Top Banner
Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics. The alarmists’ arguments are all based on fake science and political ideology. The skeptics’ arguments are based on real science. For failing to be hoodwinked by the alarmists disinformation, the skeptics have been demonized in derogatory terms as deniers. The skeptics are divided into two camps, the Lukewarmers and the Pragmatists. The alarmists believe that the greenhouse effect (GHE) of CO2, a greenhouse gas, is catastrophically warming the planet and that man’s CO2 emissions are responsible. The lukewarmers also believe that greenhouse gases produce a GHE but that the alarmists’ projection of warming has been dramatically overstated and that the warming effect is so small as to be of little to no concern. The pragmatists, a growing group of scientists, have scientific papers showing the GHE is a myth, greenhouse gases cool not warm and that any effect CO2 has, whether warming or cooling is so small it is impossible to measure. With that backdrop in mind, the media often quote NASA as saying 97% of climate scientists agree that climate warming trends over the past century are extremely likely to be due to the greenhouse gas emissions from human activities . . . The NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) operates above a restaurant in a midtown Manhattan office building, nowhere near a major NASA facility. Ironically, GISS has virtually nothing to do with studying space, much less honoring its legendary namesake, Dr. Robert H. Goddard, who is widely recognized as the father of American rocketry. Instead, NASA-GISS is far more publicly associated with its long-time head Dr. James Hansen, who is appropriately recognized as the godfather of a global warming alarm syndicate. Hansen even retained his position following four handcuffed arrests for noncompliance with police orders during eco-activist anti-fossil energy demonstrations. i NASA-GISS is a small political activist organization staffed by a handful of ideologue activists pushing a political agenda. They have zero science to back up any of their claims. They rely solely on the same failed climate models used by the IPCC that can’t predict the last 30 years of hindsight, let alone anything into the future. These models, backed by zero science, have been specifically developed in recent times to produce a predetermined outcome that will create alarmism. IPCC and NASA-GISS have produced thousands of papers to support their failed models. They’ve had them reviewed, but only by colleagues who share the same ideology, a
13

Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

May 31, 2020

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics. The alarmists’ arguments are all based on fake science and political ideology. The skeptics’ arguments are based on real science. For failing to be hoodwinked by the alarmists disinformation, the skeptics have been demonized in derogatory terms as deniers. The skeptics are divided into two camps, the Lukewarmers and the Pragmatists. The alarmists believe that the greenhouse effect (GHE) of CO2, a greenhouse gas, is catastrophically warming the planet and that man’s CO2 emissions are responsible. The lukewarmers also believe that greenhouse gases produce a GHE but that the alarmists’ projection of warming has been dramatically overstated and that the warming effect is so small as to be of little to no concern. The pragmatists, a growing group of scientists, have scientific papers showing the GHE is a myth, greenhouse gases cool not warm and that any effect CO2 has, whether warming or cooling is so small it is impossible to measure. With that backdrop in mind, the media often quote NASA as saying 97% of climate scientists agree that climate warming trends over the past century are extremely likely to be due to the greenhouse gas emissions from human activities . . . The NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) operates above a restaurant in a midtown Manhattan office building, nowhere near a major NASA facility. Ironically, GISS has virtually nothing to do with studying space, much less honoring its legendary namesake, Dr. Robert H. Goddard, who is widely recognized as the father of American rocketry. Instead, NASA-GISS is far more publicly associated with its long-time head Dr. James Hansen, who is appropriately recognized as the godfather of a global warming alarm syndicate. Hansen even retained his position following four handcuffed arrests for noncompliance with police orders during eco-activist anti-fossil energy demonstrations.i NASA-GISS is a small political activist organization staffed by a handful of ideologue activists pushing a political agenda. They have zero science to back up any of their claims. They rely solely on the same failed climate models used by the IPCC that can’t predict the last 30 years of hindsight, let alone anything into the future. These models, backed by zero science, have been specifically developed in recent times to produce a predetermined outcome that will create alarmism. IPCC and NASA-GISS have produced thousands of papers to support their failed models. They’ve had them reviewed, but only by colleagues who share the same ideology, a

Page 2: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

bastardised peer review process known as “Pal” review. None of the 32,000 scientists from the NIPCC are permitted to conduct any of these reviews.

