Obama Science Czar Punctures The Environmentalist Propaganda Balloon.

[PoliticalChic]

1. Steve Koonin...."Steven E. Koonin (born December 12, 1951)[1] is an American theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University. He is also a professor in the Department of Civil and Urban Engineering at NYU's Tandon School of Engineering.[2] From 2009 to 2011, he was Under Secretary for Science, Department of Energy, in the Obama administration."
Wikipedia

He just authored a Prager U five minute lesson for the hand-wringer......


2. "Here’s what many people believe:
One: The planet is warming catastrophically because of certain human behaviors.
Two: Thanks to powerful computers we can project what the climate will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now.
Three: That if we eliminate just one behavior, the burning of fossil fuels, we can prevent the climate from changing for as long we like.
Each of these presumptions—together, the basis of our hubris regarding the changing climate—is either untrue or so far off the mark as to be useless.

3. “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

For example, government reports state clearly that heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.
Hurricane activity is no different than it was a century ago.
Floods have not increased across the globe over more than seventy years.
Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.
Why aren’t these reassuring facts better known?
Because the public gets its climate information almost exclusively from the media.
And from a media perspective, fear sells.


4. ...from the US government and UN Climate reports say is that… “things aren’t that bad.”
Nor does the public understand the questionable basis of all catastrophic climate change projections: computer modeling.
Projecting future climate is excruciatingly difficult. Yes, there are human influences, but the climate is complex. Anyone who says that climate models are “just physics” either doesn’t understand them or is being deliberately misleading. I should know: I wrote one of the first textbooks on computer modeling.

5. ...different modelers will make different assumptions, results vary widely among different models."

Is There Really a Climate Emergency? | PragerU

 

[ReinyDays]

[Yawn] ... yesterday's news ...

Everything is fine until we start using the word "catastrophic" ... it's a single degree warmer here than it was a couple hours ago ... a single degree every fifty years is nothing ... why do you persist? ...

Ah ... feeding the trolls ... well done, m'lady, well done indeed ...

 

[Donald H]

He just authored a Prager U five minute lesson for the hand-wringer......

Your Steven had created a track record of irrational denial for himself in 2014 hon. He's going to have to wear that badge now as he tries to promote his latest denial.

Steven E. Koonin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

nuggets of truth ... buried beneath a rubble of false or misleading claims from the standard climate skeptics’ canon. To pick a few examples:

• He claims that the rate of sea level rise now is no greater than it was early in the 20th century, but this is a conclusion one could draw only through the most shameless cherry-picking...
• He claims that the human imprint on climate is only "comparable" to natural variability, whereas multiple lines of research confirm that the climate signature of human-caused greenhouse gas increases has already risen well above the background noise level...
• A large part of the natural greenhouse effect is due to substances (mainly water vapor, and consequent cloudiness) that are in the atmosphere only because carbon dioxide keeps the Earth warm enough to prevent them from condensing out...
• He states that the effects of carbon dioxide will last "several centuries," whereas "several millennia" would be closer to the truth...
• [He] doesn’t seem to appreciate that oceans cannot be a cause of long-term warming because almost all of the mass of the oceans is colder than the lower atmosphere.

Your Steven must now be called upon to deal with just the first point of shameless cherry-picking in which he lies about sea level rise!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Vostock Ice cores provide a 450,000 year side by side record of CO2 LAGGING temperature on both increase and decline, yet the AGW Cult alleges that starting in 1850, CO2 became a driver of temperature. Did CO2 change in 1850?

How much of a temperature increase is caused by increasing CO2 from 280 to 400PPM? Why are the experiments and lab work always missing?

The global economy was shutdown for most of 2020 yet the CO2 readings at Mauna Loa increased as they've done every other year. This appears to provide scientific evidence that in fact human activity does not move global CO2.

How does atmospheric CO2 heat the ocean? It takes far more energy to heat water than air. Though this massive atmospheric heating is missing, the IPCC counts this imaginary "warming" in the oceans down to 700m as, somehow, caused by mankind

 

[westwall]

[Yawn] ... yesterday's news ...

Everything is fine until we start using the word "catastrophic" ... it's a single degree warmer here than it was a couple hours ago ... a single degree every fifty years is nothing ... why do you persist? ...

Ah ... feeding the trolls ... well done, m'lady, well done indeed ...

Yeah, but to beat a dead flogged horse, you have to continually post the facts that made the horse dead in the first place.

 

[mudwhistle]

1. Steve Koonin...."Steven E. Koonin (born December 12, 1951)[1] is an American theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University. He is also a professor in the Department of Civil and Urban Engineering at NYU's Tandon School of Engineering.[2] From 2009 to 2011, he was Under Secretary for Science, Department of Energy, in the Obama administration."
Wikipedia

He just authored a Prager U five minute lesson for the hand-wringer......


