Why does climate alarmism look like a scam?

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Sunday, March 19. 2017

Why does climate alarmism look like a scam?

Scott Adams: How Leonardo DiCaprio Can Persuade Me on Climate Change

Good stuff. I would add that DiCaprio, like Al Gore, could convince me, at least, of his seriousness if he got rid of his many giant houses, giant boats, and constant private jet travel. My view: conspicuous, fashionable virtue-signaling by people who would not recognize a virtue if they stubbed their toe on one.

Posted by The News Junkie in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 14:38 | Comments (28) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

The simplest model is based on fundamental physics.

Without the greenhouse effect, the surface temperature of the Earth can be calculated by determining it's graybody temperature, which would be a chilly ≈-18°C, instead of the balmy +15°C that it is. We can calculate that a doubling of CO2 will directly increase the surface temperature by about +1°C. As warmer air can hold more water vapor, which is also a greenhouse gas, a doubling of CO2 will result in about a 2-5°C increase in surface temperature.

We can directly observe the increase in atmospheric CO2 due to human emissions, and that the surface is warming. If this warming is due to an increasing greenhouse effect, then the lower stratosphere should also be cooling, which is what we observe.

#1 Zachriel on 2017-03-19 15:43 (Reply)

Oh boy! The Zach Borg is up early today and with its FAKE SCIENCE, too!

#1.1 Old Codger on 2017-03-19 15:48 (Reply)

The basic scientific understanding of the greenhouse effect have been known for over a century. See Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, London, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1896. Feel free to point out any problems with the analysis.

#1.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-19 21:26 (Reply)

Given that CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, what is the ideal level of methane, water vapor, CO2, etc for the atmosphere?

And what is the ideal "climate" for the earth?

#1.2 the nj on 2017-03-19 15:52 (Reply)

Human civilization developed over thousands of years during a period of relative climate stability. Disrupting this stability threatens agriculture, coastal flooding, human migration with the attendant political instability, and a permanent loss of much of humanity's natural inheritance.

#1.2.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-19 21:32 (Reply)

Not true at all.

When civ developed in Africa, the sahara was green

during roman era, they grew wine grapes in england

#1.2.1.1 Bird Dog on 2017-03-20 07:04 (Reply)

Bird Dog: When civ developed in Africa, the sahara was green

Civilization in Egypt may have arisen because of the drying of the Sahara, leading to the migration and concentration of people in the Nile River basin. Of note, Egypt was first united at the end of the last drying period.

There have been many examples of climate change since the advent of civilization; such as the Roman Warm Period, Little Ice Age, Medieval Warm Period, and perhaps the Terminal Classic period; hence, the term "relative climate stability". The current warming is occurring at a faster rate, and is projected to be of much greater magnitude, than any previous climatic episode in human history.

#1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-20 10:57 (Reply)

Oh, Z. I'm not convinced you would recognize a fundamental concept in physics if it bit you.

#1.3 Texan99 on 2017-03-19 22:12 (Reply)

(Psst. This is where you engage the argument, perhaps explaining why you think it is wrong.)

#1.3.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-19 22:20 (Reply)

Graphs... we need lots and lots of graphs with those colored squiggly lines as proof of AGW...
C'mon fellas...

#1.3.1.1 drowningpuppies on 2017-03-20 08:53 (Reply)

Only the first 100 times. After that, I concluded you know only how to parrot words that sound vaguely sciencey. Doesn't it work better when you move on to venues where you haven't already been repeatedly exposed? You seem to have been stuck here for a long while.

#1.3.1.2 Texan99 on 2017-03-20 15:07 (Reply)

Uh....because it is a scam? And a yuuuuge one at that!

#2 B48 on 2017-03-19 15:46 (Reply)

Without the greenhouse effect, the surface temperature of the Earth can be calculated by determining it's gaybody temperature, which would be a chilly ≈-18°C, instead of the balmy +15°C that it is. We can calculate that a doubling of CO2 will directly increase the surface temperature by about +1°C.

We can directly observe that the best climate evah was at Noon in the middle of the Clinton Administration.

#3 Ze Best Klimate Fantasy on 2017-03-19 16:25 (Reply)

Was that the day he was not having sex, with that woman, Monica Lewinsky?

#3.1 B Hammer on 2017-03-19 17:11 (Reply)

My guess is that Leonardo DiCaprio sees his 'sacrifice' as giving his personal time (for free) to a cause, when he could perhaps be making money doing something else or spending his free time living it up in private.

Very hard to convince someone like this that they are not true to a cause, if they feel they have given up something in order to pursue the cause in some way.

