CO2 never has been and never will be a pollutant. It is the foundation for all life on this planet, and any connection between CO2 and atmospheric temperatures is purely speculative.
Obama's big push was green jobs. Who can forget the green jobs czar, the Marxist Van Jones.. Thank goodness he was not very successful, because each of them cost around $1.63 million in taxpayer cost.
http://cnsnews.com/news/articl...
Obama's energy department has given over $11 billion of our money to the likes of Solyndra, Beacon Power, Sun Power, Brightsource, First Solar, ECOtality, and a bunch of others. They have lost money and laid off workers hand over fist. Not only that, but 71% of the money went to democrat bundlers and major fundraisers. The $11+ billion they got cost them a measly $457,843 in campaign contributions. Pretty good investment I would say.
And energy is radiating off as well. This is equilibrium. Have you seen any evidence that solar radiation interacting with non-living matter has ever created living matter? Me either.
Your argument inherently depends on energy (order) being introduced into the system. Careful or people will start thinking you are one of those intelligent design wackos.
If it is true that "climate scientists can predict long-term climate trends with much better accuracy", then why are all the climate models so very far off from what we have actually observed over the last 15 years? The reason for your assertion is that it takes a long time to compare predicted vs. actual. If the weather guy is wrong, we know it within a few days. If the climate guy is wrong, it takes decades to see he is FOS.
The problem with The Magic Soup theory is that over time, all closed systems tend to disorder, and the longer the time, the greater the disorder. When Darwin posited the spontaneous eruption of life from the void, scientists generally believed that microbes sprang into existence all the time. It was Pasteur who later proved otherwise. To date we have never observed the spontaneous emergence of a life form. Also, it Darwin's day, scientists had no concept of the overwhelming complexity of even single-celled organisms. I doubt if Darwin were alive today he would approve of where many have taken his theory.
The point is that if you are unable to derive a good (predictive) model for a function (weather in this case), then you have no hope of modeling the integral of that function (climate). This is especially true if there are dozens and dozens of variables that interact in unknown, non-linear ways, and experimentation is pretty much impossible. Add in the time scale, which is measured in millennia, compared to our data set (decades), and any rational person comes to the inescapable conclusion that climate alarmists are driven by ideology and not science.
Back in 2005, Congress passed a law shielding manufacturers from liability. One would assume the credit card processors would be shielded as well. People don't sue Ford Credit if a drunk driver they finance injures someone.
Um, there are still vast areas of inquiry where mankind has no clue about what is going on. One small example: gravitational attraction between masses. Every particle attracts every other particle in the known universe with the exact same force. We have no clue as to the mechanism by which this happens. We cannot shield it, or even modify it. We cannot observe any particles being interchanged, yet there it is. The gravitational constant is empirically derived (no theoretical basis). When I got my degree in physics one of my takeaways is that we don't really know much at all about science. True scientists maintain a high level of humility before Nature.
Being a Brit, perhaps you can be excused for being so utterly ignorant of our system of government. You see, we have this document that describes the contract between we the *sovereign* people and our servants. You, on the other hand, are a *subject* of your sovereign. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution outlines the lawful activities for which Congress can appropriate funds. Health insurance is not there. Neither is fire protection or policing. These are local matters. Unfortunately, we have a bunch of people over here who are just as arrogantly ignorant of our system of government as you. It will take some time, but this travesty will be reversed.
About a quarter of the doctors in the USA are refusing to participate in Obamacare.
http://www.westernjournalism.c...
The reimbursements are about 40% of what private insurance pays. The deductibles are so high, and paid directly from patient to doctor, that doctors are concerned they will not be paid. What good is insurance if there is no doctor? When price is not the market-clearing mechanism, wait times fill that role.
Um, the climate alarmists steadfastly refuse to release their code. The only reason we have the gem of scientific wisdom above is because of a whistle blower.
Your contention that rational thought has sprung unaided from chaos is untenable. Does anyone really believe that everything came from nothing? You are like someone looking through a window without questioning the existence of the window.
Here is your hockey stick from the CRU (University of East Anglia) code:
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
Lots of "science" embedded in that gem.
Let me guess. You used something other than a bike to go to work today, work in a climate controlled office, live in a climate controlled dwelling, are utterly dependent on the commercial food supply chain, fly on airplanes, use a computer, have internet service, and take vacations every year. Each of these activities is completely dependent on energy production, which means coal, petroleum, natural gas, and fissile nuclear material production. If the production of so called "fossil fuels" were shut off today, 90% of the population in industrialized countries would be dead within a year, probably including you. The envirowacko movement could properly be called a suicide cult if they actually lived by what they preach.
If our grandchildren do indeed have such an opinion of us, it will not be because of the weather, but because we have saddled them with the largest debt in the history of humanity because we could not live within our means.
IMHO, there are only two Genesis stories. One informs us of a Creator, the other starts with "In the Beginning there were particles..." The latter posits that the reason we are having this conversation is because the orientation and energy states of certain particles in the Big Bang made it inevitable. That to me takes more blind faith than the former.
This is the first generation in history where a significant albeit small portion of the populace rejects the idea of a Creator. Would you agree that the creation of the United States by highly intelligent people, who firmly believed in God, wrecks your theory? Also, which scientific fact do you believe proves that a Creator does not exist?
I suspect all of that would be out the window. Looking at history, the only other civilizations that embraced such were the Greeks and the Romans in their decadent declines. Once the issue of basic survival is back at the forefront, societies don't indulge in non-productive activities.
Slashdot Mirror
Bureaucrats marching to the beat of their paymaster. No ops.
CO2 never has been and never will be a pollutant. It is the foundation for all life on this planet, and any connection between CO2 and atmospheric temperatures is purely speculative.
