| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Komorikid
In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
 |
|
Ish wrote:
Simple logic matrix.
Cutting back on fossil fuel consumption will depress the world economy whether Global Warming is a real problem or not.
Global Warming might depress the world economy if it turns out to be real.
Obviously, the only safe bet is to carry on as normal. |
I'm with Ish on his first point. Cutting back on cheap readily available energy sources that have seen the nations who use it make a quantum leap in development would be a disaster for western economies and would retard the development of the developing economies.
Wind, solar and geothermal will never compete on a level playing field. Europe and the UK have gone down this road for a decade and it is an abject failure. Spain is virtually bankrupt, Denmark still has to use fossil fuelled power to supplement its heavily subsidised wind farms. Germany is now going to build six new fossil fuelled power stations because they can't supply enough energy in the future. Energy prices in the UK and Europe have more than doubled in ten years and most of the revenue has gone in subsidies not in R&D on new sources of energy. The carbon trading market has crashed to be one tenth of the original carbon offset price.
And for what, the possible increase in world temperatures of less than 1° C by 2100. Temperature predictions we now know are based on totally flawed science.
I'll agree to the second point when the following evidence is presented by science based on observation and not Play Station assumptions.
1.Show me the empirical science that conclusively proves that CO2 has any major effect on world climate.
2.Show how the Stefan-Boltzmamm equation has any relevance in describing a multi-variate interlocking non linear chaotic system.
3.Show me the empirical evidence that the pre industrial level of CO2 was 280ppm.
Storms, drought, hurricanes, ice melting and the thousands of other natural occurrences that happen worldwide ARE NOT EVIDENCE of Global Warming they are merely evidence of storms, droughts etc happening on a regular basis.
The mass hysteria that has plagued the world for the last two decades has finally be outed for what it really is -- a giant fraud.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| Show me the empirical science that conclusively proves that CO2 has any major effect on world climate. |
Thank the C02-filled heavens for Aussie cool. We were treated to an experiment on TV to prove conclusively C02 warms the atmosphere by at least a couple of degrees. Two samples of air, one 'contaminated' by human breath, the other taken from a windswept shore, were heated in glass containers not much bigger than a milk bottle. Not surprisingly it worked -- but this was supposed to represent the worldwide situation.
Trouble is, the presenter was so likeable and well-meaning that it seemed churlish to disagree and the whole thing was lent gravitas by being on a serious, highly respected current affairs programme.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Hatty wrote: | | We were treated to an experiment on TV to prove conclusively C02 warms the atmosphere by at least a couple of degrees. Two samples of air, one 'contaminated' by human breath, the other taken from a windswept shore, were heated in glass containers not much bigger than a milk bottle. Not surprisingly it worked -- but this was supposed to represent the worldwide situation.. |
I've seen similar.
Trouble is, as with so much "media performance science", some factors have to be carefully ignored, to save confusing the audience. In this case, that the human breath contamination contains a much higher percentage of water vapour than the ambient air. Which has an even greater greenhouse effect than the CO2.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I got into a major row with my brother--an academic in Green Studies--about my claim that the ocean does not evaporate and hence is not the (major) source of precipitation. He said it could be demonstrated by any oceanographic vessel you cared to name. When I asked him whether he cared to name one that had done this he disappeared for ten years to investigate the disappearing ozone level over Wiltshire.
Then I found one! They had tried to measure it but couldn't for various technical reasons. I brought this to his attention but he was investigating fairies at the bottom of his compost heap so couldn't be reached.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Talking of careful ignoral, did you know this intrepid researcher can't get hold of isohyet charts for rainfall over the ocean? This is pretty damn important whichever version of the hydrological cycle you believe, so it's surprising they're not available at the touch of a button.
It means vast amounts of fresh water is constantly being lost to the briny seas and the world is currently running short of the stuff. It also means, in principle, that the ocean is getting less briny over time--a critical factor in SLOP theory. But don't get me started on the salt cycle.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
While we're on the subject, do you know what a Zud is? No, nor me neither. It is a particularly severe winter in Mongolia where mild winters are vicious enough. They come along about once every decade and Mongolian herdsmen are well used to dealing with them. Or rather, putting up with losing a lot of animals every ten years or so.
Not any more. For the last thirty years they have been coming thick and fast, and a lot more vicious too. What happened thirty years ago? The Commie regime in Ulan Bator fell and riproaring capitalism meant more and more animals were piling into, onto, the Mongolian steppe and turning it into a riproaring desert. Only it wasn't technically because the reason Zuds are so destructive is that it snows so hard the steppe is blanketed by feet of snow. So deep that not just animals get lost in it, whole yurts and their inmates can get lost underneath it.