Models compared to the last 30 years of observations (hindsight)

Not to be content with the failed models but to keep the false narrative going and try and deceive everyone into believing their models are correct, the World Meteorological Organisation or WMO, who are a 50% partner with the IPCC, have coordinated Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology, the UK Met Office and the US’s met office NOAA as well as NASA-GISS into fraudulently adjusting all the raw temperature data upwards to make it more closely resemble the failed models. There are 72 activist scientists on the IPCC. There are 32,000 real scientists on the NIPCC, the NonGovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, who all dissent from the 72. Climate change has absolutely nothing to do with climate or science. It is totally political. It is the communist agenda and it’s purpose is to destroy capitalism and replace it with communism by the redistribution of global wealth. Paris is a global wealth redistribution scheme. Rich countries have been defrauded into redistributing their wealth to poor countries to fight shadows. Every cent redistributed will achieve nothing and is a total waste. Regarding the 97% consensus. There is no such consensus. That was a bogus claim, totally unsubstantiated in a paper by Cook et al and pushed by a biased media. It has been refuted by all the real scientists in the world.ii

Page 3: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

Carbon dioxide, CO2, does not produce warming, warming produces CO2. A cause cannot be the effect. CO2 lags temperature by approximately 1,000 years and has done so for the past 1 million years.

Carbon follows temperature

CO2 is plant food and a necessary element for all forms of life on earth. It is a non-toxic trace gas. It is not dirty and not a pollutant. It is impossible for CO2 to warm the planet. The greenhouse theory is that the greenhouse gasses act as a blanket covering the earth. They let the short wave radiation (UV) in from the sun and that heats the earth. The earth emits long wave radiation (IR) which is blocked by the blanket thereby trapping the heat under the blanket and heating the earth. CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere. If you pull a doona over your body on a cold night that only covered 0.04% of your body you’d freeze. There is simply not enough of CO2 to do anything to the climate. Science has now proved that greenhouse gasses do not produce any form of warming, they actually cool. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas (GHG) and there is hundreds times more of that than CO2 and it is 1,000 times more potent. Water vapor is 4% of the atmosphere. The Surfrad studies show that water vapor does not produce warming but instead produces cooling.iii CO2 has only ever been shown to produce cooling. Water vapor makes CO2 irrelevant. What CO2 does to temperature is immeasurable.

Page 4: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

There is no science proving humans are causing warming. There are thousands of peer review science papers showing otherwise. The only thing the left side of politics have are hundreds of failed climate models that can’t even predict the last 30 years of hindsight. What they have is confirmation bias and self fulfilling prophecies. The globe has warmed for the past 100 years so humans must have caused it. The globe has been warming for the past 350 years and cooling for the past 8,000 years. In a recent article published in The American Spectator by scientist Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley from the Heartland Institute. October 13, 2017, 12:05 am If its totalitarian and unresearched its not a consensus:

Yet the largest sample of academic papers on climate ever studied — an impressive 11,944 papers over the 21 years 1991–2011 — showed only 0.3 percent “consensus” explicitly supporting the proposition recent global warming was mostly manmade.

We need to emit more CO2 into the atmosphere to make sure we can survive the next and impending ice age without humans going extinct. The left side of politics is promoting the extinction of all human kind. During ice ages the cold oceans sequester or absorb CO2 and store it and during the last ice age CO2 levels in the atmosphere dropped to critically low levels that plant life almost became extinct. CO2 dropped to 180ppm and plants can’t grow with CO2 at 150ppm or below. Our food crops are plants. If we have no food we go extinct. Our current CO2 emissions are simply restoring a balance into the atmosphere. 300 mil years ago trees grew and absorbed CO2 out of the atmosphere. These trees died and fell under water and eventually under ground. We are now digging them up as coal.

Page 5: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

By burning that coal, all we are doing is recycling that CO2 back into the atmosphere where it came from and where it is needed.

CO2 fell to 180ppm during the last ice age. That is just 30ppm short of all plant life going extinct.iv In fact, atmospheric CO2 levels at 400 ppm are approximately one-third the optimum required for plant growth as commercial greenhouses demonstrate by raising levels to 1200 ppm for increased yields. Plants breath in CO2 and breath out oxygen. We breath in that oxygen and exhale CO2. The CO2 in our exhaled breath is 40,000ppn. Do these climate delusionists want us to stop breathing? During interglacial warm periods, the warm oceans release CO2. 85% of all current total atmospheric CO2 in the atmosphere has been released naturally by the oceans. The remaining 15% is from human emissions. CO2 has a 4 year life cycle in the atmosphere before being reabsorbed back into the oceans. Only 4% of all annual emissions are from humans, the remaining 96% is natural,v mostly from the warm oceans and most of that from the equatorial belt. So if the alarmists manufacture up some empirical scientific evidence from somewhere proving that it is that 4% of CO2 that is warming the earth, then let them show us the proof that the remaining 96% is not producing any warming at all. They will have to do that to have any credibility.

