Climate Change

[dbphoenix]

These climate articles flood the popular press. They are based mostly on supposition and guesses by the "experts". But behind the scenes real progress has been made. The satellite data has unequivocally disproved the Hansen Hypothesis. We can now be quite certain that none of the CO2 abatement measures already implemented or proposed will have any discernible affect on climate, other than to possibly reduce mean temperature by a negligible amount over a few centuries. We will, nevertheless, reap some peripheral benefits from these measures, but it will be for the wrong reasons. The cost/benefit ratio will be hugely skewed against us. Of course the driving force behind this modern day Lysenkoism are the profits to be made by dipping indirectly into the public pockets that's made possible by politicizing and popularizing science as a "means of authority". Only when there is an immediate economic impact can such fervor be drummed up.

Hansen is unwittingly our modern day Lysenko, but he can't be exonerated because of his continued insistence that the models incorporating positive feedback are right despite recent observations to the contrary, including the satellite data. There are strong parallels between the present-day climate change fiasco and the politically dominant Lysenko movement in the Soviet Union. We have seen it all before right down to hyperpoliticizing to the point that even the expert community is somewhat split along ideological lines.

The global nature of the present fiasco makes it far more dangerous than Lysenkoism. Sometime within this or the next few centuries the Earth will enter a cooling cycle and the temperature will decline by a deg or two. This will be taken as a sign that the measures to reduce CO2 emissions have successfully avoided a disaster, and the talk will then shift to warnings of a dangerous, approaching ice age. If we continue acting like fools it will be a pity.

________________________________
* Please do me the favor of not attempting to read between the lines of my remarks. They are what they are, nothing more, nothing less.

Since there are at least a dozen other climate threads this year alone, perhaps you could limit your Hansen Hypothesis posts to one of them.

 

[piezoe]

Trofim Lysenko, Russian Experimental Biologist,

Books: Soil Nutrition of Plants, The Situation in Biological Science

Other books, www.google.com/search?q=lysenko&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb#rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&channel=sb&q=trofim+lysenko+books&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAGOovnz8BQMDgwYHnxCHfq6-QYpxboqWVHaylX5Sfn62fmJpSUZ-kRWIXayQn5dTuek84zMV509OJ8OORoXGLq9R82ANBQCp-2oYRQAAAA

 

[piezoe]

Since there are at least a dozen other climate threads this year alone, perhaps you could limit your Hansen Hypothesis posts to one of them.

This is only peripherally a Hansen Hypothesis post. (Which is, not incidentally, the central issue in the matter of "climate change".) It is a post mainly to call your attention to parallels between Lysenkoism and the "climate change" issue. Objectivity will be aided by awareness of similarly politicized issues of the past, where science was subverted as a source of authority, and their eventual resolution.

 

[dbphoenix]

This is NOT a Hansen Hypothesis post. It is a post to call your attention to parallels between Lysenkoism and
the "climate change" issue. Objectivity will be aided by awareness of similarly politicized issues of the past, where science was subverted as a source of authority, and their eventual resolution.

I'm not real concerned about that. I'm more interested in the current situation, the consensus of opinion, and the preponderance of evidence supporting it.

But thanks.

 

[jem]

your statement had to be preserved.
To preserve the spirit of my intent to stay off your thread I will not comment.

I'm not real concerned about that. I'm more interested in the current situation, the consensus of opinion, and the preponderance of evidence supporting it.

But thanks.

 

[futurecurrents]

Yes it is funny how much of a moron you are.

No strike that. It's sad.

This was directed at the resident moron, lucrum. I made the mistake of not quoting him and now, like the child he is, he has removed his post. Just to make things clear. It is Lucrum that is a moron.

 

[futurecurrents]

No, the data has not disproven climate science, which you refer to as the Hansen hypothesis. You don't know what you are talking about. Satellite data is the least accurate so of course you use it. You are a sack of shit liar and obviously have no interest in an objective look at the science. You suck in the worst way possible.

You are right about one thing however. As concerning the propaganda, follow the money.

These climate articles flood the popular press. They are based mostly on supposition and guesses by the "experts". But behind the scenes real progress has been made. The satellite data has unequivocally disproved the Hansen Hypothesis. We can now be quite certain that none of the CO2 abatement measures already implemented or proposed will have any discernible affect on climate, other than to possibly reduce mean temperature by a negligible amount over a few centuries. We will, nevertheless, reap some peripheral benefits from these measures, but it will be for the wrong reasons. The cost/benefit ratio will be hugely skewed against us. Of course the driving force behind this modern day Lysenkoism are the profits to be made by dipping indirectly into the public pockets that's made possible by politicizing and popularizing science as a "means of authority". Only when there is an immediate economic impact can such fervor be drummed up by those who will profit. They are unconsciously innocent. The greed in human nature destroys objectivity.

Hansen is unwittingly our modern day Lysenko, but he can't be exonerated because of his continued insistence that the models incorporating positive feedback are right despite recent observations to the contrary, including the satellite data. There are strong parallels between the present-day climate change fiasco and the politically dominant Lysenko movement in the Soviet Union. We have seen it all before right down to hyperpoliticizing to the point that even the expert community is somewhat split along ideological lines.

The global nature of the present fiasco makes it far more dangerous than Lysenkoism. Sometime within this or the next few centuries the Earth will enter a cooling cycle and the temperature will decline by a deg or two. This will be taken as a sign that the measures to reduce CO2 emissions have successfully avoided a disaster, and the talk will then shift to warnings of a dangerous, approaching ice age. If we continue acting like fools it will be a pity.

________________________________
* Please do me the favor of not attempting to read between the lines of my remarks. They are what they are, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[hedron]

As did you. That carbon dioxide is breathable has nothing to do with the problem.

No, the fact co2 is breathable proves there isn't a problem. Climate warming is a paranoid fantasy. It's mass hysteria over nothing.

I could create a climate model with those same computer models that would prove that the seismic force of my flatulence is strong enough to cause an earthquake massive enough to dump the entire West coast into the sea.

 

[dbphoenix]

my flatulence is strong enough to cause an earthquake massive enough to dump the entire West coast into the sea.

Somehow I have no doubt that that's true.

 

[futurecurrents]

No, the fact co2 is breathable proves there isn't a problem. Climate warming is a paranoid fantasy. It's mass hysteria over nothing.

I could create a climate model with those same computer models that would prove that the seismic force of my flatulence is strong enough to cause an earthquake massive enough to dump the entire West coast into the sea.

No CO2 is an important greenhouse gas that we have raised the levels of by 40%. How can that NOT cause warming? Also, where are all you idiots coming from? Maybe climate change is creating idiots?