Eschatology and Global Warming

The chiliastic fervor of some AGW believers may yet produce something like climate jihad.
“Damage and Destroy” Climate Zealots’ Final Solution?
Guest Blogger
Andreas Malm claims that property destruction is necessary for the defense of the planet and of humanity. On what moral basis, though, could he object if people were to destroy his…

 

He doesn't need to cite anything to you.

Are you unable to address his arguments as he has presented them to you??

 

https://www.climatefiles.com/shell/1988-shell-report-greenhouse/


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

 

This howler has been long debunked years ago and this recent post makes clear that it is a bogus narrative anyway since it has been known for the SAME 50 years by many others including scientists who has nothing to do with Exxon.

From Watts Up With That?

The #ExxonKnew Lie Spreads to Motor City

LINK

=====

When will people stop chasing bogus claims?

 

Riiiiiiiiiight.

I'm not going to wade through reams of irrelevant print to find a referece to global warming and Exxon. If you have information you would like to share, share it and quote your source and link to your source so I can read your quote in context.

 

Not only did Exxon know, they published their research results and shared them with the IPCC. Look for a villain elsewhere.
The "Exxon Climate Papers" show what Exxon and climate science knew and shared
2016 › 04 › 20 › the-exxon-climate-papers-show-what-exxon-and-climate-science-knew-and-shared
separate what is being said by the writer and what he is reporting from outside research. Exxon (and later ... legislation may be passed that will affect Exxon. He argues that Exxon should do their own environmental research

 

Oh yeah I forgot this smackdown posted 6 years ago where it shows that Exxon published a lot of information that by a miracle only non democrats can see and read.

From MY link Kode ignored this section, from 2020 year:

This graph appears as Figure 3 in nearly every bogus climate lawsuit filed against oil companies over the past couple of years:



What #ExxonKnew in 1977.

Here’s the same graph with HadCRUT4 NH overlaid on it:


#ExxonKnew that the models were wrong.

HadCRUT4 tracks the bottom of the uncertainty range (just like modern climate models) and it is barely exceeding the “approximate range of undisturbed climate in past few centuries.”

=====

There is nothing illegal going on here, just a desperate attempt by clueless democrats to demonize a legal company who published a lot of information over the years and worked with various IPCC reports over the years as well.

 

Bullshit. If you have a point to make, make it. YOU are the one playing games and pointing fingers and crying and whining.

 

Note: "HadCRUT4 tracks the bottom of the uncertainty range"

So the BOTTOM of the range of observed temperatures has exceeded the TOP of the range of "undisturbed climate in the past few centuries". AND (this is most important) the increase in mean temperature from average to the current high is shown in your graph to have happened IN JUST 35 YEARS. And it was accompanied by or caused by an increase in atmospheric CO2 to predicted dangerous levels.

The important point which you deniers try really really really hard to ignore and minimize, is that the changes we're seeing in 30 or 40 years used to take 2,000 to 10,000 years to manifest. And so the critical issue is the MOMENTUM which is going to carry climate change measurably higher and we're already experiencing disastrous weather patterns.

What I can't figure out is why you deniers don't just opt for doing what we can to mitigate climate change "in case it works" since doing those things will produce a huge boost to our economy and incomes. Is it about "being right"? Or is it some evil wish to see society destroyed? Or is it just stupidity on the part of those leading the opposition and the rank-and-file deniers just being gullible?

 

Consider your claim debunked.
The "Exxon Climate Papers" show what Exxon and climate science knew and shared
2016 › 04 › 20 › the-exxon-climate-papers-show-what-exxon-and-climate-science-knew-and-shared
separate what is being said by the writer and what he is reporting from outside research. Exxon (and later ... legislation may be passed that will affect Exxon. He argues that Exxon should do their own environmental research

 

I find it revealing that you so quickly attack temperature data from the IPCC's favorite HadCrut temperature data which was honestly applied to the old Exxon chart which shows nothing unusual to the slow rate of warming.

There is a measured DECLINE to Weather Related Deaths:



There is a measured DECLINE in severe Tornadoes:


There is NO increase in Tropical storms or Hurricanes:



There is a small precipitation increase in the US since 1900:



There is a measured decrease in global wildfires:



No increase in hot days since the 1930's peak:



No increase of heat waves since the 1930's peak:



There is negligible downwelling increase of CO2 effect since the 1700's:

Next, here is the radical change in downwelling radiation at the surface from the increase in CO2 that is supposed to be driving the “CLIMATE EMERGENCY!!!” What I’ve shown is the change that in theory would have occurred from the changes in CO2 from 1750 to the present, and the change that in theory will occur in the future when CO2 increases from its present value to twice the 1750 value. This is using the generally accepted (although not rigorously derived) claim that the downwelling radiation change from a doubling of CO2 is 3.5 watts per square metre (W/m2). The purpose is to show how small these CO2-caused changes are compared to total downwelling radiation.


The changes in downwelling radiation from the increase in CO2 are trivially small, lost in the noise …

LINK

======

You have plainly swallowed the climate hysteria nonsense.

 

You have plainly fallen for the lies your handlers told you to believe. Got no critical thinking? "Wattsupwiththat" is a website that is DEDICATED to denial of AGW. THAT is why they exist. So any idiot knows we can't expect to find objective information there!

