"""Climate Change?"""

[1stRambo]

Yo, in plain English, maybe you followers of the "Socialist Democrat Party" will Wake The F--- Up!!!

Video: What’s so alarming about climate change?
By LU Staff

“The sky is falling!” says Chicken Little in the classic children’s folk story, a cautionary tale about the dangers of making false, alarmist claims.

Like Chicken Little, climate change activists insist, based on cherry-picked data, that we are headed for a climate catastrophe.

But, as Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center explains in this week’s video, their conclusions are every bit as misguided as their methodology. The vast majority of scientific data indicate that the climate is not changing much, if at all. Worse, says Lomborg, alarmist claims give rise to climate policies that may actually harm the world’s most vulnerable people. Watch the video and find out why the sky is not, in fact, falling, and why a more balanced conversation on climate change is sorely needed.



Video: What's so alarming about climate change? - Liberty Unyielding

"GTP"
Don`t You Just Love Climate Change?

 

[The Great Goose]

yay! more time at beach!!!

 

[Hossfly]

Records for August 12th in Fort Worth, TX

• HOTTEST
  108°F in 1964
• COLDEST
  59°F in 1967
• Today's Forecast
• 104F
• Not even close

 

[polarbear]

Yo, in plain English, maybe you followers of the "Socialist Democrat Party" will Wake The F--- Up!!!

Video: What’s so alarming about climate change?
By LU Staff

“The sky is falling!” says Chicken Little in the classic children’s folk story, a cautionary tale about the dangers of making false, alarmist claims.

Like Chicken Little, climate change activists insist, based on cherry-picked data, that we are headed for a climate catastrophe.

But, as Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center explains in this week’s video, their conclusions are every bit as misguided as their methodology. The vast majority of scientific data indicate that the climate is not changing much, if at all. Worse, says Lomborg, alarmist claims give rise to climate policies that may actually harm the world’s most vulnerable people. Watch the video and find out why the sky is not, in fact, falling, and why a more balanced conversation on climate change is sorely needed.



Video: What's so alarming about climate change? - Liberty Unyielding

"GTP"
Don`t You Just Love Climate Change?

I agree that the policies based on these exaggerated claims actually harm the poorer countries by denying them access to cheaper energy.
Where I disagree with the author of this video is his stance that the CO2 we contribute is a climate driver.
Anyone who subscribes to AGW does so by completely ignoring that CO2 increase lags temperature increase by about 800 years as all the ice core samples clearly show.
Aside from faulty computer model and fudged temperature data there is no proof be that empirical or experimental that CO2 is a climate driver.
But there is empirical and experimental proof that solar activity is and has been driving the climate.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article...-link-between-cosmic-rays-and-cloud-formation
For well over a decade Svensmark has studied how the energetic particles reaching Earth from deep space, known as cosmic rays, can influence the planet's climate as a result of changes to the Sun's output. The idea is that cosmic rays seed clouds by ionizing molecules in Earth's atmosphere that draw in other molecules to create the aerosols around which water vapour can condense to form cloud droplets. The low-lying clouds that result then have the effect of cooling the Earth by reflecting incoming sunshine back out to space. Since the Sun's magnetic field tends to deflect cosmic rays away from the Earth, the planet will be warmer when solar activity is high and, conversely, cooler when it is low.
There is also an experiment at CERN in Switzerland that is investigating the possible links between cosmic rays and clouds
CLOUD | CERN
The Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment uses a special cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron (PS) at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science. The results should contribute much to our fundamental understanding of aerosols and clouds, and their affect on climate.

What can cosmic rays tell us about climate?
Cosmic rays are charged particles that bombard the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. Studies suggest they may influence cloud cover either through the formation of new aerosols (tiny particles suspended in the air that can grow to form seeds for cloud droplets) or by directly affecting clouds themselves. Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. However, despite its importance for climate, aerosol formation is poorly understood. Measuring the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is important for a better understanding of atmospheric aerosol and is the key to unravelling the possible connection between cosmic rays and clouds.
Please do watch the CERN video about this experiment on their web site

 

[1stRambo]

Yo, in plain English, maybe you followers of the "Socialist Democrat Party" will Wake The F--- Up!!!

Video: What’s so alarming about climate change?
By LU Staff

“The sky is falling!” says Chicken Little in the classic children’s folk story, a cautionary tale about the dangers of making false, alarmist claims.

Like Chicken Little, climate change activists insist, based on cherry-picked data, that we are headed for a climate catastrophe.

But, as Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center explains in this week’s video, their conclusions are every bit as misguided as their methodology. The vast majority of scientific data indicate that the climate is not changing much, if at all. Worse, says Lomborg, alarmist claims give rise to climate policies that may actually harm the world’s most vulnerable people. Watch the video and find out why the sky is not, in fact, falling, and why a more balanced conversation on climate change is sorely needed.



