The Human Touch Revealing All that is Real
Comments for Trillions Spent on ‘Climate Change’ Based on Faulty Temperature Data, Climate Experts Say
Meteorologist finds 96 percent of NOAA temperature stations located in ‘urban heat islands,’ including next to exhaust fans and on ‘blistering-hot rooftops.’ |
And fossil fuels do not? (they do) You probably don't know CO2 isn't the only product released during combustion.
Commented: Monday, February 5th, 2024 @ 6:29 am
By: Big Bob
|
|
Solar panels are full of harmful substances including carcinogins, and they are being dumped in landfills when they wear out. They are a ticking environmental pollution timebomb. That is REAL pollution, in contrast to CO2 which is a natural substance, not pollution, that is beneficial to plant growth.
Solar panels and wind turbines also hurt people, especially the poor, by making electricity more expensive and less reliable.
Commented: Monday, February 5th, 2024 @ 5:35 am
By: Concerned Taxpayer
|
|
Worse than what? According to you, everything is fine. Solar panels can’t hurt cause nothing is wrong. Right?
Commented: Sunday, February 4th, 2024 @ 8:00 pm
By: Big Bob
|
|
John Steed solar radiation modification is already happening per Biden. Below is a link from the White House website. They think this solar radiation will help but in reality it is and will only make things worse.
RESEARCH www.whitehouse.gov
Commented: Sunday, February 4th, 2024 @ 8:40 am
By: Jann
|
|
Time will tell.
Commented: Friday, February 2nd, 2024 @ 6:11 pm
By: Big Bob
|
|
Amazing, Little Bobbie, you seem to finally grasp what really causes warming and cooling of Earth, the amount of solar radiation we get from the sun. Fewer sunspots mean less radiation, so we get cooling, but more of them means more radiation so we get warming. Some astronomers are predicting a significant reduction in sunspots and therefore solar radiation in the not too distant future.
Commented: Friday, February 2nd, 2024 @ 5:51 pm
By: John Steed
|
|
Pass the sunscreen!
Commented: Friday, February 2nd, 2024 @ 1:10 pm
By: Big Bob
|
|
The fact is that if you look at Earth's climate history, the alternating warming and cooling cycles clearly have nothing to do with CO2. That is a red herring from the climate alarmists. A good example is looking at the 20th century. Most of the warming happened during the Depression when industrial production was more limited. After the Second World War, when industrial production really took off, temperatures fell. They did not start rising again until the next recession. The temperature pattern, even within the current natural warming cycle simply does not fit with industrial production.
For your Chicken Little crowd, the Industrial Age conveniently started just as the most recent cooling period, the Little Ice Age was ending, so of course temperatures went up coming out of a cooling period.
Commented: Thursday, February 1st, 2024 @ 5:20 pm
By: Concerned Taxpayer
|
|
cv- long windedness aside, your 'research' fails to account for the ever increasing emissions of the Industrial Age. That is why your posts on the topic are completely not true.
Commented: Thursday, February 1st, 2024 @ 6:57 am
By: Big Bob
|
|
Unfortunately, the re-emergence of this discredited CO2 climate theory was soon followed by an easily distortable research technique called computer modelling, which is little more than digial voodoo. A computer model can be set up to produce any particular result that its designers want. It can be set up subjectively with the particular desired result in mind or it can be set up objectively, but even with the later it can be severely flawed. The computer models used by the climate alarmists do not correctly show climate patterns in the past where we know the real data, so why should anyone trust them as to the future? Michael Mann's hockey stick chart is a prime example, as it does not track with historical data going backward and is very far off of historical data. Nonetheless, the UN made it a key exhibit in one of their reports. Then, it was revealed by one of his students how Mann had deliberately cherry picked data to create his phony computer model, and the UN dropped that chart like a hot potato in subsequent reports. Mann was one of those exposed in the Climategate emails for manipulating data in other regards, too.
