Climate is far too chaotic to make sense of as to global climate

Let me introduce you to a very educated man. And his long term field is in outer space science.When he retired, he decided to take a crack at Climate. As he says, it is not possible to separate Weather from Climate as Democrats will constantly claim is needed.
Climate is far too complex and chaotic to put into a neat box and pronoucnce man is now in charge of climate.
I am starting you at the Astrophysics man but check by rewinding to Dr. Soon who does a super job on climate and the myths.

 

Dr Soon has gotten over a million bucks from Big Oil.

Oooops.

 

According to Greenpeace, every grant Soon has received since 2002 has been from oil or coal interests.

 

When this sort of thing pops up, because Koch has a paid army of fakes and internet trolls, first thing I do is google the name + Koch. You can guess what happens next...

 

Make Sense Of This, and get back to me please.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/storm-francis-exposes-ancient-welsh-085300741.html
A petrified Welsh woodland area, which was submerged under water for 4,500 years, has been exposed by Storm Francis — and the images are fascinating.

The eerie forest — made up of pine, oak, alder and birch trees — is believed to have stopped growing around 4,500 to 6,000 years ago, due to the sea level rising and suffocating the trees. But, over the years, climate change has caused the ancient tree stumps to emerge from the sand once again. . . .



As best as this dyslexic can figure
Climate Change and rising sea levels drowned the trees.
And the current climate change (suppose to have rising sea level + melting ice)
exposed the remnants of the dead forest.

@Robert
Don't you the way Global Warming Climate Change chicken littles
can play opposite tunes to support Global Warming?


Moi
The Cool Down is coming
as always follows a warm up.

click on image

Ice Hoarders​

 

Some weather is dangerous. Climate is not dangerous.

I like to speak of the glaciers that melted producing the great lakes. Surly man was not the cause. But the lakes are awesome. Nature is awesome. Where NY City is today was covered by a glacier. Who wants it to cool back down?

Warm produces life. Cold kills life. Who wants life killed?

 

Democrats always produce a name to use as the scapegoat. Recall when it was Scaiffe being called all those names by Democrats?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife

 

Wonderful. When do you plan to prove that claim? Besides Soon shows the science. When do you think Democrats will show the science?

 

Gore has got much more money than that.

Oooops.

 

Gore already had money. Not only that, he learned about it in college, as I did.

Once you know Soon is a Koch employee, you know he says what the boss wants him to say...

I'd say you don't have a leg to stand on, but you're missing everything above it as well.

 

Climate shysters have been getting rich off both sides of man made climate change. The thing is it's also woman made climate change can we at least be fair about that Robert?

 

Greenpeace supports the Green new deal and of course shills for Democrats.

So how does one of the founders of Greenpeace now see the operations there?

Greenpeace co-founder tears into Ocasio-Cortez, Green New Deal: ‘Pompous little twit’

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gr...sio-cortez-green-new-deal-pompous-little-twit

 

Dr. Soon, Dr. Lindzen and Dr. Curry all speak on climate. The term denier is a fake term. It is not true climate is denied. What is denied is the mass hysteria driven by the politics of climate has taken dangerous paths. when kids are their scholars, what else can we expect? (Greta Thunberg)

 

How is it that for billions of years, climate managed to change all the time. Suddenly man gets the blame and you include women too?

 

Well why the hell didn't I think that the right way to debate is to shill for Democrats and hurl epithets at Democrats?

Gore spent his time in the Army using a camera. Gore shills for the Democrats. Guess who else posting here shills for the Democrats? Question is why?

 

Among loyal democrats, damned few of them admit they got screwed over at college by forcing them to accept Democrats views. I feel bad you endured that.

 

Earth's climate changes regardless of women flushing their personal disposables. End of story. Now can we get on to some cheap partisan politics?

 

I do!
Imagine an occasional snow flurry in Orange County.
And more rain here too.
A "blob of warm water" (search that if you don't know of it)
has existed off the California coast for years hindering rain carrying Pacific storms from the north.


Disagree unless we speak of Snowball Earth like cold
"Life finds a way", Jeff Goldbloom, some Jurassic movie
BTW, deserts kill too.