As you know, one foot of snow is equal to one inch of rain so whether this means the Mongolian steppe is technically a desert (i.e. less than ten inches of snow per year) I cannot say. What I can say is that the Western Effect of newly desertised Mongolia means there is going to be less rain in California, and that started about... er... thirty years ago.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | he disappeared for ten years to investigate the disappearing ozone level over Wiltshire. |
Did he find it?
That reminds me. The technology that found the hole in the Ozone layer was invented by James Lovelock. Best known as one of the creators of the Gaia Theory.
Once upon a time, quite by chance, M'Lady & I nearly bought his home in West Devon. At the time, we didn't even know it was his home. Then by another chance I read a newspaper article that said he was selling his home (with a picture that gave the game away) and moving to Arizona. Why? Because it was too cold and wet, too much rain, and it was costing him a fortune to heat that house. What was good enough for Saint James was good enough for me, so we didn't buy it.
He also said we should be going for UK fracking in a big way. Which I think was the kiss of death on his approval by the Guardianistas.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | What I can say is that the Western Effect of newly desertised Mongolia means there is going to be less rain in California, and that started about... er... thirty years ago. |
Does the Western Effect explain the greenification of Southern Sahara?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
My brother was a long time soi-distant collaborator of Lovelock's. It was good the Guardianistas did not know of his long and very intimate relationship with Porton Down. Lovelock's, I mean. Though my brother's father (also by coincidence my own) did have a relationship with the Common Cold Research Centre which had its own mysterious relationship with Porton Down.
Lovelock could afford pre-Boreadean mansions because of his invention of a machine that could detect particles of one part per twenty swimming pools (or whatever, a thousand times better than the previous one) and which was in worldwide demand for both nuclear and bio-chem weapons testing and detection.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
I haven't seen the outrage in the Guardian yet.
| Tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest are being cleared and paved over to build a new four-lane highway |
What's it for?
| For, of all things, the upcoming COP30 climate summit in Brazil. |
Are they still having COPs?
| More than 50,000 people are expected for the 30th annual UN climate summit in Belém, in November, including a number of world leaders. |
The invite for the AEL contingent must still be in the post.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| More than 50,000 people are expected for the 30th annual UN climate summit in Belém, in November, including a number of world leaders. |
This tells you all you need to know about COPs. If they were serious policy forums it would be 'world leaders plus staffs'. If they are PR jamborees, it would be 'fifty thousand people'. And don't forget, we only have COPs between us and extinction.
"Goodbye, world."
"Goodbye, people. And good riddance."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Whenever I say that recycling should be made illegal, people think I'm joking. When I say I'm not, they still think I'm joking. When I insist for a third time, they walk away shaking their heads. 'That Mick, what a card.'
So what's the problem? It's an AE problem. The word 'recycling' has attained 'apple pie' status. We might not be very good at it but at least it's a contribution, right? Wrong. Recycling is a menace. Let me regale you with the latest example.
Now, as it happens, used tyres don't suffer from the normal trials and tribulations of 'recyclables':
* They are totally homogenous (aside from a bit of metal bracing inside the rubber).
* They are simple to collect. The bloke putting on the new ones takes the old ones off. No intermediary wheelie bins are involved.
* They are straightforward to deal with. You shred them up in a giant whatsit.
* The end product has a readymade usefulness. Rubber 'crumb' can be used 'as is' in playgrounds, sportsfields, roadfill, all sorts.
Old tyres are posterchilds for recycling. So what happens next? ...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Boreades wrote: | | Does the Western Effect explain the greenification of Southern Sahara? |
Nudge.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | The word 'recycling' has attained 'apple pie' status... |
Is there an AEL-approved list of such?
e.g.
Recycling
NHS
Mary Berry
etc
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
It costs more to recycle tyres than is available from playgrounds, sports fields et al, so governments levy money to do it. Not much, three pounds a tyre in Britain (which I'll stay with, but it's much the same everywhere in the developed world).
The bloke in the garage, who's just swapped your old ones for new and pocketed the three pounds per--not that that makes a difference to his bottom line--but it keeps everything regular and recorded--rings the bloke at the local tyre recycling factory who comes round periodically and picks up all the old tyres. He is licensed to do so by the government to keep out the cowboys.
He might be one of the rubber crumb johnnies but only ten percent of licensed rubber recyclers are because there's no money in it. The other ninety per cent 'compact' the tyres, put them in containers and ship them off to 'licensed compact tyre recyclers'. I say 'shipped off' because there's even less money in compacted tyres than in whole ones so it's only economic in third world countries.
What happens when the container arrives? I know you've got there before me but I'll give you chapter and verse anyway...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