AND, your graphs are wrong (that's charitable) or more accurately, THEY LIE!
Try something objective.
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/extrem...-increased-significantly-in-the-last-20-years

https://weather.com/science/environment/news/earth-climate-change-effects

 

I'm afraid that if you want to be taken seriously you'll have to present data rather than just shout and wave your arms.
Perhaps you could start by explaining which graphs "lie."

 

It is clear you didn't pay attention to the SOURCES of the charts, it is why I posted the link behind it:

Can you guess which charts were from Satellite Data, EMDAT, NASA, NATURE, NOAA three times, EPA...

LOL

You need to do better than to scream since the sources are viable and some of the charts showed the source right in it.

 

In pursuit of the millennium, anything can be justified.
‘They Need To Breed Less’: The Darkness Of Climate Zealotry
Guest Blogger
If this disregard for our very humanity goes unchallenged, we could be in for some dark times indeed. Watch COP26 at Glasgow for trends. . . .

 

The amazing track record of success by science illiterates who masquerade as politicians on vacation.

 

The religious fervor of climate zealotry is apparent to anyone who studies history.
Climate Change Fueled Witch Hunts… Then and Now
Guest Blogger
It appears that we haven’t learned the lessons of the 16th century and the dangers of stirring unfounded fears concerning changes to our climate. . . .

European witch hunts of the 15th to 17th centuries targeted witches that were thought to be responsible for epidemics and crop failures related to declining temperatures of the Little Ice Age. A belief that evil humans were negatively affecting the climate and weather patterns was the “consensus” opinion of that time. How eerily similar is that notion to the the current oft-repeated mantra that Man’s actions are controlling the climate and leading to catastrophic consequences?




The first extensive European witch hunts coincided with plunging temperatures as the continent transitioned away from the beneficial warmth of the Medieval Warm Period (850 to 1250 AD). Increasing cold that began in the 13th century ushered in nearly five centuries of advancing mountain glaciers and prolonged periods of rainy or cool weather. This time of naturally driven climate change was accompanied by crop failure, hunger, rising prices and epidemics. . . .

 

Here's why AGW advocacy is a religious, not scientific, position -- explained clearly.
Why Blaming Recent Warming on Humans is Largely a Matter of Faith
March 3rd, 2022
(Note: I apologize for not posting much in the last several months, as I have been dealing with family health issues. Hopefully, things will gradually be returning to normal soon. I also want to thank those who have stepped up and contributed to keeping this website going since Google has demonetized it…thank you!)

As I continue to see all of the crazy proclamations of how human-caused climate change is disrupting lives around the world (e.g., the Feb. 28 release of the IPCC report from Working Group 2, [Pielke Jr. analysis here]), I can’t help but return to the main reason why human causation for recent warming has not been convincingly established. I have discussed this before, but it is worth repeating. . . .

 

thanks, we've all heard this theme many times before but this piece seems to be well written. My thinking is to go over it and maybe share w/ my one or two of my kids.

 

Proving the range is too high.

I.e., assuming the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years had not been ended by increased solar activity, and had instead turned into the coldest 700-year period....

<sigh> Because the Holocene average is much higher than the LIA average. Think!

It is an absurd and disingenuous fabrication to call current CO2 levels "dangerous," as CO2 has been more than an order of magnitude higher in the past, with no discernible ill effects.

That's just a bald falsehood. The MWP and LIA emerged in century-scale times, just as the post-LIA warming has.

Yes, we are "already" experiencing disastrous weather patterns because we always have. Think!

Because it won't. It will be a disaster. Look at what has been happening in Germany.

It's about prioritizing truth above all else.

That would more accurately describe the AGW anti-industrial revolution crowd.

It's being willing to know facts.

 

Followers of the climate religion don't like to be called followers of the climate religion.
“Exposing the ‘modern green religion'” Published in the Catholic Standard
Eric Worrall
Archbishop Julian Porteous of Tasmania, Australia is in hot water over promoting the words of climate “denier” Ian Plimer, on the seventh anniversary of the Pope’s climate encyclical “Laudato Si”. . . .

 

You do know that Tasmania is Australia’s Arkansas?

 

Isn't that what the UK used to say about Australia?

 

Yes, and . . . ?
President Clinton came from Arkansas. As did these scientists.

• Joycelyn Elders (born 1933), former Surgeon General of the United States
• Mary L. Good (1931–2019), former chair and first female member of the American Chemical Society board
• Samuel L. Kountz (1930–1981), pioneer in organ transplant surgery
• Trent Pierce, family practitioner; chairman of the Arkansas Medical Board
• William L. McMillan (1936–1984), National Academy of Sciences physicist noted for his research on superconductors
• Taylor Wilson (born 1994), nuclear physics prodigy; youngest person to achieve fusion, at the age of 14
• Gazi Yaşargil (born 1925), named "Neurosurgery's Man of the Century" by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

 

We do have to remember that sometimes small minded folks have to pretend they are superior to others.... You just never know what influence China has in Australia these days though. It just never occurs to folks that while China has no intention of actually cutting back on energy production, getting other countries to become less competitive does have a positive impact on their ability to continue to grow their economy and influence......