Moi

​

 

I listened to a few minutes of the video and expected it to be about climate being chaotic. It was a lecture on a variety of topics that didn't interest me and I don't know where in

the 1.5 hour video the discussion centered on the climate and chaos. Actually, the climate isn't chaotic or else it wouldn't be so predictable. Weather is chaotic. Weather,, averaged

over the entire surface of the earth and over a long period of time (20 years for example) is not chaotic.

Climate changes as climate "forcings" change. Climate "forcings" include perturbations like changes in: greenhouse gases, solar output, orbital motion,

atmospheric aerosols, and land surface. One can estimate a change in the mean global temperature using a linear equation known as climate sensitivity which allows

one to multiply the climate sensitivity by the total net forcing to get the equilibrium temperature change. This works fairly well as an approximation and can be used to

estimate large temperature fluctuations associated with the Milankovitch cycle initiated temperature swings from one equilibrium level to another. If a linear equation can be used to make estimations

of past and present global mean temperature changes caused by changes in climate forcings then that implies that climate is not chaotic.

https://www.nap.edu/read/11676/chapter/13#99 from the book, "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years", Chapter 10

The temperature of the Earth is determined by a balance of the energy entering the Earth–atmosphere system and the energy leaving the system. An energy imbalance imposed on the climate system either externally or by human activities is termed a climate forcing (NRC 2005); persistent climate forcings cause the temperature of the Earth to change until an energy balance is restored. The amount of change is determined by the magnitudes of the climate forcings and the feedbacks within the climate system that amplify or diminish the effect of the forcings (NRC 2003b). Climate forcings that directly affect the radiative balance of the Earth are termed radiative forcings and are typically measured in watts per square meter (W·m–2) (NRC 2005). Positive global mean radiative forcings result in warming of global mean surface temperatures. Volcanic eruptions, changes in the Sun’s radiative output, and the mostly anthropogenic changes in greenhouse gases, tropospheric aerosols, and land use are the main climate forcings for surface temperatures over the last 2,000 years.

 

First laugh of the day, thanks.

College was great.

Facts have a well known liberal bias...

 

At some level you have to know you're a Big Oil puppet.

So you got caught with your pants down, and are trying rubber and glue out for size.

Brilliant.

 

For my part, I want to utilize all that lovely FREE energy that falls on HALF the world's surface 24/7, REGARDLESS of climate mysteries.

We almost have the capacity to realize it right now, and certainly most coal and oil should be phased out beginning immediately, using gas as transitional back-up until the necessary pumped-hydro and battery storage infrastructure is in place.

And here's the good bit: all funded at no cost to you and me, via BIS multi-currency money printing as appropriate, to serve the different infrastructure requirements in each and every country.

The ultimate way to create real universal full employment after the pandemic, as all 4? billion working age citizens will have a role to play from site development up (ie unskilled labour up to research scientists).

I say at no cost, though it might require a once-off diversion of resources from the junk consumer economy, a small price to pay for a global economy running on unlimited, free, environmentally-clean energy. NO MORE SMOG.


.....and if the climate scientists ARE correct, we get to SAVE the planet from catastrophic extinction of life as well.

Now THAT'S got to be the mother of all bonuses...

 

Every time over the past few years I've chased the rabbit warren is some sceptics link it ends up being dodgy brother's Inc. and embarrassingly so.
Often they are early 21st C data.

I think there are maybe a handful of 'legitimate' sceptics that pick little holes in certain aspects of the theory or call over-exaggeration in other aspects. And I'm not saying there aren't political enthusiasts that tweak things a little bit. But even conservative scientific estimates are saying that we are doing worse than the average prediction...

I think this issue will rear it's head once covid has gone. Look forward to the final swipe of the sword decapitating all these increasingly isolated sceptics

 

I have yet to hear anyone tell me why climate change is bad? Lots of horrible climates on earth that can only get better. Lots of folks in the desert would like a little more rain. Arizona will get cooler which is awesome. Less ice means more room for habitat for ocean life.....imagine all the extra food we could grow on Antarctica, the second largest continent on the planet.....no more world hunger.

 

So he realized there was more money in shilling for big oil? That’s not surprising.