Video: What's so alarming about climate change? - Liberty Unyielding

"GTP"
Don`t You Just Love Climate Change?

I agree that the policies based on these exaggerated claims actually harm the poorer countries by denying them access to cheaper energy.
Where I disagree with the author of this video is his stance that the CO2 we contribute is a climate driver.
Anyone who subscribes to AGW does so by completely ignoring that CO2 increase lags temperature increase by about 800 years as all the ice core samples clearly show.
Aside from faulty computer model and fudged temperature data there is no proof be that empirical or experimental that CO2 is a climate driver.
But there is empirical and experimental proof that solar activity is and has been driving the climate.
Physicists claim further evidence of link between cosmic rays and cloud formation - physicsworld.com
For well over a decade Svensmark has studied how the energetic particles reaching Earth from deep space, known as cosmic rays, can influence the planet's climate as a result of changes to the Sun's output. The idea is that cosmic rays seed clouds by ionizing molecules in Earth's atmosphere that draw in other molecules to create the aerosols around which water vapour can condense to form cloud droplets. The low-lying clouds that result then have the effect of cooling the Earth by reflecting incoming sunshine back out to space. Since the Sun's magnetic field tends to deflect cosmic rays away from the Earth, the planet will be warmer when solar activity is high and, conversely, cooler when it is low.
There is also an experiment at CERN in Switzerland that is investigating the possible links between cosmic rays and clouds
CLOUD | CERN
The Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment uses a special cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron (PS) at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science. The results should contribute much to our fundamental understanding of aerosols and clouds, and their affect on climate.

What can cosmic rays tell us about climate?
Cosmic rays are charged particles that bombard the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. Studies suggest they may influence cloud cover either through the formation of new aerosols (tiny particles suspended in the air that can grow to form seeds for cloud droplets) or by directly affecting clouds themselves. Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. However, despite its importance for climate, aerosol formation is poorly understood. Measuring the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is important for a better understanding of atmospheric aerosol and is the key to unravelling the possible connection between cosmic rays and clouds.
Please do watch the CERN video about this experiment on their web site

Yo, I didn`t hear you say anything about what Government is going to do to save us from disaster, I`ll tell you, they will tax you broke!!! Carbon dioxide is a colorless and odorless gas vital to life on Earth. This naturally occurring chemical compound is composed of a carbon atom covalently double bonded to two oxygen atoms.

"GTP"

 

[mamooth]

Yo, in plain English, maybe you followers of the "Socialist Democrat Party" will Wake The F--- Up!!!

When the first thing you did was bring politics into it, that was your admission that of how you're only interested in the politics, not the science. Those who can talk about the science, do. Those who can't, they rave about politics.

As far as Lomborg goes, here are some links debunking his junk science.

Debunking Lomborg, the Climate-Change Skeptic

Bjørn Lomborg - RationalWiki

Bjorn Lomborg’s New Paper ‘Appears To Have No Basis In Fact’ — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part I, The Great Polar Bear Irony — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part II, Misrepresenting Sea Level Rise — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part III, He’s a Real Nowhere Man — ThinkProgress

Lomborg's biggest flop is his dependence on the false dichotomy fallacy. He declares it's impossible to work on global warming and other issues at the same time, and therefore concludes we shouldn't work on solving global warming.

 

[Holos]

The vast majority of scientific data indicate that the climate is not changing much, if at all.

Could you please provide a link to the raw scientific data (in text format if possible)?

Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. However, despite its importance for climate, aerosol formation is poorly understood. Measuring the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is important for a better understanding of atmospheric aerosol and is the key to unravelling the possible connection between cosmic rays and clouds.

Earth's energy balance? Considering we aren't exclusively referring to soil, but of soil AND water (as in astrophysical planet), the energetic balance is actually much more stable than the suggested few percent possible change in water particle movements. I am not so acquainted with astronomy alone, but I believe an astrophysical body with planetary dimensions binds it's energy (particle movements into varying and alternating substance forms) to what is, in physics, considered a "virtually closed system", a closed entropic system with minimal (non-calculable) systematic exchange (between systems closely enough equivalent in dimensions of density; another planet with equivalent particles).

Considering the physics fundamentals disclosed above, microphysics measurement couldn't possibly be coinciding to actual planetary conditions such as the atmosphere or the climate, including clouds and cosmic rays.

When the first thing you did was bring politics into it, that was your admission that of how you're only interested in the politics, not the science.

I disagree about the logical validity of the sentence, despite whatever the OP actually intended.
Considering science as a multi participant, protocol verifiable, continuous inquiry, politics must precede AND succeed adequately for regular scientific establishment.

I agree that the policies based on these exaggerated claims actually harm the poorer countries by denying them access to cheaper energy.

