Question about climate change

You should just ignore it or make it an entertainment piece....kinda like we do with you.

 

And yet none of my questions have been answered ?? It is great fun to watch the alarmists attempts to avoid the truth. They try diversion at first but then get nasty and revert to name calling and insults just as you have done. That is entertaining but there is a limit to everything.

 

All of your questions were answered but you for some reason cannot see it....eventually people get tired of it and stop trying.

 

There you go again. Too funny but eventually tedious.

 

Your questions are uneducated and tedious as you keep repeating the same uninformed crappola.
Any effort to explain anything is met with distain and the usual insistence that you know more then every climate research facility in the world. It’s laughable.

 

Yeah no science at all behind past CO2 levels.

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.2013.0096

We should listen to 14 year olds feelings when it comes to CO2.

 

The anti AGW pundit talking heads all start out the same way. “I’m not a scientist but......” they then go on to brag how much more they know about science, then scientists do. It’s amazing these guys dare to get behind the wheel of a car they’re so against science.

 

And do you know the cause to a significant degree?

I have asked you what is causing the current warming... which i have understood that we agree is happening. You decline to specify a cause. And yet you agree that there is a warming influence to co2... which, as far as I understand it is the only factor among many possible climate change influencing candidates that is significantly changing. And further, as I understand it, you do not dispute the experimentally verified chemical and physical properties of co2 which.... all other things being equal.., could account for the climate warming.

 

The same factors that caused the other 9 Holocene warming and cooling cycles. Our current warm period is right in the center of the temperature rate of rise and maximum temperature ranges of those 9 cycles all of which occurred at constant CO2 concentration. Why aren't our universities who get billions in federal government grants to study climate putting all their resources into answering this question which has huge economic regressive consequences ??

 

Ok so this should be easy. What is the optimal sustainable temperature supposed to be? And where to you measure that from?

 

None of the alarmists give up such figures.

Are temperatures in deserts ideal? If not, how about the Arctic? Is that temperature more ideal than what is found at the Antarctic? What about equatorial temperatures? Are they ideal?

Why can a state like Minnesota get so utterly cold and that be fine yet when it gets hot, is that not also fine?

 

As reasoned as that sounds you seem to be under the impression that the warming causative effect of CO2 is linear. Are you sure? I doubt any scientist would actually agree with you. Just trying to understand...

Oh, and when the sun doesn't shine, and the atmosphere is still saturated at the same level as when the sun does shine, why does the temp drop? (to record breaking cold levels it appears...) I suspect that CO2 is less the lever than the indicator. Wouldn't that be radical....

 

Enter the ......."average"..... because that "means" something....

 

What about this scientist?

 

I'd respond but I've had enough faith based anti fact posts which basically say 'shut up and trust the government paid experts'. Ike warned of the government take over of science which we are right in the middle of. Our climate scientists have become government climate prostitutes.

 

The fortunes to be made are in the "man causes climate" industry.

 

Exactly as Ike warned it would be. In his farewell speech he famously warned about the military industrial complex. But he also warned about a federal government take over of science.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/eisenhower001.asp

 

Different factors have caused sec different cooling cycles... for instance sometimes it is increased volcanism, sometimes an asteroid impact, sometimes a change in solar activity, sometimes a change in earth orbit. Which is it at the present time... because, is I understand it, all possible factors that we know of are either unchanged or biased towards cooling... except of course for greenhouse gasses. So i ask you again for any specific reason other than GHG that we can attribute to causing current climate change.

I neither accept nor deny that, however, as mentioned above there are several reasons that we know of that “could” impact the climate. All of these potential causes are integrated into climate change models. When those models are run without increased GHG increase those models would indicate stable temps. When GHG added to the equation, we get rising temps.

But lets say that there were constant co2 in previous warmings..., But lets say that other factors were not constant. The result would me non co2 warming. I think no scientist has ever claimed that ONLY co2 could cause warming. That is why your logic is faulty

I think that there has been an enormous number of people who have been studying this question... both here and abroad. But they are not looking to validate a specific result they are studying all possible contributing factors. And so far, they have not discovered any reason other than ghg that would be causing current climate changes

Btw, the governments of the world are not the only source of significant research funding. The various energy companies are among the largest and most powerful in the world. They fund lots of research. And if someone had an idea of research that would prove ACA was a fraud.... would prove that we do not worry about carbon emissions..... certainly there would be lots of companies with deep pockets who would be interested to fund that research.... not to mention government funding from oil rich countries.

And how about us government funding right now. Why wouldn't trumps energy department fund the research that you propose? And how about president GWBush. He was an oil guy who was President for 8 years. Why did he not fund the research that you think should have been done?

 

So you claim that all other Holocene warming periods had nothing to do with CO2 but our current warming period is 100% the result of human CO2 emissions ?? That’s absurd.

 

I have not looked into that. But i do assume that other people have in their quest to figure out this problem

Why is it that you think that the government under trump and GWBush have failed to research proving the skeptics case

 

More data or how they screwed up so badly.

 

Dubya pulled us out of Kyoto. Trump pulled us out of Paris.

Why have the universities not done this on their own ?? That’s easy. They make big money producing research producing science which “confirms” what the Obama government assumes that being that the current warming is completely due to human CO2 emissions.

 

So, anyone paid by the govt is a fraud ? Isn’t that silly ? Govt has taken over science ? Where are the little green men ? Are all corporations, and private institutes frauds also, of just govt. ones.

 

What about the ones outside the U.S.?

 

Same thing.