2. "Here’s what many people believe:
One: The planet is warming catastrophically because of certain human behaviors.
Two: Thanks to powerful computers we can project what the climate will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now.
Three: That if we eliminate just one behavior, the burning of fossil fuels, we can prevent the climate from changing for as long we like.
Each of these presumptions—together, the basis of our hubris regarding the changing climate—is either untrue or so far off the mark as to be useless.

3. “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

For example, government reports state clearly that heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.
Hurricane activity is no different than it was a century ago.
Floods have not increased across the globe over more than seventy years.
Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.
Why aren’t these reassuring facts better known?
Because the public gets its climate information almost exclusively from the media.
And from a media perspective, fear sells.


4. ...from the US government and UN Climate reports say is that… “things aren’t that bad.”
Nor does the public understand the questionable basis of all catastrophic climate change projections: computer modeling.
Projecting future climate is excruciatingly difficult. Yes, there are human influences, but the climate is complex. Anyone who says that climate models are “just physics” either doesn’t understand them or is being deliberately misleading. I should know: I wrote one of the first textbooks on computer modeling.

5. ...different modelers will make different assumptions, results vary widely among different models."

Is There Really a Climate Emergency? | PragerU

Course it doesn't help that 'homeless people' have been committing arson all over California, Oregon, and Washington....burning up vegetation causing drought and water shortages.
Sort of the way they did it in Africa and South America.

 

[westwall]

Course it doesn't help that 'homeless people' have been committing arson all over California, Oregon, and Washington....burning up vegetation causing drought and water shortages.
Sort of the way they did it in Africa and South America.

Yeah, we just caught a California asshole down in Carson City trying to set a wildfire at the edge of town. The fucker is from Shasta!

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I'm still having a hard time deciding which to invest in... Tubans and camels or parkas and sled dogs.

I'm leaning towards the latter though...

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your Steven had created a track record of irrational denial for himself in 2014 hon. He's going to have to wear that badge now as he tries to promote his latest denial.

Steven E. Koonin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Your Steven must now be called upon to deal with just the first point of shameless cherry-picking in which he lies about sea level rise!

So.....Chicken Little is your idol?????

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. "Let’s just take one simple, but significant assumption modelers must make: the impact of clouds on the climate.



Natural fluctuations in the height and coverage of clouds have at least as much of an impact on the flows of sunlight and heat as do human influences. But how can we possibly know global cloud coverage say 10, let alone 50 years from now? Obviously, we can’t. But to create a climate model, we have to make assumptions. That’s a pretty shaky foundation on which to transform the world’s economy.



By the way, creating more accurate models isn’t getting any easier. In fact, the more we learn about the climate system, the more we realize how complex it is.



Rather than admit this complexity, the media, the politicians, and a good portion of the climate science community attribute every terrible storm, every flood, every major fire to “climate change.” Yes, we’ve always had these weather events in the past, the narrative goes, but somehow “climate change” is making everything “worse.”



Even if that were true, isn’t the relevant question, how much worse? Not to mention that “worse” is not exactly a scientific term.



And how would we make it better?"
Ibid.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7.
And how would we make it better?

For the alarmists, that’s easy: we get rid of fossil fuels.

Not only is this impractical—we get over 80% of the world’s energy from fossil fuels—it’s not scientifically possible. That’s because CO2 doesn’t disappear from the atmosphere in a few days like, say, smog. It hangs around for a really long time.



About 60 percent of any CO2 that we emit today will remain in the atmosphere 20 years from now, between 30 and 55 percent will still be there after a century, and between 15 and 30 percent will remain after one thousand years.

In other words, it takes centuries for the excess carbon dioxide to vanish from the atmosphere. So, any partial reductions in CO2 emissions would only slow the increase in human influences—not prevent it, let alone reverse it.
CO2 is not a knob that we can just turn down to fix everything. We don’t have that ability. To think that we do is… hubris.


Hubris leads to bad decisions.
A little humility and a little knowledge would lead to better ones. "

Is There Really a Climate Emergency? | PragerU

The climate is the most complex system on Earth. Is it really possible to project with any precision what it will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now?…

www.prageru.com

 

[Donald H]

Not only is this impractical—we get over 80% of the world’s energy from fossil fuels—it’s not scientifically possible.

The question of it being scientifically impossible or not has nothing to do with the fact that CO2 doesn't disappear in a few days, as you suggest below!

That’s because CO2 doesn’t disappear from the atmosphere in a few days like, say, smog. It hangs around for a really long time.

You can't expect to get away with statements like that, even if they might not be intentional lies!