Worse, says Lomborg, alarmist claims give rise to climate policies that may actually harm the world’s most vulnerable people.

I don't have access to sound in this computer, assuming the video is detailing the policies mentioned.

Could any of you two, polarbear or 1stRambo, provide examples of those policies with possible references to the whole description of their proposed regulations?

What polarbear mentioned about providing access to cheaper energy is of my interest to pursue, regardless of how rich or how poor a country is. My country is abundantly rich but the energy is still exceedingly costly.

Thanks!

 

[polarbear]

polarbear said
Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. However, despite its importance for climate, aerosol formation is poorly understood. Measuring the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is important for a better understanding of atmospheric aerosol and is the key to unravelling the possible connection between cosmic rays and clouds.

Holos said
Earth's energy balance? Considering we aren't exclusively referring to soil, but of soil AND water (as in astrophysical planet), the energetic balance is actually much more stable than the suggested few percent possible change in water particle movements. I am not so acquainted with astronomy alone, but I believe an astrophysical body with planetary dimensions binds it's energy (particle movements into varying and alternating substance forms) to what is, in physics, considered a "virtually closed system", a closed entropic system with minimal (non-calculable) systematic exchange (between systems closely enough equivalent in dimensions of density; another planet with equivalent particles).

Considering the physics fundamentals disclosed above, microphysics measurement couldn't possibly be coinciding to actual planetary conditions such as the atmosphere or the climate, including clouds and cosmic rays.
I don't have access to sound in this computer, assuming the video is detailing the policies mentioned.

What polarbear mentioned about providing access to cheaper energy is of my interest to pursue, regardless of how rich or how poor a country is. My country is abundantly rich but the energy is still exceedingly costly.

Thanks!

OK I trimmed the quote to the part you addressed to me.
First off it`s not "what polarbear said" it`s what the CERN so called "CLOUD" research project says on the web page to which I supplied the link. The relevant text was copied and pasted from there.
All you had to do was click on the link, but as I can see you could not be bothered to read what the CERN scientists had to say.
Here they are in front of the cloud chamber

Also the National Space Institute in Denmark says what you say could not possibly be so.
You do know ( I hope) that water vapor is the most predominant climate driver.
If you do then you must also be aware that clouds shield the surface from a large slice of solar radiation, i.e. have a cooling effect.
That being a given fact it follows that it`s rather important to understand how clouds are formed which in turn leads to understanding the facts about cloud nucleation.
Your PC does not have access to sound? But at least you can use it to check out Wikipedia:
Nucleation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clouds form when wet air cools (often because the air is rising) and many small water droplets nucleate from the supersaturated air.[1] The amount of water vapor that air can carry decreases with lower temperatures. The excess vapor begins to nucleate and form small water droplets which form a cloud. Nucleation of the droplets of liquid water is heterogeneous, occurring on particles referred to as cloud condensation nuclei. Cloud seeding is the process of adding artificial condensation nuclei to quicken the formation of clouds.

 

[Holos]

clouds shield the surface from a large slice of solar radiation, i.e. have a cooling effect.

Solar, or cosmic rays, enter and remain compounded as water and other substantial particles within the Earth's gravity at an atmospheric layer much higher than that of the troposphere, in which clouds are formed and interact with the Earth's surface.

Higher than the troposphere, where weather and clouds occur, is the stratosphere. Higher than the stratosphere is the mesosphere. Higher than the mesosphere is the thermosphere. And the very most distant part of the atmosphere from the surface is the exosphere, which merges with the vacuum of space.

(Layers of the Earth's Atmosphere: Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere, and Exosphere - Windows to the Universe)

The energy present in the Earth as continental and oceanic land isn't modified atmospherically if we are analyzing only the troposphere, in which particles become more densely aggregated into vapor or clouds.

Your PC does not have access to sound? But at least you can use it to check out Wikipedia:
Nucleation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No access to sound on this PC, unfortunately. It actually isn't my own PC, I'm just using it opportunistically. I don't have a PC of my own.

The Wikipedia article, nor the studies there linked, are examples of proposing, regulating policy.

 

[polarbear]

clouds shield the surface from a large slice of solar radiation, i.e. have a cooling effect.

Solar, or cosmic rays, enter and remain compounded as water and other substantial particles within the Earth's gravity at an atmospheric layer much higher than that of the troposphere, in which clouds are formed and interact with the Earth's surface.

Higher than the troposphere, where weather and clouds occur, is the stratosphere. Higher than the stratosphere is the mesosphere. Higher than the mesosphere is the thermosphere. And the very most distant part of the atmosphere from the surface is the exosphere, which merges with the vacuum of space.

(Layers of the Earth's Atmosphere: Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere, and Exosphere - Windows to the Universe)

The energy present in the Earth as continental and oceanic land isn't modified atmospherically if we are analyzing only the troposphere, in which particles become more densely aggregated into vapor or clouds.

