Interesting ideas and even documents to prove his stuff.
Few things I did not agree with him like "just drive your SUVs, you are not hurting mommy nature". Then him saying that mammoth picture was not photoshopped and that only radiation affects genes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdlWS8pnwEE
I think it's kind of funny how a majority of all the climate change critics and denial websites seem to have evaporated into thin air. What with record heat waves, record fires and flooding and record low temperatures because of the shifting jet stream ... I didn't think anyone that stupid was left to deny it wasn't real. The unfortunate truth is that all the deniers are looking more and more like pissy misguided fools as every year passes and the facts keep adding up.
My wager is that within 5 years things will get progressively worse and all those deniers will be the first one's whining that someone should have done something sooner.
I'm not convinced because the experts do not all agree. The models have been wrong and measuring the temp in a city will always be distorted because of the unfair concentration of population and small area. And I remember Al Gore's predictions never even came close. And I detest the money these
so called prophets make from their lectures.
My real interest is alternative energy and there is plenty to do but big money controls it all.
If I change to a vapor carburetor on my car and do not need a catalytic converter I risk getting jailed
and it will not pass the pollution test and can't be driven unless I live in a state that does not have
the pollution check. I've tested this and it works and there are patents to do the same but big money will not let it happen. Remember we still do not know who killed Kennedy for sure but it was not
Oswald. It was proven in court that there were 2 shooters but who cares other than big money.
Hydrogen is also great for the auto but big money will not let that happen.
It would solve the CO2 problem for sure.
If we had the power of voter made laws like ballot initiatives then we would have a change
to change things. But till then same ole same ole.
And one study showed that the ice cores showed that the temp rise came first then the CO2
rise. So don't count on the prophets.
And remember there is big money in the global warming push. Al Gore figured that out.
Norman
What amazes me is how many people believe the fake news information without ever doing any research on their own. The media has only one goal. To brainwash you into believing the liberal politicians have the solutions to the world problems. They never mention any benefits to whatever propaganda they are promoting. Did you ever stop to think that there might actually be some benefits to global warming if it is even a fact?
Look at this article:
Effects of increased CO2 on plants and crops
A 1993 review of scientific greenhouse studies found that a doubling of CO2 concentration would stimulate the growth of 156 different plant species by an average of 37%. Response varied significantly by species, with some showing much greater gains and a few showing a loss. For example, a 1979 greenhouse study found that with doubled CO2 concentration the dry weight of 40-day-old cotton plants doubled, but the dry weight of 30-day-old maize plants increased by only 20%.[69] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-69)[70] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-70)
In addition to greenhouse studies, field and satellite measurements attempt to understand the effect of increased CO2 in more natural environments. In free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-air_concentration_enrichment) (FACE) experiments plants are grown in field plots and the CO2 concentration of the surrounding air is artificially elevated. These experiments generally use lower CO2 levels than the greenhouse studies. They show lower gains in growth than greenhouse studies, with the gains depending heavily on the species under study. A 2005 review of 12 experiments at 475–600 ppm showed an average gain of 17% in crop yield, with legumes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legumes) typically showing a greater response than other species and C4 plants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C4_carbon_fixation) generally showing less. The review also stated that the experiments have their own limitations. The studied CO2 levels were lower, and most of the experiments were carried out in temperate regions.[71] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-71) Satellite measurements found increasing leaf area index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaf_area_index) for 25% to 50% of Earth's vegetated area Earth over the past 35 years, providing evidence for a positive CO2 fertilization effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CO2_fertilization_effect).[72] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-72)[73] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-73)
A 2017 article states that increased CO2 levels have a negative impact on the nutritional quality of various human food crops (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop), by increasing the levels of carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate), such as glucose (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose), while decreasing the levels of important nutrients such as protein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_(nutrient)), iron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron), and zinc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc_deficiency). Crops experiencing a decrease in protein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_(nutrient)) include rice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice), wheat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat), barley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley) and potatoes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato).[74] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#cite_note-74)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere
Also consider how much less fuel will be needed to heat our homes in the winter. How much less salt will be spread on the roads to melt the snow and ice. That has to be better for the environment.
I am so tired of all the doomsday crap put out by the main stream media.
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on February 05, 2019, 04:27:57 PM
The media has only one goal. To brainwash you into believing the liberal politicians have the solutions to the world problems.
