monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

I hope you are never in a position to "teach" logic to kids, eh, Jack?

Read the paper I added, as an afterthought, to that original post I made to Ollie, eh?

If we used more nuclear power, we could reduce carbon emissions.

The Left blocks the expanded use of nuclear power.

If we added a bit of dust to the upper atmosphere to block a bit of sunlight, it would counter the impact of greenhouse gasses (and give us very nice sunsets as a bonus).

The Left blocks any move to offset the effects of global warming.

Pipelines full of fracked natural gas have allowed us to reduce our carbon emissions quite a bit.

The Left is now trying to block both pipelines and fracking.

If we could just get rid of all the liberals, we could fix any climate change problems overnight.

I might add that, over the last 850,000 years, there is a actually a very strong co-relation between temperature increase and CO2 levels.

Of course, correlation does not equal causation, but, if it did, you could not possibly conclude that rising CO2 levels cause temperature increases.

Why? Because the increase in CO2 lags behind the temperature increases by about 800 years. The effect cannot possibly precede it's supposed "cause."

If co-relation "proved" anything, it would therefore prove that rising temperatures cause the CO2 levels to increase, not vice versa.

For those who may be a little slow on the uptake, I'll spell it out in a little more detail:

Over the last 850,000 years FIRST temperatures start steadily rising (or falling). THEN, about 800 years later, CO2 levels start steadily rising (or falling) in a pattern that strongly mirrors the prior temperature increase.

Quote oralloy:

So in order to counter pollution on the ground which you can clean up, you would introduce intentional permanent pollution in the upper atmosphere which you can't be clean up, ever.

What could possibly go wrong?

Good question. Back in the 1970's the climate alarmists were telling us that a life-ending ice age was imminent. The horror stories told were truly alarming. Only a few people, who managed to kill off all the others and make it to the equator, would survive, they claimed.

Many proposals were made to counter this, such as covering the poles, and all surrounding area, with black coal. We should have rushed out and done that while we had the chance, eh?

"Stephen Henry Schneider (February 11, 1945 – July 19, 2010) was Professor of Environmental Biology and Global Change at Stanford University, a Co-Director at the Center for Environment Science and Policy of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a Senior Fellow in the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. Schneider served as a consultant to federal agencies and White House staff in the Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations."

This guy was an early promoter of the global freezing scam. Before long, he was making up alarmist claims about the pending disaster which would come from the imminent global warming. In 1989 he said:



When it comes to climate alarmism, you have a choice, eh? You can either be honest, or BE EFFECTIVE.

All poor Al Gore ever wanted to do was "be effective" so he could enrich himself through all the "green" companies he was creating and investing in, eh?

Who can blame the guy?

The dust in the upper atmosphere would not be pollution, would not be permanent, and would not need to be cleaned up.

But if you have a way to clean up carbon emissions on the ground, then let's keep burning coal and just clean up the emissions on the ground. Problem solved.

Kinda funny that CO2, which is absolutely essential to life, and which many scientists say would create great benefits for mankind if the current levels of it in the atmosphere could be increased, is now referred to by the climate alarmists as a "toxic pollutant," eh?

It's a fact that methane and carbon dioxyde are greenhouse gases, in that they can trap heat much better than oxygen or nitrogen. -Check

It's a fact that since the industrial revolution, the western way of life is based on the combustion of fossil fuels, which emits carbon dioxyde. -Check

It's a fact that our atmosphere CO2 content has been steadilt rising since the industrial revolution. -Check

It's a fact that mean temperatures have been rising since the industrial revolution, at a pace correlated with CO2 levels. -Argumentative

It's a fact that we won't stop using fossil fuels anytime soon. -Check

Hence it's a fact that we are ******* up the climate like there's no tomorrow. -Argumentative

Let me lay down some other facts...

It's a fact that one medium sized volcanic eruption can put enough waste into the atmosphere to cool the climate by several degrees.

It's a fact that flora thrives in carbon dioxide rich environments.

It's a fact that man has reduced rain forest and other vegetation far faster than any sort of natural disaster ever could.

It's a theory that that is also a reason for increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

It's a fact that man can replace lost rain-forest and other vegetation at a pretty rapid pace should the need arise.

Comey just fired by Trump.

I know, what is up with that, you think?

'bout time.

Ahhhhh, that's interesting.

Well, it looked hinky when the deputy director sent a correction to Comey's previous testimony. I'm actually surprised, everything prior to today didn't seem to raise an eyebrow.......for some people........I can't wait to hear how Spicer explains this one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/james-comey-fired-fbi.html?_r=0

Later, Jimbo.

Trump is freaking out, the investigation must be unveiling too much.

Get the popcorn

I wish Trump would appoint me as the new FBI Director. I would follow J. Edgar's blueprint, compiling blackmail material on every son of a bitch in Washington, and then coast to a pension, while collecting a high salary in the interim, ya know?

They could NEVER fire my ass.

The argument that CO2 "lags warming" is poor analyses torn from the pages of "Skeptical Scientist's" view based on verysmall scale local observations on things like muskeg, tundra soils. Actually global climatological measurements from ice core data clearly show that in the last two deglaciation periods, CO2 preceded the warm up. The Sangamon interstadial had evidence of CO2 uptake in Ice coes at higher and higher levels till the temperature an climate began to rise and the Sangamoniqn times contained palm tree pollen in places like the Presumpscott formation of MAINE!

The argument whether there was NO GLOBAL WARMING is past arguemnt. It a fact.

There still is a bit of possibility that natural and anthro causes act in concert to drive up the climate change.. Statistics favors a conclusion that human kind leaves an awfully measurable climate footprint.

ALMOST ALL the fossil fuel companies are relying on technology to sweep their offgases in drilling. In the North Sea platforms , its almost ZERO DISCHARGE. They use a tech thats very similar to catching sawdust from power saws in a wood shop. Then the fugitive gases are pumped into beds of lime/coal/an serpentinite to capture lotsa stuff.

I think georgeob has his company design drill rig fugitives and COx/NOx controls. BTW, all this talk of climate change has resulted in the start up of many multibillion dollar technologies and companies that assist in the control of air and water contamination and climate change.

While its true that natural exhudates of gases do spike the cooling levels on the planet, the climate is almost ignoring those inputs and continues to keep warming and science has little idea why other than the one thats stares us in the face.
The sea is a huge sink, but its not bottomless. We are seeing some creatures, like scleractin corals , and coquina formations and porous limestones are qll being dissolved at markedly faster rates than predicted by hydro mapping .Corals (who have a narrow tolerance to Ph levels) in many cases are being bleached befire they can even settle in to add to a reef structure.

I used to be a fairly big time denier of anthropogenic climate change. Now I say, the evidence seems to be pointing at us, not some sunspot, or Danzgar cycle, or precession.
Weve gone through 2 , (22 year) cycles since the first hockey stick controversies and the climate ignores its even happened.

Poor Blicky, eh? Trump aint even bein investigated. What's he gunna claim now?

I know! Trump is a damn liar, that's what. Yeah, that's the ticket, sho nuff!

Doesn't he realize how this make him and Sessions look guilty?