Your PC does not have access to sound? But at least you can use it to check out Wikipedia:
Nucleation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No access to sound on this PC, unfortunately. It actually isn't my own PC, I'm just using it opportunistically. I don't have a PC of my own.

The Wikipedia article, nor the studies there linked, are examples of proposing, regulating policy.

At first I thought I was discussing physics with somebody who wanted to know how clouds are formed and how clouds moderate surface temperature.
But after seeing this kind of jibberish:

Solar, or cosmic rays, enter and remain compounded as water and other substantial particles within the Earth's gravity at an atmospheric layer much higher than that of the troposphere

I realized that I was conversing with someone who is not playing with a full deck.


.

 

[1stRambo]

Yo, in plain English, maybe you followers of the "Socialist Democrat Party" will Wake The F--- Up!!!

When the first thing you did was bring politics into it, that was your admission that of how you're only interested in the politics, not the science. Those who can talk about the science, do. Those who can't, they rave about politics.

As far as Lomborg goes, here are some links debunking his junk science.

Debunking Lomborg, the Climate-Change Skeptic

Bjørn Lomborg - RationalWiki

Bjorn Lomborg’s New Paper ‘Appears To Have No Basis In Fact’ — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part I, The Great Polar Bear Irony — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part II, Misrepresenting Sea Level Rise — ThinkProgress

Debunking Bj¸rn Lomborg — Part III, He’s a Real Nowhere Man — ThinkProgress

Lomborg's biggest flop is his dependence on the false dichotomy fallacy. He declares it's impossible to work on global warming and other issues at the same time, and therefore concludes we shouldn't work on solving global warming.

Yo, that is nothing more than Lies, the Losers on the Left do this every time something goes against their Agenda, maybe one day you will see the light!

"GTP"

 

[hauke]

why you science deniers even try to use logic is beyond me.

you don t even know what logic is.

why don t you simply say : " i don t care shit about the future i just want to do my thing, fuck earth fuck our children i want to drive a big block useless truck , because i like it, and you can t stop me."

that would be truthfull


instead you lie and just give totaly idiotic arguments, which hurts people who think about it if they got an IQ above 85#

just say :"i don t care shit about the future" that would be the simple truth

 

[hauke]

and please don t try to use logic, never use science.

you do not understand what logic is nor do you have a clue what science is.

just proclaim your belives, thats ok. its meaningless but ok.

don t try to make your personal reasonless belives seem identical to science.

science is accountable reproductible reason.

not a bunch of belives.

 

[Holos]

clouds shield the surface from a large slice of solar radiation, i.e. have a cooling effect.

Solar, or cosmic rays, enter and remain compounded as water and other substantial particles within the Earth's gravity at an atmospheric layer much higher than that of the troposphere, in which clouds are formed and interact with the Earth's surface.

Higher than the troposphere, where weather and clouds occur, is the stratosphere. Higher than the stratosphere is the mesosphere. Higher than the mesosphere is the thermosphere. And the very most distant part of the atmosphere from the surface is the exosphere, which merges with the vacuum of space.

(Layers of the Earth's Atmosphere: Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere, and Exosphere - Windows to the Universe)

The energy present in the Earth as continental and oceanic land isn't modified atmospherically if we are analyzing only the troposphere, in which particles become more densely aggregated into vapor or clouds.

Your PC does not have access to sound? But at least you can use it to check out Wikipedia:
Nucleation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No access to sound on this PC, unfortunately. It actually isn't my own PC, I'm just using it opportunistically. I don't have a PC of my own.

The Wikipedia article, nor the studies there linked, are examples of proposing, regulating policy.

At first I thought I was discussing physics with somebody who wanted to know how clouds are formed and how clouds moderate surface temperature.
But after seeing this kind of jibberish:

Solar, or cosmic rays, enter and remain compounded as water and other substantial particles within the Earth's gravity at an atmospheric layer much higher than that of the troposphere

I realized that I was conversing with someone who is not playing with a full deck.


.

You are welcome to return the cards whenever convenient.

 

[mamooth]

The cosmic ray theory is clearly wrong, because reality has behaved in a manner opposite to what that theory predicted.

The solar magnetic field has been weakening, which has allowed more cosmic ray particles to hit the earth. According to the cosmic ray climate theory, that should have meant more clouds and lower temperatures. Instead, temperatures just kept going up. Hence, that theory is wrong.

 

[Weatherman2020]

When the first thing you did was bring politics into it, that was your admission that of how you're only interested in the politics, not the science.

Hilarious. Al Gore, Obama, Hillary, Kerry are not interested in science per your admission, thanks.

 

[Crick]

What politics do you believe Al Gore brought into the discussion?