:o Good grief. What a crock! Get a grip man. :)
Carroll is one very dedicated builder ,helping many experimenters here at this open source forum whenever he can [for many years at multiple forums
and at the end of the day ,has probably put thousands of hours of his life into the theme of this forum ,sharing his work and living that slogan.if you want the world to change "be that change" and live by example.
perhaps the place we work to make that change which will effect our world in the Best possible way....should not be a place to argue !!
some people just live to press buttons....[flame war topics here
we're trying to put out this fire ...regardless of why ?and Carroll has been carrying much more than his fare share of water buckets...[others here too
just one mans opinion
Chet K
Quote from: onepower on February 05, 2019, 03:28:51 PM
I think it's kind of funny how a majority of all the climate change critics and denial websites seem to have evaporated into thin air. What with record heat waves, record fires and flooding and record low temperatures because of the shifting jet stream ... I didn't think anyone that stupid was left to deny it wasn't real. The unfortunate truth is that all the deniers are looking more and more like pissy misguided fools as every year passes and the facts keep adding up.
My wager is that within 5 years things will get progressively worse and all those deniers will be the first one's whining that someone should have done something sooner.
Are there any climate change critics? Who can honestly say that the climate hasn't been changing for 4,5 billion years? Maybe they disappeared, because nobody can deny the change?
Funny how the ice ages every 100k years seem pretty cyclic. with temperature rising and CO2 rising 200 years after. Hmm what kinda cyclic thing the Earth does or "cycles" around?
What I am looking for is any facts that human activity is causing the climate change. Not beliefs or IPCC models, that can be turned to any result they want. Just facts plz
Every living thing is built from carbon. Plants grow because they take water from earth and carbon from the air. Now it is suddenly a toxic gas?!?
Quote from: norman6538 on February 05, 2019, 04:07:45 PM
I'm not convinced because the experts do not all agree. The models have been wrong and measuring the temp in a city will always be distorted because of the unfair concentration of population and small area. And I remember Al Gore's predictions never even came close. And I detest the money these
so called prophets make from their lectures.
My real interest is alternative energy and there is plenty to do but big money controls it all.
If I change to a vapor carburetor on my car and do not need a catalytic converter I risk getting jailed
and it will not pass the pollution test and can't be driven unless I live in a state that does not have
the pollution check. I've tested this and it works and there are patents to do the same but big money will not let it happen. Remember we still do not know who killed Kennedy for sure but it was not
Oswald. It was proven in court that there were 2 shooters but who cares other than big money.
Hydrogen is also great for the auto but big money will not let that happen.
It would solve the CO2 problem for sure.
If we had the power of voter made laws like ballot initiatives then we would have a change
to change things. But till then same ole same ole.
And one study showed that the ice cores showed that the temp rise came first then the CO2
rise. So don't count on the prophets.
And remember there is big money in the global warming push. Al Gore figured that out.
Norman
Weeell when you burn hydrogen you get water vapor. That and clouds are 70% of the green house gases and CO2 is only 20%. I bet the IPCC starts blaming you, if you come up with a hydrogen engine. Who is working for Big Oil then!
Yeah but sun is still the external factor that brings all energy here. I don't believe changing 5% of CO2 to 5% more water vapor is going to affect the climate in a significant way
QuoteWhat I am looking for is any facts that human activity is causing the climate change. Not beliefs or IPCC models, that can be turned to any result they want. Just facts plz
Every living thing is built from carbon. Plants grow because they take water from earth and carbon from the air. Now it is suddenly a toxic gas?!?
Right... every credible climate agency on the planet agrees we have just experienced the hottest 4 year period on record and that the trend will continue. So you can believe whatever you want, you can push whatever false narratives and logical fallacies you want however the facts remain.
A little advice, if you live in the U.S. your in big trouble as the coasts will eventually flood inland and the central U.S. will be desertified to the point it will be mostly uninhabitable. You may want to think about real estate because soon many are going to start cluing in to the fact that large area's of land will become basically worthless within the next ten to twenty years. Look at Australia which is experiencing flash floods in some area's or massive heat waves turning it into a drought stricken wasteland.
I don't have to prove anything my friend... all I have to do is prepare for what is coming and wait because time is going to prove the facts of this matter soon enough.
Quote from: onepower on February 06, 2019, 06:49:27 PM
Right... every credible climate agency on the planet agrees we have just experienced the hottest 4 year period on record and that the trend will continue. So you can believe whatever you want, you can push whatever false narratives and logical fallacies you want however the facts remain.
