Should I be terrified of climate change?

[JohnLarue]

If he's a paid oil lobbyist that should be known.
Its not character assassination to point out his paid job.

his job is retired professor of atmospheric physics with 200+ papers on the subject
It is character assassination to imply he is a paid paid oil lobbyist and his scientific integrity and understanding of our complex climate system can be bought

if you want to question someone's character and integrity look no further than the nearest mirror

So your theory is that changes in CO2 levels won't change the size of the greenhouse effect but it will affect plant growth?

changes in parts per million of an inert odourless, colorless trace gas does not control our decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic climate system
our climate is immensely more complex than that

CO2 absorption spectrum is also saturated



crop yields are increasing
CO2 is plant food and the basis for all life on the planet

it must be frustrating for you to expend so much time and effort towards misleading others only to be confronted with facts

 

[Frankfooter]

no
you need to finish high school so you can learn what a subsidy is

You just declare everything that the oil&gas industry gets as not fitting the definition of subsidy.
Who cares what you think, the stats are the stats.

Really, this study sums up your tiny, anti science, fringe, hate filled group.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711445094681735185

 

[Frankfooter]

changes in parts per million of an inert odourless, colorless trace gas does not control our decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic climate system
our climate is immensely more complex than that

Look, just because you're not smart enough to be able to figure out how the greenhouse works and how it effects the climate doesn't mean that the thousands of scientists who have studied the subject can't do it.

Here's the challenge you can never pass.
Read the IPCC reports and detail the exact passages where you think they get the science on CO2 wrong and provide answers to why you think they are wrong. Stop with the copy and paste of 20 year old dodgy charts from oil lobbyists and read the IPCC report.

But you won't.
You can't understand the IPCC reports to even find the sections that deal with your criticism and you can't understand the science behind it.

 

[JohnLarue]

You just declare everything that the oil&gas industry gets as not fitting the definition of subsidy.

what you define as a subsidy are generally legal and legitimate deductions from corporate taxable income
capital cost allowances are legal and legitimate deductions available to ANY Canadian business who invests capital to grow their business
if you want to punish the Canadian oil and gas sector (because you are a simpleton) , you will need to re-write the tax code for ALL Canadian business

misrepresenting tax deductions as subsidies is just plain disingenuous, dishonest and stupid
you are not fooling anyone

Really, this study sums up your tiny, anti science, fringe, hate filled group.

really , Michael Mann, the fraudster ?
scientific fraud is not a criminal offense, however given the enormous economic damage and phycological damage to children his fraud has caused, it should be

Who cares what you think,

too funny
no one cares what you parrot, they know you cant think for yourself
you are a perpetual clown show

the stats are the stats.

the facts are the facts

and the facts of the matter is the absorption spectrum of atmospheric plant food is saturated
and crops love atmospheric plant food

 

[Frankfooter]

what you define as a subsidy are generally legal and legitimate deductions from corporate taxable income
capital cost allowances are legal and legitimate deductions available to ANY Canadian business who invests capital to grow their business
if you want to punish Canadian oil and gas sector (because you are a simpleton) , you will need to re-write the tax code for ALL Canadian business

Those are subsidies.

really , Michael Mann, the fraudster ?
scientific fraud is not a criminal offense, however given the enormous economic damage and phycological damage to children his fraud has caused, it should be

The guy was challenged in court and won every time.
Everything he's published has been confirmed multiple times.

You are engaged in character assassination of a well trusted scientist.
What is wrong with you.

and the facts of the matter is the absorption spectrum of atmospheric plant food is saturated
and crops love atmospheric plant food

Idiotic theory, larue.

Post where in the IPCC reports they get the science wrong according to you.
What's that?
You've never read them and can't understand them?