 

[PoliticalChic]

The question of it being scientifically impossible or not has nothing to do with the fact that CO2 doesn't disappear in a few days, as you suggest below!

You can't expect to get away with statements like that, even if they might not be intentional lies!

That was an American physicist and former government environment czar who made the statement.....


What did you say your credentials were?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The question of it being scientifically impossible or not has nothing to do with the fact that CO2 doesn't disappear in a few days, as you suggest below!

You can't expect to get away with statements like that, even if they might not be intentional lies!

I love getting under the scales of you morons, who swallow whole every lie the Left tells you.



Here's another expert you might want to debate:



"... an article by award-winning climate activist Michael Shellenberger, in which he apologizes "for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years."


Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Environmental Progress (emphasis ours)

On Behalf Of Environmentalists, I Apologize For The Climate Scare


On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.
I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.
But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.
Here are some facts few people know:

• Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
• The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
• Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
• Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
• The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
• The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
• Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s
• Adapting to life below sea level made the Netherlands rich not poor
• We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
• Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
• Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
• Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism"
Forbes Censors Award-Winning Environmentalist's Apology Over Three-Decade 'Climate Scare' - So Here It Is

"We environmentalists have misled the public."
www.zerohedge.com



I've noticed that an awful lot of Democrat voters buy the Global Warming Scam.....

....what could the connection between believing lies and voting for Leftists be??????

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yeah, but to beat a dead flogged horse, you have to continually post the facts that made the horse dead in the first place.

It certainly helps when you own the Ministry of Truth, the state media.

 

[Donald H]

"... an article by award-winning climate activist Michael Shellenberger, in which he apologizes "for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years."

Is that the same Schellenberger who had his article removed from Forbes because it violated their editorial guidelines around self-promotion hon?

This same guy hon?

In 2019, Shellenberger also testified in support of Ohio House Bill 6. The bill, which was signed into law by Governor Mike DeWine later that year, provided subsidies to uncompetitive nuclear and coal plants, and rolled back Ohio’s renewable energy and energy efficiency standards for electric utilities.

Can't be possible!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is that the same Schellenberger who had his article removed from Forbes because it violated their editorial guidelines around self-promotion hon?

This same guy hon?



Can't be possible!

You need another spanking????


Watch this:

For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
37. 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

Mark Simone




I bet you were clutching your pearls with each and every one of those predictions, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh boy.....can't wait to see the response's from the usual suspects in here.

Lol....they are pwn'd.

Funny though....skeptics have known this for years.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. Steve Koonin...."Steven E. Koonin (born December 12, 1951)[1] is an American theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University. He is also a professor in the Department of Civil and Urban Engineering at NYU's Tandon School of Engineering.[2] From 2009 to 2011, he was Under Secretary for Science, Department of Energy, in the Obama administration."
Wikipedia

He just authored a Prager U five minute lesson for the hand-wringer......


2. "Here’s what many people believe:
One: The planet is warming catastrophically because of certain human behaviors.
Two: Thanks to powerful computers we can project what the climate will be like 20, 40, or even 100 years from now.
Three: That if we eliminate just one behavior, the burning of fossil fuels, we can prevent the climate from changing for as long we like.
Each of these presumptions—together, the basis of our hubris regarding the changing climate—is either untrue or so far off the mark as to be useless.

3. “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

For example, government reports state clearly that heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.
Hurricane activity is no different than it was a century ago.
Floods have not increased across the globe over more than seventy years.
Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was 80 years ago.
Why aren’t these reassuring facts better known?
Because the public gets its climate information almost exclusively from the media.
And from a media perspective, fear sells.


4. ...from the US government and UN Climate reports say is that… “things aren’t that bad.”
Nor does the public understand the questionable basis of all catastrophic climate change projections: computer modeling.
Projecting future climate is excruciatingly difficult. Yes, there are human influences, but the climate is complex. Anyone who says that climate models are “just physics” either doesn’t understand them or is being deliberately misleading. I should know: I wrote one of the first textbooks on computer modeling.

5. ...different modelers will make different assumptions, results vary widely among different models."

Is There Really a Climate Emergency? | PragerU

Newsletter Sponsored by Patriot Mobile ​

​ ​ Southern California Covered In 6 Feet Of Global Warming​ ​ ANAHEIM, CA — The Southland was turned upside down this week as an unexpected weather pattern left the region blanketed by what experts were only able to call "massive amounts of Global Warming." Residents were told to remain indoors to avoid making direct contact with the Global Warming. Southern California Covered In 6 Feet Of Global Warming ANAHEIM, CA — The Southland was turned upside down this week as an unexpected weather pattern left the region blanketed by what experts were only able to call "massive amounts of Global Warming." Residents were told to remain indoors to avoid making direct contact with the Global Warming. babylonbee.com