A little advice, if you live in the U.S. your in big trouble as the coasts will eventually flood inland and the central U.S. will be desertified to the point it will be mostly uninhabitable. You may want to think about real estate because soon many are going to start cluing in to the fact that large area's of land will become basically worthless within the next ten to twenty years. Look at Australia which is experiencing flash floods in some area's or massive heat waves turning it into a drought stricken wasteland.
I don't have to prove anything my friend... all I have to do is prepare for what is coming and wait because time is going to prove the facts of this matter soon enough.
So you just go on faith? You don't need proof. I think that is called religion. Logical fallacy is to believe something on faith. People that rely on faith do not need to prove anything. That is the whole point of a religion. If then by some miracle you try to, you use your own book to prove it.
Once again. The temperature is raising. That is a fact. The sea level is Raising. That is a fact. Is that because humans produce 7% of green house gases? I doubt it. Do we affect weather in some way? For sure, but how can our actions determine the weather or the energy that comes from the Sun?
Has the temperature ever been this high? Yes. Every 100k years before the ice age. This can be checked from the ice core samples. Why IPCC says "highest we have ever measured" is because then you can leave the ice core samples out and claim our factories did it. We were not here "measuring" 800k years ago.
Has the CO2 ever been this high? Yes. Every 100k years it raises with 200 years lag AFTER the temperature raises.
Sea levels have been rising since the last ice age.
Images of temperature and CO2 between ice ages and sea level rise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interglacial#/media/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_period#/media/File:Co2_glacial_cycles_800k.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise#/media/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
From the images you can see, that we can actually prove this. With facts. Facts that everybody agrees on. Temperature and CO2 raise like clockwork 800k years before we had factories or cars. Sea level rises after every ice age.
You got one thing right though. We are headed towards a catastrophe. What I can gather it is cyclic and is related to the Sun. Many scientists are calling this "micronova" and it has happened before. I believe this is what ancient myths are talking about when they say floods came, fire from the sky or thunderbolts from gods.
https://www.exopolitics.org/impending-solar-flash-event-supported-by-scientific-studies-insider-testimony/
Magnetic pole reversal might come in 2046 and that is when the shit hits the fan. CIA has known this since 1957 and is the reason why "every dredible climate agency" tells you that CO2 is doing it. Who is going to pay their 25 year mortgages, if the house is gone 2046?
We can make a bet and meet on the same mountain!
People are so religious and crazy about the CO2 I am going to start selling "CO2 protection domes for plants" in TV-Shop. Lets see how long your tomatoes stay alive without this "poisonous gas" that gives life
Belfior
QuoteSo you just go on faith? You don't need proof. I think that is called religion. Logical fallacy is to believe something on faith. People that rely on faith do not need to prove anything. That is the whole point of a religion. If then by some miracle you try to, you use your own book to prove it.
Another logical fallacy as a classic strawman argument misrepresenting my argument so it is easier to attack. Obviously my argument is not based on faith but proof published by tens of thousands of the smartest most credible climate scientists. We should also note these scientist use their real names and back up their opinions with real proof unlike these forums.
QuoteOnce again. The temperature is raising. That is a fact. The sea level is Raising. That is a fact. Is that because humans produce 7% of green house gases? I doubt it. Do we affect weather in some way? For sure, but how can our actions determine the weather or the energy that comes from the Sun?
It's not that difficult to understand Belfior it's called science. If an insulator such as glass can trap or retain heat in the example of a green house then this same scientific principal also applies to this planet. Thus if an insulator such as a green house gasses increases in our atmosphere then we can expect that more heat will be retained... what part of this grade school science do you not understand?.
QuoteHas the temperature ever been this high? Yes. Every 100k years before the ice age. This can be checked from the ice core samples. Why IPCC says "highest we have ever measured" is because then you can leave the ice core samples out and claim our factories did it. We were not here "measuring" 800k years ago.
Yes of course however never in the history of this planet to my knowledge has an "animal species" sucked billions of tons of hydrocarbons from the depths of this planet and released these green house gasses into the atmosphere. There were never 7 plus billion beings doing there best to consume everything in sight and destroy this planet in the past to my knowledge.
QuoteMagnetic pole reversal might come in 2046 and that is when the shit hits the fan. CIA has known this since 1957 and is the reason why "every dredible climate agency" tells you that CO2 is doing it. Who is going to pay their 25 year mortgages, if the house is gone 2046?