Another good example of the misuse of computer modelling to get a desired result is the use of computer modelling instead of real loss data in setting property insurance rates. Eastern North Carolina is overcharged on property insurance as a result of manipulated computer models that do not track with actual records of insurance losses. The insurance companies have a desired result, getting higher premiums out of policyholders. On the other hand, hurricane tracking is an area where there are competing computer models, and everyone is trying to get it right since if their model predicts a path right, they look good and if it predicts it wrong, they look bad. Even so, on the computer modelling charts, every model always shows a different path, sometimes very differnt paths.
Commented: Thursday, February 1st, 2024 @ 7:50 am
By: John Steed
|
|
The theory that CO2 had an impact on climate was proposed by a Swedish physicist in the 1890s and got no traction in climate science and was largely forgotten until a British scientific magazine, the New Scientist published an article on this old and forgotten theory in the 1970s, and first British politicians and then UN politicians decided it could be useful politically. The British politicians insured its revival by dumping a bunch of government research money behind it, and that is like dragging a $100 bill through a trailer park to too many scientists. Now the WEF globalists have gotten involved, too.
In reality, the Earth's climate history has seen a repeated cycle of multi-century warm cycles and cool cycles. The last cool cycle, the particularly cold "Little Ice Age" or Maunder Minimum ended in the 19th century and we have been in a natural warming cycle since. The last warming cycle, the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today and a period of great wealth, not a period will all the bad things today's climate alarmists claim. The granddaddy of warm periods was the Holocene Maximum when it was much warmer than today for 3,000 years and none of the dire consequences claimed by the climate alarmists happened. This cycle coincided with the heyday of ancient Greek civilization and their writings do not indicate any negative effects from it. Real science show these cycles driven by the level of solar radiation, not the level of CO2. In fact the study of ice core samples shows that the levels in CO2 in the atmosphere do not precede temperature changes, but in fact follow them by several hundred years. That means more CO2 is a result of warming, not a cause of it.
Commented: Wednesday, January 31st, 2024 @ 9:33 pm
By: Concerned Taxpayer
|
|
His main contention is that the world is heating, but not as fast as most think. CO2 emissions are a driving cause but natural causes exist as well. There is bias in the data. For the most part that is agreeable but he concludes climate change isn't all that bed.
Most others disagree and clearly Spencer has is own bias pointed out below. Spencer is an advisor to the Cornwall Alliance, formerly the Interfaith Steward Alliance (ISA), an evangelical Christian group that claims environmentalism is “one of the greatest threats to society and the church today.”4 Bottom line, even this guy thinks the world is warming, he just see the need to act. Foolish
Commented: Wednesday, January 31st, 2024 @ 1:17 pm
By: Big Bob
|
|
GeoEngineeringWatch.org
That's why people better RESEARCH and "wake up" to what's really going on!!
Commented: Wednesday, January 31st, 2024 @ 11:50 am
By: Jann
|
|
The Paris Climate Accords are not Constitutionally a legally binding treaty in the United States because to be legally binding, it has to be submitted to the US Senate and approved by 2/3 vote. That is why President Trump was able to take us out of this mousetrap by Executive Order, and can do so again when he is returned to office. However, it may be better to submit it to the Senate and have it rejected so we could not have another Biden just put us back in.
Many other countries are in the same boat. The EU approved it for all of Europe without letting individual countries decide. With populist right parties which reject the climate alarmist mantra surging, it is likely that countries in Europe are going to kick up about it, too. Farmers all over Europe are in open revolt against this eco-tyranny and they have overwhielming support among the public against it. The Climategate email dump showed beyond doubt that the mad scientists pushing climate alarmism are outright fraudsters and liars.
Commented: Wednesday, January 31st, 2024 @ 8:41 am
By: John Steed
|
Home
Contact
About
Service Rates
Privacy Policy
Follow on Facebook
Subscribe to Newsletters
Rss Feed
Keywords
Eastern NC Now & ENC NOW © Copyright 1998-2024 All Rights Reserved.
