Solving climate crisis will require a total transformation of global energy

Also perhaps of interest.
Dependence of Earth's Thermal Radiation on Five Most ... - arXiv
https://arxiv.org › physics

by WA van Wijngaarden · 2020 · Cited by 5 — Abstract: The atmospheric temperatures and concentrations of Earth's five most important, greenhouse gases, H_2O, CO_2, O_3, N_2O

 

And:
“Radiative Energy flux variation from 2001 – 2020“, Dübal, H.-R.; Vahrenholt, F., in Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1297

 

". . . funded by Big Oil" is a cop out indicating you have no evidence.
Denigration of "blog posts" is how you attempt to shut down debate.

 

Ha ha they are still pushing that science illiterate claim that CO2 is a pollutant when it was far higher for most of the last 500 MILLION years that created the massive Coal beds and Oil and Gas, drives the explosion of plant and animal life for millions of years as well.

It is an essential part of the Photosynthesis process (LINK) that drives most of life on the planet.

"6CO2 + 6H2O —> C6H12O6 + 6O2"

The CO2 pollution nonsense is pure idiotic politics but warmists/alarmists are easily mislead by political ideology because they don't know any better.

 

No, THEY have no evidence

and “blog posts by their very nature are not or rarely academic level. I would have thought you might have learnt this from the many many times I have pointed out the academic errors (lack of valid referencing, cherry picking of comments, misrepresented facts, made up data). Truth is you have NO valid arguments to debunk the science

If you did you would be submitting it to the IPCC and not arguing online

 

Ha ha ha! Still igoring the massive amounts of scientific reports on this topic!! Oh and for photosynthesis to work we need trees - guess what humans have been cutting down?

 

So???

 

A) pre print - do you know what that means

And

b) do YOU know what the implications of this research is?

 

Well, hardly a long term solution. And new oil gets more difficult, costly and polluting to extract.

Yes, we're going to need oil for a while longer, but I hope we dent those reserve as little as possible.

 

Which shows what? What are the implications of this research? How does it contribute to atmospheric modelling? What exactly does it prove or disprove?

 

Sorry, but I don't debate with delusions. I am not aware of any exchange in which your posts have not fallen short in both substance and logic of presentation.

 

The paper brought to light a surprising result for climate science: the warming of the Earth in the last 20 years is mainly due to a higher permeability of clouds for shortwave solar radiation. This means that more shortwave radiation reached the Earth’s surface, contributing to warming.

 

The paper suggests the “self-interference” saturation of all greenhouse gases in the current atmosphere substantially reduces their climate forcing power.

 

The more we use the more we find. We'll transition when we need to.

 

The paper provides further evidence that high ECS CMIP6 models do not realistically simulate the behavior of the Earth’s real climate system.

 

We depend heavily on the planet's organic reserves and there is scant progress toward viable replacements. The IPCC agenda shifts the focus to CO2 and this is in my opinion a distraction from the greater problem that our organic reserves are in fact a finite resource. Does anyone imagine that there will not be WWIII over these reserves if adequate replacements are not found?

 

There will not be a war over these reserves.

 

Trolling suits you well, keep at it.

 

Translation:

"When doze baby boomers have pocketed lots of smelly lol cash."

One thing for sure. It will be an earlier transition than you would like.

 

He seems to honestly think that organic reserves are infinite or that a replacement will magically become available when they run out.

And apparently all of the world will have a kumbaya festival to divvy up that last barrel of oil - no need to fight about it.

 

*oil cash

 

Not trolling. Just answering your post.

 

I'm indifferent about timing.

 

Indifferent people rarely go to such efforts to create and maintain a narrative.

 

I don't waste energy on things I can't control, but I point out nonsense when I see it.