Right... blah blah blah and lets not forget that conspiracy back in 1948 blah blah blah. You know they say the Earth is flat supported by pillars on the backs of an infinite stack of turtles. The intelligent choice is not to argue for or against this kind of mental defect in the ability to reason but to walk away. Obviously I have chosen to ignore this choice, lol.
QuotePeople are so religious and crazy about the CO2 I am going to start selling "CO2 protection domes for plants" in TV-Shop. Lets see how long your tomatoes stay alive without this "poisonous gas" that gives life
No my friend it is quite the opposite and it is the religious and fanatical who have decided to believe that we are somehow chosen and can supersede natural law. My beliefs are simple to understand, every action has an equal and opposite reaction... do you understand?. Thus this ridiculous notion that we can do whatever we want without any consequence is not only misguided but bat shit crazy.
Do you know what I would like to see?... a duel.
"A duel is an arranged engagement in combat between two people, with matched weapons"
However in this case our combat, our struggle, would be a consensus between two men as towards what is the truth and what is not. I would see it as an actual duel on a platform such as youtube where I would throw down my glove and say dude your so full of shit I don't even know where to begin and I demand retribution. Then one of two things could happen, one you decline like many cowards do or two we go one on one on live video for all the world to see.
Personally I suspect 99% of the population has neither the balls nor the brains to ever agree to such a thing and we all know the reasons as to why this is true. I'm just throwing it out there because I think it's important to understand who we are. I really like and more so respect this gentleman... https://jordanbpeterson.com/
You have to love this guy in my opinion because he makes no apologies for who he is, I am who I am right or fucking wrong. As he say's ... live with yourself, deal with it, man the fuck up and take some responsibility to give your life some kind of meaning. So my theory on this is not rocket science... stop making excuses as to why your such a fucking loser and start showing us reasons why your not?. Seems pretty self explanatory doesn't it...?. I don't give a shit why you keep failing tell us how all of us can succeed together and move forward.
I just get tired of the ... it wasn't me and I have no fucking idea what to do nonsense. It's 2019 gentlemen and this BS is getting old. Man the fuck up or move on... nuff said.
There are facts and an interpretation of the facts.
The increase in temperature is not proof that global warming is anthropogenic.
A certain correlation between temperature and CO2 does not prove that CO2 is the cause of warming, it is rather warming that increases CO2.
An increase in temperature does not mean that we know all the reasons and that we can predict the evolution. The most important greenhouse gas, water vapour, is ignored and the impact of solar variations is underestimated. All previous IPCC predictions have been found to be false by a factor of 2 to 3 five years later.
The fact that there would be a large majority of scientists in favor of the theory of anthropogenic global warming is not relevant (most of them included in the number are not climate experts). Opponents are prevented from expressing their work in the institutions.
The IPCC does not follow the scientific method: they give their final conclusions without verification by independent teams or organizations, and politics and the media spread them with catastrophism, conditioning people.
Global warming is not dangerous, on the contrary, past periods of global warming have always coincided with periods of prosperity for the men.
And all measures to combat CO2 have been shown not to have any influence on the climate, but to cost a lot and therefore create worse problems.
See the recent testimony of climatologist Judith Curry before a US Senate committee: "the cure could be worse than the disease"
https://youtu.be/ZLuSks4xxsA?t=8451
Quote from: F6FLT on February 10, 2019, 07:52:21 AM
There are facts and an interpretation of the facts.
The increase in temperature is not proof that global warming is anthropogenic.
A certain correlation between temperature and CO2 does not prove that CO2 is the cause of warming, it is rather warming that increases CO2.
An increase in temperature does not mean that we know all the reasons and that we can predict the evolution. The most important greenhouse gas, water vapour, is ignored and the impact of solar variations is underestimated. All previous IPCC predictions have been found to be false by a factor of 2 to 3 five years later.
The fact that there would be a large majority of scientists in favor of the theory of anthropogenic global warming is not relevant (most of them included in the number are not climate experts). Opponents are prevented from expressing their work in the institutions.
The IPCC does not follow the scientific method: they give their final conclusions without verification by independent teams or organizations, and politics and the media spread them with catastrophism, conditioning people.
Global warming is not dangerous, on the contrary, past periods of global warming have always coincided with periods of prosperity for the men.
And all measures to combat CO2 have been shown not to have any influence on the climate, but to cost a lot and therefore create worse problems.
