atmospheric chemistry then that is your problem.

Look in the mirror. *YOU* got it wrong.

Ah, an idealist.

History shows that isn't the case. What does happen is that the same people cause different problems. If you tell me how someone is incentivised, I'll tell you how they will behave.

Mensch ist mensch, the whole world over, then and now.

He won't, on principal.

A good rule of thumb is that people with cute monikers are very young, or trolls, or false-flag operatives, or embody Dunning-Kruger syndrome. (That's inclusive-or)

Sure a straight line with slope of four. Your ~3% temperature increase (270-280) will give a 12% increase in BB radiation.

What's the localized positive feedback?

George H.

It is good enough as an engineering approximation. That's part of the reason why the nominal half life of methane in the atmosphere is vague.

Corruption is a natural human behavior. Political parties are mostly ugly, but they do compete for the available business, and they do police one another. In a one-party state, there is no policing of corruption, just maybe some factions trying to destroy one another.

The market isn't much wiser than evolution. In both cases, things get tried sort of at random, and the best ideas survive and grow. Communist top-down management supresses fresh ideas/mutations and puts dullards in charge of everything.

Nobody should be in charge of everything.

Once people spun and wove their own clothing, and scrounged animal droppings for cooking fuel, and most died before the age of six. Those "self serving psychopathic little s**ts" gave us power, medicine, cars, pizza delivery, and life.

You can elect, on principle, to boycott electricity and running water and antibiotics. Show those bastards!

Personally, I don't care what their motives were; I love my house and my ski lifts and my oscilloscopes.

The quick and dirty treatment of linearising deltaT relation wrt deltaE is fine for small changes and gives the factor of 4 reduction. The full non-linear treatment allows a fair bit more latitude.

Absolute temperature has to be around 10% different from ambient for the radiative T^4 term to become really significant in cooling objects on the Earth as compared to local convection and conduction.

Obviously for the entire Earth it is always radiative balance that matters and we have already stored up a certain amount of future heating by the amount of CO2 that is already in the atmosphere. The planet's enormous thermal inertia means that the warming lags the driving force.