Alfa Romeo Forums banner

2761 - 2780 of 2960 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
"Does it really matter if it's politicized? Does the fact that it's politicized actually change things?"

Oh, where to begin?
101/105guy, if you were a politician how would you stop the most important thing facing the future of life on earth becoming a political issue?

Many voters want you to act on this issue. Of course anything like this has to be politicized. Many voters expect/demand policy changes.

If you were to ignore it you might lose lots of votes. Also because you are a denier, don't you want your politicians to set policies that, I guess, don't spend on climate change? So both sides HAVE to use it as a political football.

Free market does not care about the future generations, never has and never will ...
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
Were you looking for an answer??

It seems that every time an answer is given, some here just re-define the question...
I think I understand that you don't trust politicians. Fair enough, but is that really a sound basis for deciding on what is real or otherwise, what you should believe or bury your head in the sand and ignore? I personally don't think so. Every now and then a politician is actually talking about truthful things, even if they have devious plans up their sleeves.

This issue, deforestation and our rubbish production (particularly plastic), is bigger than mere politicians, if you care about future generations.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
Well, you brought up politicians. As if they have some special powers to know all....
Most here have a healthy scepticism for claims made by people with an agenda on either side of an issue. After some study, the truth becomes more clear.
And after years and years of doom and gloom guesses with little or no facts to confirm them, it becomes easy to tell who are the liars and who will profit most from getting people in a panic. 99.95% of the time these panics are a hoax.

So far the fear mongers on climate have nothing......but I encourage people to act on their beliefs. Just don't deny my rights just to make others feel better!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
Major oops. Apologies, "stupid post of mine" deleted 🙂
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
Fair enough.....
But honestly, the 'ready, fire, aim' approach can't work if one is trying to change hearts and minds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
Agreed. An unfortunate mistake on my part ... 2 steps forward and 3 back in this case.

But 101/105guy, the process is usually (and in this case) scientist discover something, general public worry and request action, politicians respond ... so I'm still interested in why you say "Oh, where to begin" in regards to science being politicized. The goal of any scientist is to do the research and gather results. They then can only pass their results on. In a situation where the general public need to change their ways, politicians have to be involved. People by in large do not like change, and many people have little conscience and are not future thinkers.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/07/31/food-waste/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7b0989df1888 said:
According to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, 30 percent of food is wasted globally across the supply chain, contributing 8 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions. If food waste were a country, it would come in third after the United States and China in terms of impact on global warming.
Pete
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,243 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Is it a conspiracy? Good question to which I answer let's look at the facts. When pretty much all of the so called science has been based solely on the "data" and thusly the graph presented by NASA and NOAA that these scientists are working from is adjusted or paramaterized data then something is very wrong. They all get the same answer because they are working with the same bad data. These 2 don't tell you that unless you ask and then they have to tell you what they have done to the data or they would be liable for fraud. Please take a look at the original data and read about it in the newspapers of the time and you will see where the 1930"s was the hottest decade in the last 120 years and they were saying the same things about climate that we are saying today except CO2 levels were about 300ppm. So a conspiracy? (check)

When a young scientist can't get a job at any lab or government department or university unless he/she bows down to the anointed conclusion that we are all going to burn in hell (actually earth) and it's all man's fault due to fossil fuel use then (check) it's a conspiracy. When you can't get high quality papers published in supposedly esteemed journals because the conclusions they come to don't align with the powers that be and they purposely delete papers they don't like then (check) it's a conspiracy.

When every news outlet in the country will not allow opposing views from some of the best climatologists and climate physicists on the planet and just dismiss them as deniers (love that word!) then (check) it's a conspiracy. When the cabal says we can change it all by just switching to solar and wind and completely leaving out nuclear power, which by the way is the only way you can reduce CO2, and they leave out all discussion about the down side of solar and wind and the tremendous upside to fossil fuels then (check) it's a conspiracy. I could go on and on with this list but really just ask oneself what better way to control the world and its people than by making EVIL the one thing that the world is exposed to (AND NEEDS FOR SURVIVAL) on a continuous basis every second of every day. And yes that would be CO2; the staff of life upon which every living creature depends. So again (check) it's a conspiracy.

However at this point I would ask anyone who is really interested in this explosive topic to please be a pragmatist and look and read both sides carefully. There is sooooo much more to our climate that is not understood (but the one that is understood is that computer models absolutely cannot predict future climate changes). At this point it's all just being ignored and not even studied at any government funded institution and that is a really pathetic state of affairs. In my previous thread I named just a handful of top scientists AND environmentalists who truly care about the truth. Again if you are not including opposition studies in your search you are fooling yourself into thinking you know it all.

Environmentalists have done a great job convincing the world that man is bad and that the earth as given to us by Mother Nature (or God) is perfect in every way just the way it is. The problem is that Mother Nature is not a kind and loving mother but in fact a motherf*@^er who reeks havoc on the earth and its inhabitants on a daily basis. Don't be fooled way too many of these groups despise you and your family and would not mind if we all just died so the earth could be cleansed and rid of the human scourge. Remember they call themselves environmentalists, which to me means their value system is earth first everything else second, not humanists where humans come first and then humans can tend to the earth.

I'm not coming at this from left field I was a geochemist for 40 years and most of that, but not all, with the Feds so I do have a working knowledge into how things are done in federally funded institutions of all sorts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts
A scientist retires from NOAA and publishes his conclusions on man-caused-climate change.
No evidence that changes in CO2 "cause" climate change. It is the other way around.
Temp changes lead changes in CO2.
https://notrickszone.com/2018/04/05/ex-noaa-climate-scientist-no-role-of-co2-in-any-signi%ac%81cant-change-of-the-earths-climate/ac%
Unfortunately Subtle, your link does not work.

I have been able to locate Rex Fleming, on the internet, and read his CV. A little concerned that he is/was president of GAL (not sure I understand his position in that company though) which of course relies on the aerospace industry, very reliant on the oil industry ... but I did my best to read this article of his: An updated review about carbon dioxide and climate change (found here: Global Aerospace ? Rex Fleming).

I think what he is saying is that the increase in CO2 and the rise in temperature are not causal. And the cause is related to the sun, sun spots, radiation from the sun ...
Pete
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,243 Posts
Some stories on Fleming recently and a book that examines the institutionalization of error while he was at NASA.
For decades I've seen it in the economy and policymaking. Those in office become the public man and have to recite the institutional story.
Central banking and policymaking are full of nonsense, but widely believed.
PSK--you are on the right path when you mention that great source of heat--the Sun-- and the fact that the Earth's distance to the sun changes. Thus, the amount of heat received also changes.
The Left has a serious problem with anything that opposes doctrine. But it really has a problem with former disciples who leave the flock.
A guy by the name of Horowitz was a socialist in the late 1960s and in the 1970s realized its dangers and has been an independent critic since.
Rex Fleming in stepping out of constraints of authority is only one such researcher.
And giving the aging process and many other retirements the numbers of climate skeptics will continue to grow.
Setting up another renaissance in physics.
Exciting times, indeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,671 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,243 Posts
Climate is a subset of Geophysics, which BSc I got a long time ago.
The only thing new of significance is the Cosmic Ray-Solar Cycle-Cloud Cover theory.
Which over the past decade seems to be working out.
To be sure, i've checked this with a Prof. Emeritus, Physics, Princeton.
And a Prof Emeritus, Geology, Melbourne.
 
2761 - 2780 of 2960 Posts
Top