See the recent testimony of climatologist Judith Curry before a US Senate committee: "the cure could be worse than the disease"
https://youtu.be/ZLuSks4xxsA?t=8451 (https://youtu.be/ZLuSks4xxsA?t=8451)
I agree with this 100%. Rational thinking means you do your own research and study and do not follow the propaganda put out by the politicians and main stream media.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Every machine we use, motors, generators, transformers, transmission lines, engines etc., and every electrical appliances such as electric stove, TV, computer, cell phone, oven etc., have heat losses and release heat into the atmosphere. Since heat is a form of energy and it cannot be destroyed, it heats the atmosphere causing warming of atmospheric in addition to green house effect by gases. Even the breath we and all animals release, carry heat from the body which also heat the atmosphere. When world population grows, these activities will be more and atmosphere gets heated up rapidly. I don't see any point in blaming God or nature for that.
size matters [insulation]
https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2018/10/26/a-new-space-weather-metric/
Quote from: ramset on February 10, 2019, 09:18:45 AM
size matters [insulation]
https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2018/10/26/a-new-space-weather-metric/
Quote from the above web page :
"Finally, please be aware that the thermosphere is very far above our heads–more than 100 km high. Just because the rarefied air up there is cooling off, it doesn't mean the surface of the Earth is getting colder. Not yet, at least. Stay tuned for updates as the solar cycle progresses."
End of quote.
Global warming is real and obvious because all human activities are heating up the earth's atmosphere. When atmosphere gets heated up, it warms the oceans causing more water to evaporate from oceans because water molecules are made of weak hydrogen bonds which break away easily into water vapors under increased heat and atmospheric pressure. More water evaporating from the seas cause devastating rains and we are getting heavy rains even in deserts of gulf (middle east)nations, Australia, China, Japan etc. This heavy rain may cause extreme cooling during winter. If this cooling by global warming resonates with cooling by solar minimum, it may take earth to the ice age.
Quote from: Newton II on February 10, 2019, 10:40:49 PM
...
Global warming is real and obvious because all human activities are heating up the earth's atmosphere.
...
It's not true. Even the IPCC has never claimed that this would be the cause of global warming.
The amount of energy used by man on earth is negligible compared to energy from natural sources, mainly the sun.
According to IPCC, the main cause is the greenhouse gas effect, but climate sensitivity is constantly being reduced. Climatology is a young science, these guys are still far from having the skills to make predictions, but they do so as pretentious ignorant as they are. They are a danger to humanity because of the absurd resolutions they demand from politicians, in the name of a science that is not yet a science.
Well it is pretty obvious, that there is cognitive dissonance at play here. There is absolutely nothing we can do about that. We could have all the evidence on the table and God presenting it and what these 'believers' would do is get up and walk away saying "this is ridiculous. Everybody knows man made climate change is real. I will now walk away and stick my fingers in my ears".
There is no way any of these people that also call themselves scientific will agree to look at the fact and evidence that we have. Their brain will not let them. If I say "lets look at the data" and onepower says "no need. everybody knows. You just present logical fallacies" there is very little that can be done. They absolutely refuse to look at the evidence. That is not scientific. That is a religion.
Newton 2 mixes truth with religion to achieve what his brain is telling him is the truth.
I could wear a T-shirt that says "forest fires are real!" and show that forest fires and the amount of smoke are related. That is the truth. How could someone argue with that? IPCC then produces a parametric model that shows that if the smoke doubles, then the whole california will burn. Then everybody signs a Paris agreement that binds them to stop creating smoke. Finland is lobbied to make a law, that every smoker has to pay 500€/year for creating smoke and every wooden stove in 2 million saunas has to changed to electric stoves.
So the question is who benefits from this nonsense and creates electricity for those saunas? How much energy usage was cut from developing countries, that mostly use coal power plants and not nuclear?
Mental images and religion will not change the fact, that basically all energy comes to this planet from the Sun and 5% of the greenhouse gases are not enough to cause global warming. It will of course have an effect on global warming, but it cannot cause it. Temperature will keep rising like it has done for 880k years until we hit an ice age. Sea level will keep rising like it has been doing since the last ice age. Glaciers will melt, because temperature rises. This planet is not overpopulated just because people are driven to cities and they feel that you have to live on top of each other, because there are just too many people. We could move ALL people on this planet to Australia and they would all have half an acre to farm and still Queensland would be left partly empty. Rest of the world would be empty from people. How the hell is that overpopulation?