Al Gore, on the other hand, found a way to make money off of this nonsense. So I totally get his motivation to be the figurehead of something so he can sell books, get speaking engagements, etc.

#4 MissT on 2017-03-19 17:31 (Reply)

Al Gore may personally have a larger carbon footprint than entire countries in Africa. And he's a scamster who has made millions off the Climate Change scam.

#4.1 Jim on 2017-03-19 20:40 (Reply)

how come it doesn't look like Zach trolled Scotts blog?

#5 Jerry on 2017-03-20 00:17 (Reply)

Back about a decade ago, I jokingly came up with a new unit of measurement called the gore. One gore was the equivalent of Al Gore's ecological "footprint": thus the average person in the US and Canada had something like a .0588 gore. I don't know what Leonardo's count would be but I'd guess it would be several gores.

Here's my personal challenge to the Gores and DiCaprios of this world: in the furtherance of the climate change cause, you bring your footprint down to the same level as mine then I'll consider your argument.

Who knows? From there we could all go down to the footprint of the average Rwandan together!

I don't necessarily agree with him, but the only celebrity I respect on environmental issues is Ed Begley Jr, a man who - mirabile dictu - actually walks the talk.

#6 JJM on 2017-03-20 06:45 (Reply)

So, The Global warm period came and went, and Vikings colonized Greenland, then the Medieval Ice age came and went and the Vikings left Greenland.
If only they didn't drive their SUV's so much!

#7 Dale on 2017-03-20 07:18 (Reply)

Careful. You are not supposed to notice the medieval warming period. 97% of scientists have colluded to hide this information can't you get on board with this? And then you double down and point out that inconvenient yet very significant global cooling period awkwardly named the mini ice age. That would lead someone to the logical conclusion that a warming period following a mini ice age was inevitable and normal. Next thing you know you will point out that with the increased CO2 and warmer temperatures that humans can actually grow enough food to feed the 7.2 billion people on earth. Or that satellite pictures have shown a greening of earth over the last 40 years including desert areas.

#7.1 OneGuy on 2017-03-20 09:48 (Reply)

Dale: So, The Global warm period came and went, and Vikings colonized Greenland, then the Medieval Ice age came and went and the Vikings left Greenland. ]

What will those crazy climate scientists come up with next!

#7.2 Zachriel on 2017-03-20 10:59 (Reply)

I mispoke (must not have had my coffee yet) The proper terms are the Medieval warm period, and the mini ice age. It still doesn't change the fact that Vikings with SUV's and outboard motors made it happen.

#8 Dale on 2017-03-20 10:51 (Reply)

Hey Z-Bot.
It's all fact, the Medieval warm Period and the Mini Ice age are all attested to by history. Odd, though that they don't show up on the Hockey stick Graph

#9 Dale on 2017-03-20 11:10 (Reply)

Dale: It's all fact, the Medieval warm Period and the Mini Ice age are all attested to by history.

They were considered regional weather patterns, not global events. The idea of global climate change was a later scientific development.

Dale: Odd, though that they don't show up on the Hockey stick Graph

Here are several temperature reconstructions by climate scientists. While there is still some debate on how global the Medieval Warm Period may have been, most reconstructions show both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.

#9.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-20 12:46 (Reply)

For humans, warm is better than cold...look it up.

#10 rocdoctom on 2017-03-20 11:35 (Reply)

Hey Z,
They were regional in that they occurred in areas of the world that recorded history. And I will trust historical documents more than models that change monthly. While we're at it, concensus is not science. And I am always wary of a crisis that has as it's solution MORE GOVERNMENT CONTROL! Leftists could not give a hoot about the weather or science other than it gives them another club to beat people with

#11 Dale on 2017-03-20 13:35 (Reply)

Dale: They were regional in that they occurred in areas of the world that recorded history.

You had said the climate changes were "attested to by history". More distant history generally only records regional history where people live. However, enough evidence has accumulated to suggest that the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age were global in extent, though the timing and effects varied across the globe.

Dale: And I will trust historical documents more than models that change monthly.

We provided a model of global warming which has been consistent for over a century, and forms the basis of modern climatology.

Dale: While we're at it, concensus is not science.

No. Science is based on evidence, evidence which supports anthropogenic global warming.

#11.1 Zachriel on 2017-03-20 15:35 (Reply)

"Climate scientists tell us that there are hundreds of climate models, all somewhat different. I assume that most of them do a good job predicting the past "
I'm impressed. The climate models can predict the past. I would have never believed it possible. I'm almost ready to join the climate change cult.

#12 Ray on 2017-03-20 13:43 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Sunday, March 19. 2017

Why does climate alarmism look like a scam?