Go breathe the air in Beijing then LA. What are you going to believe, propaganda or your own lying eyes, or in this case, lungs.
Obama's big push was green jobs. Who can forget the green jobs czar, the Marxist Van Jones.. Thank goodness he was not very successful, because each of them cost around $1.63 million in taxpayer cost. http://cnsnews.com/news/articl... Obama's energy department has given over $11 billion of our money to the likes of Solyndra, Beacon Power, Sun Power, Brightsource, First Solar, ECOtality, and a bunch of others. They have lost money and laid off workers hand over fist. Not only that, but 71% of the money went to democrat bundlers and major fundraisers. The $11+ billion they got cost them a measly $457,843 in campaign contributions. Pretty good investment I would say.
And energy is radiating off as well. This is equilibrium. Have you seen any evidence that solar radiation interacting with non-living matter has ever created living matter? Me either.
Your argument inherently depends on energy (order) being introduced into the system. Careful or people will start thinking you are one of those intelligent design wackos.
If it is true that "climate scientists can predict long-term climate trends with much better accuracy", then why are all the climate models so very far off from what we have actually observed over the last 15 years? The reason for your assertion is that it takes a long time to compare predicted vs. actual. If the weather guy is wrong, we know it within a few days. If the climate guy is wrong, it takes decades to see he is FOS.
The problem with The Magic Soup theory is that over time, all closed systems tend to disorder, and the longer the time, the greater the disorder. When Darwin posited the spontaneous eruption of life from the void, scientists generally believed that microbes sprang into existence all the time. It was Pasteur who later proved otherwise. To date we have never observed the spontaneous emergence of a life form. Also, it Darwin's day, scientists had no concept of the overwhelming complexity of even single-celled organisms. I doubt if Darwin were alive today he would approve of where many have taken his theory.
The point is that if you are unable to derive a good (predictive) model for a function (weather in this case), then you have no hope of modeling the integral of that function (climate). This is especially true if there are dozens and dozens of variables that interact in unknown, non-linear ways, and experimentation is pretty much impossible. Add in the time scale, which is measured in millennia, compared to our data set (decades), and any rational person comes to the inescapable conclusion that climate alarmists are driven by ideology and not science.
Climate is nothing more or less than the integral of weather.
Who shoots at squares? Clay targets and paper bullseyes are generally circles. And Biden's advise on shooting borders on the moronic.
Back in 2005, Congress passed a law shielding manufacturers from liability. One would assume the credit card processors would be shielded as well. People don't sue Ford Credit if a drunk driver they finance injures someone.
In other words, fascism.
Um, there are still vast areas of inquiry where mankind has no clue about what is going on. One small example: gravitational attraction between masses. Every particle attracts every other particle in the known universe with the exact same force. We have no clue as to the mechanism by which this happens. We cannot shield it, or even modify it. We cannot observe any particles being interchanged, yet there it is. The gravitational constant is empirically derived (no theoretical basis). When I got my degree in physics one of my takeaways is that we don't really know much at all about science. True scientists maintain a high level of humility before Nature.
Being a Brit, perhaps you can be excused for being so utterly ignorant of our system of government. You see, we have this document that describes the contract between we the *sovereign* people and our servants. You, on the other hand, are a *subject* of your sovereign. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution outlines the lawful activities for which Congress can appropriate funds. Health insurance is not there. Neither is fire protection or policing. These are local matters. Unfortunately, we have a bunch of people over here who are just as arrogantly ignorant of our system of government as you. It will take some time, but this travesty will be reversed.
About a quarter of the doctors in the USA are refusing to participate in Obamacare. http://www.westernjournalism.c... The reimbursements are about 40% of what private insurance pays. The deductibles are so high, and paid directly from patient to doctor, that doctors are concerned they will not be paid. What good is insurance if there is no doctor? When price is not the market-clearing mechanism, wait times fill that role.
Um, the climate alarmists steadfastly refuse to release their code. The only reason we have the gem of scientific wisdom above is because of a whistle blower.
Your contention that rational thought has sprung unaided from chaos is untenable. Does anyone really believe that everything came from nothing? You are like someone looking through a window without questioning the existence of the window.
Here is your hockey stick from the CRU (University of East Anglia) code: valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor Lots of "science" embedded in that gem.
Let me guess. You used something other than a bike to go to work today, work in a climate controlled office, live in a climate controlled dwelling, are utterly dependent on the commercial food supply chain, fly on airplanes, use a computer, have internet service, and take vacations every year. Each of these activities is completely dependent on energy production, which means coal, petroleum, natural gas, and fissile nuclear material production. If the production of so called "fossil fuels" were shut off today, 90% of the population in industrialized countries would be dead within a year, probably including you. The envirowacko movement could properly be called a suicide cult if they actually lived by what they preach.
If our grandchildren do indeed have such an opinion of us, it will not be because of the weather, but because we have saddled them with the largest debt in the history of humanity because we could not live within our means.
And how many of these historical events can be traced back to CO2 concentrations? Zero.
IMHO, there are only two Genesis stories. One informs us of a Creator, the other starts with "In the Beginning there were particles ..." The latter posits that the reason we are having this conversation is because the orientation and energy states of certain particles in the Big Bang made it inevitable. That to me takes more blind faith than the former.
This is the first generation in history where a significant albeit small portion of the populace rejects the idea of a Creator. Would you agree that the creation of the United States by highly intelligent people, who firmly believed in God, wrecks your theory? Also, which scientific fact do you believe proves that a Creator does not exist?
I suspect all of that would be out the window. Looking at history, the only other civilizations that embraced such were the Greeks and the Romans in their decadent declines. Once the issue of basic survival is back at the forefront, societies don't indulge in non-productive activities.