Page 6: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

There is nothing unusual happening with the globe's temperatures. The globe is not warming, it is slowly cooling. It is impossible for humans to control the globe's temperature. The globe's temperatures are regulated by a number of natural cycles. The earth's elliptical orbit around the sun - 100,000 year cycle The earth's tilt cycle - 40,000 years Wobble or Precision around the tilt - 23,000 to 26,000 years Major solar cycles - 600 years Every 100,000 years we have an ice age and in between we have an integlacial warm period. Every ice-age began when CO2 was at or near peak levels, in other words, high CO2 levels have, not only not produced warming, but have also never been enough to prevent ice ages. In our past history the earth plunged into an ice age with CO2 levels at 4,000ppm. We are currently coming to the end of an interglacial warm period. Our temperatures peaked 8,000 years ago and have been slowly declining since, going up and down in line with major solar cycles. The last grand solar minimum was 1650 – 1700 when the Thames froze. Temps have been rising since and we are currently rolling over the top of a grand solar maximum. The sun’s magnetic waves will cross at low amplitude and thereafter fail to cross at any point as they remain fully separated in opposite hemispheres and we will be having another solar minimum between 2020 and 2053.vi Our temperature peak 8,000 years ago was 1 deg C less than the interglacial peak 100,000 years ago without humans. Sun spots cycle are on an 11 year cycle but have a Grand Solar Cycle on a 600 to 1,000 year cycle. Within these longer term natural cycles, the globe’s temperature follows the grand solar cycles.

Page 7: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

Temperature follows the grand solar cycles

In addition to the grand solar minimum, we are headed for a double whammy of cooling. The elliptical cycle, also known as the Milankovitch cycle, will be pushing the earth away from the sun between 2019 and 2033. Between 2019 to 2033, centered on 2025, the large planets of Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus will all be aligned to one side of earth and their gravity will pull the earth into an Elliptical Orbit and will cause the earth to have a cooling period.

Page 8: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.
Page 9: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

This planetary orbit cycle for 2016 shows the gas giant planets Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune spaced

relatively equally around the solar system. This creates almost no gravitational pull on the earth resulting

the earth having an almost circular obit around the Sun.

This planetary orbit cycle for 2024 shows the gas giant planets Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune all on

one side of the Sun and all outward from earth. Their combined gravitational pull, pulls the earth outwards

in their direction into an elliptical orbit around the Sun. When Earth orbits on the same side of the Sun as

the gas giants, it is further away from the Sun compared to when it orbits on the opposite side of the Sun.

The end result is that Earth spends more time away from the Sun than closer to the Sun resulting is Earth

receiving less radiation in total than when it is a circular orbit. Less radiation results in cooling.

Page 10: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

During these 100,000 year cycles, sea levels rose and fell by 140 metres. During the last ice age the Great Barrier Reef was high and dry for 50,000 years and dead. You could walk across to PNG and Tasmania. The left wing push on climate change has nothing to do with climate or science, it is all political. It is political activists pushing the communist agenda.vii It is time to stop this childish argument about CO2. Coal is a clean energy source. In the 1970s the alarmists were telling us we were heading for an ice age and it was because of CO2. Then the temperature started warming so they changed their mantra to global warming and CO2 is still the culprit. CO2 causes cooling and warming according to these people. Then they learned the globe was actually cooling so they changed again to climate change.viii That’s taking an each way bet. CO2 will catastrophically annihilate us one way or the other and the rich nations must fork out $100 tril and give it to poor countries. All of which will achieve nothing towards any form of climate change but will convert the donor nations to poverty and the world to the communist “globalist agenda”. It's time to change the debate. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Coal is clean energy. Carbon dioxide is green, it is greening the planet. The globe currently has record food crop harvests and even deserts are greening.ix Carbon does not cause warming, warming causes carbon. Human carbon emissions are not only beneficial but absolutely necessary for the survival of human kind. It is traditional pollution we need to get rid of, not CO2. Smoke contains pollutants which is unburned matter that can be recycled through the burners to make them more efficient, the same as we do with vehicle emissions. The current Paris accord is the greatest economic disaster in human history. It is economic vandalism disguised as environmentalism. Rich governments have been defrauded into spending $100 tril to give to poor