 

[JohnLarue]

Those are subsidies. legitimate and legal tax deductions available to all Canadian business

The guy was challenged in court and won every time.

you lie with such ease

Michael Mann v. Timothy (“Tim”) Ball, The Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Inc. and John Doe - Climate Change Litigation

climatecasechart.com

Michael Mann v. Timothy (“Tim”) Ball, The Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Inc. and John Doe

On August 22, 2019, the court dismissed the case on account of delay. The court found that two periods of delay totalling 35 months constituted "inordinate delay" that could not be excused on account of the plaintiff being occupied with other matters. The court further found that this delay had caused prejudice to the defendant because three of the defendants' planned witnesses had died. The court dismissed the case and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's court costs.

micheal mann vs tim ball court summary - Google Zoeken

Frustrated with Mann, the judge ultimately dismissed the charge, saying Mann had unduly delayed proceedings while filing “grossly excessive” volumes of evidence

. In dismissing the case, the judge ordered Mann to pay Ball's $1 million in legal fees.Feb 1, 2024

Mann did not pay the money to Tim Ball who has since died

Everything he's published has been confirmed multiple times.

the broken hockey stick is scientific fraud

You are engaged in character assassination of a well trusted scientist.
What is wrong with you.

there is a difference between calling out scientific fraud and trying to cancel a scientist because an event was sponsored by the Koch Brothers

are you going to cancel everyone who has received $ from the Koch Brothers
you be very busy making an ass of yourself

What do the Koch brothers donate to?
The two brothers' foundations have provided an estimated $1.5 billion to a variety of causes and institutions including public television, medical research, higher education, environmental stewardship, criminal justice reform and the arts. Charles Koch and his wife were trustees of the Claude R.

Idiotic theory, larue.

the absorption spectrum is not a theory, you blithering fool, it is a repeatable experimental result
and saturation is a repeatable experimental result

crop yield increases are a fact
co2 is plant food, this is a fact unless you think you can cancel photosynthesis

Post where in the IPCC reports they get the science wrong according to you.
What's that?
You've never read them and can't understand them?

their climate models can not reproduce the past properly, a bare minimum requirement for any projective model

The Colossal Mistakes of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

.

The colossal mistakes of the IPCC are in what was not done, what was left out, what was ignored. These are the mistakes of the administrative function of the IPCC and not the scientific contributors.

The first category of the crucial missing parts concerns the role of water in the Earth's climate system.

The IPCC should have put a major effort into compiling times series of statistics on water vapor content of the atmosphere around the globe. Because the absorption of thermal radiation by the atmosphere is a nonlinear phenomenon (see Saturation) the information has to be compiled by at least latitude rather than relying upon global averages.

The climate modeling should not have begun until the statistics on the water regime of Eatht's climate system were available. Fundamentally the problem is that the IPCC started off with the notion that that its assignment was to prove that anthropogenic CO2 was the problem rather than to seek the truth.

However, even with the flawed models the analysis could have been vastly improved by backcasting. That is to say, beforer the modelers started generating projections a century into the futures they should have generated backcasts of the climate over the past century and half.

Backcasting on a regional level would also be highly interesting. There is a good chance that the correlation of the regional backcasts with the actual regional data is so low as to dictate the abandonment of such regional future projections. The IPCC now confesses to such a wide range of uncertainty about such regional projections that their use can only be misleading.

Here is the time series for global temperatures and backcast values for a model from the Canadian Centre for
The model does not do very well and overestimates the temperature change from 1905 to 1993 by about 100 percent. The regression of recorded temperatures on the model temperatures confirms that the model has a bias of overestimating temperature change by about 100 percent. When this bias is corrected for the picture looks much better.

i guess you will now need to dig up dirt on Thayer Watkins so you can try to perform a new character assassination

maybe he drives a big car and you can nail him to a cross for that
maybe he posts on hooker review boards and you can try to besmirch his character with that information

your character assassination routine says a whole lot more about your character than the character of those you want to cancel

 

[niks9009]

oh why am i not surprized some uninformed, uneducated lefty fool would try character assassination on a very accomplished atmospheric physicists who has 200+ published papers to his credit.
Dr. Lindzen was also a contributor to the IPCC until he quit in disgust.

character assassination is not relevant in science
either the repeatable scientific observations support the proposed hypothesis or they do not & the hypothesis is rejected. That is how science works !

character assassination does say a lot about the would be assassin


428 parts per million of atmospheric plant food is not causing all of the earth's mechanisms to be pushed to extremes
and no scientist worth his salt would ever make such a ridiculous claim

The IPCC defines our climate as a decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic system
changes in parts per million of an inert odourless, colorless trace gas does not control our decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic climate system
our climate is immensely more complex than that

CO2 is plant food and the basis for all life on the planet
its absorption spectrum is also saturated at the all important 15 micron wavelength


somehow i am guessing you have not taken any scientific training beyond high school and you have allowed others & propaganda to make up your mind for you
that confirms your pre-existing biases

there are numerous scientists who dispute the catastrophic AGW , including the 2022 noble prize winner in physics Dr. John Clauser.

so will you devote your time to
a) learning the skeptical side of the story (learn some actual science along the way)
or
b) desperately searching for dirt on Dr. John Clauser to perform another despicable & cowardly character assassination?
or
c) running away

Are you surprised now ?