Stop looking at polar bears on melting ice cubes and start looking into facts. Who's agenda benefits from controlling energy usage, that results in progress and production? Who's agenda benefits from giving the image, that this planet is overpopulated? Bill Gates already gave a TED speech where he said population must decrease by 85% and we can achieve that by centralized health care and vaccinations. His logic is that population X services X energy units used per service X CO2 created per energy unit must become 0. Then he laughed and said it is hard to make the population zero, but we can get it down by 85%.
Now what continent or continents are going to be CO2 shamed and blamed for overpopulation? I very much doubt Gates will sterilize his kids, but apparently that could be an option for some other people. It is called eugenics and it started long before the Nazis. What family basically founded United Nations and has been driving eugenics since the start?
These are the things we should be looking at, but we are getting bombarded by TV that tells us CO2 is poison, except it is the source of life on this planet.
Now fighting cognitive dissonance is a loosing battle. This is my last rant on the subject. I will spend my time researching how I can make energy without any CO2 emissions. I bet you my left bollock, that the answers are already on the selves of the military industrial complex. They won't let it out, because they need the cash.
I see only one way out of this slavery. Free energy and then new propulsion methods appear. We can get off this planet and the rest is history.
Quote from: Belfior on February 12, 2019, 06:25:34 AM
Well it is pretty obvious, that there is cognitive dissonance at play here. There is absolutely nothing we can do about that. We could have all the evidence on the table and God presenting it and what these 'believers' would do is get up and walk away saying "this is ridiculous. Everybody knows man made climate change is real. I will now walk away and stick my fingers in my ears".
There is no way any of these people that also call themselves scientific will agree to look at the fact and evidence that we have. Their brain will not let them. If I say "lets look at the data" and onepower says "no need. everybody knows. You just present logical fallacies" there is very little that can be done. They absolutely refuse to look at the evidence. That is not scientific. That is a religion.
Newton 2 mixes truth with religion to achieve what his brain is telling him is the truth.
I could wear a T-shirt that says "forest fires are real!" and show that forest fires and the amount of smoke are related. That is the truth. How could someone argue with that? IPCC then produces a parametric model that shows that if the smoke doubles, then the whole california will burn. Then everybody signs a Paris agreement that binds them to stop creating smoke. Finland is lobbied to make a law, that every smoker has to pay 500€/year for creating smoke and every wooden stove in 2 million saunas has to changed to electric stoves.
So the question is who benefits from this nonsense and creates electricity for those saunas? How much energy usage was cut from developing countries, that mostly use coal power plants and not nuclear?
Mental images and religion will not change the fact, that basically all energy comes to this planet from the Sun and 5% of the greenhouse gases are not enough to cause global warming. It will of course have an effect on global warming, but it cannot cause it. Temperature will keep rising like it has done for 880k years until we hit an ice age. Sea level will keep rising like it has been doing since the last ice age. Glaciers will melt, because temperature rises. This planet is not overpopulated just because people are driven to cities and they feel that you have to live on top of each other, because there are just too many people. We could move ALL people on this planet to Australia and they would all have half an acre to farm and still Queensland would be left partly empty. Rest of the world would be empty from people. How the hell is that overpopulation?
Stop looking at polar bears on melting ice cubes and start looking into facts. Who's agenda benefits from controlling energy usage, that results in progress and production? Who's agenda benefits from giving the image, that this planet is overpopulated? Bill Gates already gave a TED speech where he said population must decrease by 85% and we can achieve that by centralized health care and vaccinations. His logic is that population X services X energy units used per service X CO2 created per energy unit must become 0. Then he laughed and said it is hard to make the population zero, but we can get it down by 85%.
Now what continent or continents are going to be CO2 shamed and blamed for overpopulation? I very much doubt Gates will sterilize his kids, but apparently that could be an option for some other people. It is called eugenics and it started long before the Nazis. What family basically founded United Nations and has been driving eugenics since the start?
These are the things we should be looking at, but we are getting bombarded by TV that tells us CO2 is poison, except it is the source of life on this planet.
Now fighting cognitive dissonance is a loosing battle. This is my last rant on the subject. I will spend my time researching how I can make energy without any CO2 emissions. I bet you my left bollock, that the answers are already on the selves of the military industrial complex. They won't let it out, because they need the cash.
I see only one way out of this slavery. Free energy and then new propulsion methods appear. We can get off this planet and the rest is history.
You raise many valid points, too many to address here and now.