Page 11: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

countries to fight shadows. To try and reduce the earth’s temperatures 2 deg C. The earth has no temperature control knob. It is impossible for humans to adjust the earth’s temperature. The sun trumps everything humans are capable of doing. This money is a total waste. Paris has nothing to do with climate or science. It is all about the redistribution of global wealth. Take all of or hard earned tax payers dollars and throw it down the drain. It is communism. Many people within the IPCC have made admissions to this. The IPCC is a political body with a political agenda. It’s terms of reference are that it is to find humans are causing warming. Nothing else. It is time to pull the plug on the IPCC. During ice ages, two thirds of the globe’s arable land is under ice and there is almost no carbon to grow our food crops. The globe’s temperature is 12 to 20 degrees C lower than now as well. Survival of the earth’s 8 bil people in an ice age will not be easy or comfortable. The earth’s temperature has been stable and warm for the past 10,000 years. Probably no coincidence humans came to the fore during that period. The last 10,000 years is the most stable and warm the earth has been for the last 1 mil years. We are sitting on the precipice and about to slip off into the next ice age right now. We need to recycle as much CO2 back into the atmosphere as we can rather urgently. This hideous notion of CCS is about as non-sensical as you can get. Burying carbon under ground is astronomically expensive. When we enter the impending ice age, CO2 levels will drop dramatically and we will be forking out an even greater amount of money to mine it all up again and get it back into the atmosphere so we can grow our food crops. How stupid is that? The alarmists know they can’t power the earth, at it’s current usage, with wind and solar and want to cull the world’s population until it can be powered with wind and solar. Not only do they want to cull the earth’s population but they also want to remove all CO2 from the atmosphere so that all humans go extinct. It is time all citizens of the world wake up to the disinformation and false narrative spread by the left side of politics before we all end up extinct. Brendan Godwin

Radio Technician Ground (RAAF)

Radio Technical Officer

Weather Observer and General Meteorology

Bureau of Meteorology

Mawson Antarctic 1974

Page 12: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

i Corrupt Climate Science Discredits NASA. Larry Bell, Oct 4, 2017. http://principia-scientific.org/corrupt-

climate-science-discredits-

nasa/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+psintl+%28Principia+Sci

entific+Intl+-+Latest+News%29

ii 97 Articles Refuting The “97% Consensus”

Anthony Watts / December 19, 2014

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/19/97-articles-refuting-the-97-consensus-on-global-warming/

http://www.populartechnology.net/2014/12/97-articles-refuting-97-consensus.html

UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol. Testimony to U.S. Congress: Full Committee Hearing –

Examining the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Process. May 29, 2014.

UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol. Sept. 3, 2015.

Joseph Bast and Dr. Roy Spencer . “The Myth of the Climate Change ‘97%’.” The Wall Street

Journal - May 26, 2014.

iii SURFRAD Data Falsifies the “Greenhouse Effect” Hypothesis

Published on October 6, 2017

Written by Carl Brehmer

https://principia-scientific.org/surfrad-data-falsifies-the-greenhouse-effect-hypothesis/

iv THE POSITIVE IMPACT OF HUMAN CO2 EMISSIONS

ON THE SURVIVAL OF LIFE ON EARTH BY PATRICK MOORE | JUNE 2016

The Frontier Centre for Public Policy. www.fcpp.org. Executive Summary.

v Global and Planetary Change

Volume 152, May 2017, Pages 19–26

Scrutinizing the carbon cycle and CO2 residence time in the atmosphere

Hermann Harde

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.02.009

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818116304787?via%3Dihub

vi PREDICTION OF SOLAR ACTIVITY FROM SOLAR BACKGROUND MAGNETIC FIELD

VARIATIONS IN CYCLES 21–23

Prof Valentina Zharkova, of Northumbria University.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...46S

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/46/pdf

The Astrophysical Journal, 795:46 (8pp), 2014 November 1

Mini ice-age which could freeze the Tyne is on the way, says Newcastle academic

Peter McCusker 11:30, 13 JUL 2016

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/business/business-news/mini-ice-age-could-freeze-11607587

Page 13: Climate Change Pragmatism - Radschool Change... · Climate Change Pragmatism The climate change debate traditionally has had two divided camps dubbed the Alarmists and the Skeptics.

vii Why the Russians conceived the global warming scam

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/why-the-russians-conceived-the-global-warming-scam/

Cliff Kincaid; Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism

The Marxist roots of the global warming scare

June 16, 2008

By Wes Vernon ~ renewamerica.com

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/vernon/080616 links to:

https://web.archive.org/web/20091125012723/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/vernon/

080616

Gorbachev & Global-Enviro-Communism.pdf. By Natalie Grant

The Register, Vol. IV, No. 3, Pages 58 – 62

viii Thursday, February 28, 2013

1970s Global Cooling Alarmism

Popular Technology.net

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html

120 Years Of Climate Scares – 70s Ice age scare

Read the Full Article By: Marc Morano - Climate Depot May 23, 2017 11:05 AM

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/05/23/120-years-of-climate-scares-70s-ice-

age-scare/

Global cooling trend affects wacky weather

Andrew Wilson

1974 Chicago Daily News

ix Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds

NASA's Earth Science

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

Read the paper at Nature Climate Change.

www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3004.html

Greening of the Earth and its drivers

Zaichun Zhu, Shilong Piao[…]Ning Zeng