Me changing your mind isn't going to change anything. Neither do I care to spend my time doing that. People can spend their lives studying something and still be wrong. I believe even lindzen at one point agreed that climate change is an issue. He only disagreed on the what and how much of it is affected by carbon.

We've fucked up the climate enough already so what's the fucking point or arguing with you here.

 

[JohnLarue]

Me changing your mind isn't going to change anything.

not to worry, my view is based on scientific facts and the physical laws of nature
your feeble attempts to attack Dr Lindzen's integrity and character illustrate you do not understand scientific facts, the physical laws of nature or even the concept of scientific discovery

Neither do I care to spend my time doing that.

really ?
you were not afraid to spend time trying to disparage Dr Lindzen's integrity and character by implying his view had been bought by the Koch Bros.

People can spend their lives studying something and still be wrong.

sure
the sun revolving around the earth was the consensus view for the vast majority of mankind's existence
this incorrect view was prolonged by the church, who placed Galileo under house arrest for the remainder of his life after he challenged the consensus

I believe even lindzen at one point agreed that climate change is an issue.

that's possible as his career spans 40 to 50 years and brilliant minds do not reject a hypothesis immediately
that said, i do not know of any evidence which suggest he was ever an alarmist
he is crystal clear in his position now

He only disagreed on the what and how much of it is affected by carbon.

do not confuse yourself
co2 in addition to being atmospheric plant food is a triatomic organic compound with a dipole moment , so it can absorb specific frequencies of electromagnetic radiation.
that does not mean it will cause catastrophic climate change

you can wander down to the shore of lake Ontario and pour a gallon of beer into the lake
are you incrementally increasing the volume of liquid in the lake? Yes
Are you going to cause catastrophic flooding up and down the St Lawrence ? No
Can you even measure the incremental change in the lake level ? No
The atmosphere is massive, the oceans are massive

We've fucked up the climate enough already so what's the fucking point or arguing with you here.

you are so misinformed and naive

pay attention so you can sleep at night
man can not possibly control or alter the climate via CO2
70% of the planet is covered with nature's universal temperature regulator ......water
nature's universal temperature regulator ......water is also found in our atmosphere... they are called clouds which regulates how much energy reaches the surface
the surface which is 70% water.... nature's universal temperature regulator
if it starts to get too hot more water is evaporated into the atmosphere forming clouds which reduces transmission of energy to the surface
if it starts to get too cold less water is evaporated into the atmosphere forming fewer clouds which increases transmission of energy to the surface

vs 420 parts per million cO2 whose absorption spectrum is saturated and has been for hundreds of millions of years.

multiple ice ages are proof positive there is natural variability in climate
the yunger dryas prove these natural changes can be abrupt / rapid
natural variability did not stop when James Watt invented the steam engine

 

[Frankfooter]

Those are subsidies. legitimate and legal tax deductions available to all Canadian business

Those are subsidies.
Cancel them all and put that money towards transition.

you lie with such ease
Mann did not pay the money to Tim Ball who has since died
the broken hockey stick is scientific fraud
there is a difference between calling out scientific fraud and trying to cancel a scientist because an event was sponsored by the Koch Brothers
are you going to cancel everyone who has received $ from the Koch Brothers
you be very busy making an ass of yourself

You're wrong, Mann won.

https://www.science.org/content/article/jury-rules-climate-scientist-michael-mann-long-running-defamation-case

the absorption spectrum is not a theory, you blithering fool, it is a repeatable experimental result
and saturation is a repeatable experimental result

Its your theory that you think the IPCC is totally wrong because of IR absorbtion.
But you can't read and understand the IPCC report to state where they get it wrong.
You think you're right but don't even understand the IPCC report to prove it.

 

[Frankfooter]

not to worry, my view is based on scientific facts and the physical laws of nature

Bwahaha!

You think you are smarter than all of NASA and understand science better than they do.