Fighting is not going to change any facts. - It will only take your "energy" and give it another who is incapable of its creation and feeds upon the "energy" of the willfully ignorant foolish enough to ignore self evident truths.
"I will spend my time researching how I can make energy without any CO2 emissions." - That WILL be the best time you can spend to set yourself free, and in that time you may find precisely
what "ENERGY IS", and the operating principal which is required to be able to produce it and a gain
by DESIGN, AT WILL.
You can keep your left on that bet, as it already sits upon shelves other than TPTB for reasons that are far beyond cash alone.
"I see only one way out of this slavery." - There is always more than one way to look at and address any problem.
Read this http://www.backgauges.com/Gen-E-Sys%20II/boetie.pdf and understand the simplicity of another way out: Withdraw your support for whatever it is you don't enjoy if you WILL, and you WILL watch it vanish. A word of caution: Be careful for what you wish, as you may get more than you bargained for. And that can cost you more your left and right together.
As for: "We can get off this planet and the rest is history."
I'll ask where do you have a DESIGN on going? Any problem you have here WILL GO WITH YOU wherever you may try to go.
Besides the problem presented by the "vacuum of space" and its conflict with the law of nature:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laksuvdGYCY A Globe w/ Gas Pressure Next to a Vacuum? Pseudoscience 101
"To boldly go where no man has gone before ....." does not compute.
thx TV! I will read the pdf.
I think Crothers brings forth many problems in current laes that we have and that are taken for actual natural law
Einstein's "creative math" in special relativity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zWy6_Mog70
Stephen Crothers on LIGO finding Higgs' boson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev10ywLFq6E
I don't see that these observations will gain any ground, because the ruling elite needs to keep us in the dark. Current science has replaced Occam's Razor with a magic 8 ball. Every time the flawed theory breaks down, they come up with a more complicated explanation. We are going to need Eddie Matter pretty soon.
Kirckhoff and Planck took black body radiation as a universal law and it only holds for boxes covered in carbon. No news on those laws either. We still teach them at school
when they first discovered dinosaurs they realized these animals could not live in our current gravity. Then they said dinos only lived in water and water took care of the weight/bones relation. Then they found ground based dinos and even flying ones, but the problem was never again brought up. This would mean Newton's G was not universal and not even constant on Earth. What do we teach in schools?
Do we actually have any laws that hold? If light is a particle it must have mass and volume. They say it doesn't because then it would destroy Einstein's theory. Well how does a galaxy bend light, if there is no mass? Curved spacetime is not a force. How does that pull a spring+weight towards the Earth?
It is absurd to think that science would be omniscient and infallible, just as it is absurd to think that it would be incoherent and that anything imagined instead would have the same relevance.
And there is also a big difference between sciences. We cannot mix those of life and earth, which have a complexity linked to the large number of parameters that determine it many of which being unknown, with the physics sciences which are based on simple elementary laws, but complicated to identify.
The laws of physics are well established. The resulting technology is proof of this. Even though they are not complete, new models will not radically challenge the current ones, more than Einstein's relativity has challenged Newtonian gravitation, still valid in most practical cases, only its field of validity has been reduced.
"Curved spacetime is not a force", that's true, and the misunderstanding comes from wanting to reason with everyday 3D flat space, when we are in 4D curved space. "How does that pull a spring+weight towards the Earth?", it is the question itself that is not relevant because it is based on the analogy of an effect. But there is no need for "pulling a spring+weight" to create an effect similar to that of "pulling a spring+weight". Comparison is not reason. A paradigm shift is needed.
The new paradigme here is that the notion of "something at rest" is not the same in a flat space as in a curved space.
I think there are still valid concerns about the Einsteins theory, because to me it seems few liberties were taken by him to create special relativity.
You cannot divide by 0 and say that this time it was infinity
You cannot base your theory on unprivileged observers and then have just one observer.
All the way to Newton we have had scientists, that are taking huge liberties and as a result we have a Solar System that cannot be here. Yet we are here.
So what needs to be done is to go as far back as needed to get rid off the shit that does not work. There are basically 2 reasons why this is not going to happen:
1. There are people that are running the world and it is imperative to them, that the cattle does not know how the universe works
2. Modern science is way too invested in the current model to admit, that they are wrong. This would mean they are in on it, or they were too stupid to notice.
Every time some new evidence is found that supports this fallacy, they come up with more elaborate explanations why we need more mass or energy somewhere.