Scientists Prove Man-made Global Warming Is A Hoax

Discussion in 'News, Current Events, and Politics' started by TMT Tactical, Apr 9, 2019.

0/5, 0 votes

  1. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Okay, I am not sure I posted in the right spot.

    Scientist have proven that 3,000,000 (if I got it right is 3 million) years ago, the CO2 levels were as high as they are today. That is before any recorded appearance of man. So maybe the aliens stopped by and had a few too many BBQ"s

    "Current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million (ppm) were last seen on Earth three million years ago, according to the most detailed reconstruction of the Earth’s climate by researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and published in Science Advances.?"

    So now we have it, scientific proof -- not just the deniers but scientist, that we are NOT THE CAUSE of global warming.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ists-prove-man-made-global-warming-is-a-hoax/
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2019
    Sonofliberty likes this.
  2. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    7
    Confused! Maybe I am missing something here, but it reads:
    Yet today, it is the increase of greenhouse gases due to the burning of fossil fuels that is fundamentally changing our planet, the analysis further confirms. Global mean temperatures never exceeded the preindustrial levels by more than 2 degrees Celsius in the past 3 million years, the study shows – while current climate policy inaction, if continued, would exceed the 2 degrees limit already in the next 50 years.
    Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
    Keith.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  3. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    It also stated;
    "
    Yes, you read that correctly, three million — million — years ago CO2 levels on Earth were the same as they are today, but there is one major difference between three million years ago and today…

    Three million years ago, we humans were not driving cars or eating the meat that requires cow farts; we weren’t barbecuing or refusing to recycle or building factories; there was no Industrial Age, no plastic, no air conditioning, no electricity, no lumber mills, no consumerism, no aerosols.

    In fact, three million years ago, there were probably no human beings on Earth, at least not human in the way we use that term today. And yet…

    CO2 levels were the same then as they are now…"

    So we are not causing the global warming, any more than we did 3 million years ago. And I seriously doubt the world is going to end in 12 years, as some Democrats and fear mongering liberals claim.
     
    Sonofliberty likes this.
  4. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    7
    No sorry mate, but just because there was extreme weather conditions 3 million years ago does not prove that global warming climate change is not a product of human intervention.
    I do not believe in the 12 years scenario, but I do think it possible that we may encounter TEOTWAWKI before the end of this century, & then the extinction of all life on earth possibly in the next century.

    I tell you what, I would sooner take action & spend the rest of my life living an 18th century lifestyle than have to go through TEOTWAWKI & possibly condemn my grandchildren & any great grandchildren to death. For me the choice is simple, no contest.
    However, the majority of people are not going to take any action, so this world is more than likely going to end, unless some other catastrophe comes along first & shuts down all fossil fuel industry.
    Keith.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  5. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Keith, I can't and won't fault you for your beliefs. I am betting TEOTWAWKI will come not from climate change but from stupid and corrupt governments. As the economies of all the nations fail and the populations continue to grow, civil disorder will grow into ciaos and then into civil wars and ultimately world wide destruction. Consider it MOB rule, worldwide. The climate is the least of our worries.
     
    Sonofliberty and Morgan101 like this.
  6. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Teotwawki is more likely to be man made than anything natural, but I wouldn't rule out a mixture of the two.
     
    Morgan101 and TMT Tactical like this.
  7. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I agree, If we don't kill each other off, then the pollution will probably get us. OR the pollution from trying to kill each off will get us.
     
    Sonofliberty and lonewolf like this.
  8. Sonofliberty

    Sonofliberty Master Survivalist
      407/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I think SHTF/TEOTWAWKI will most likely be an economic catastrophe or the fulfillment of Revelation.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  9. Ystranc

    Ystranc Master Survivalist
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    An economic catastrophe my change the world we live in and even cause massive population decrease by starvation and disease but it is not truly an extinction event.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  10. Hick Industries

    Hick Industries Expert Member
      155/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The first highly detailed ice core data was published 21 yrs ago. I saw a chart published in "The Economist" which showed these long term changes in global temps vs atmospheric gas, and down loaded the raw data from oak ridge site CDIAC-ORNL the following year.

    This data not only fails to support the hypothesise of man made global warming, it proves that current CO2 levels are not causing a detectable change to the climate. So I wrote a 20 page engineering white paper describing these results, and sent it to the US President in March 2001. About six weeks later, President Bush formally withdrew from the Kyoto agreemment (which had been signed by former VP Al Gore, but rejected by the US Senate).

    In the 17 yrs since that time, I have watched as the true believers proposing the hypotheses, go absolutely bat shit crazy. All of the serious scientists who had originally worked on the hypotheses, abandoned the field following the discolure of the climate gate emails. The only folks left who pretend to believe it, are those asking for money.

    I'll skip to the bottom line.
    Yes, the climate changes frequently, and CO2 levels have nothing to do with it. The actual cause is variations in the Earths orbit, changes in the Suns magnetic field, and large volcanoes and impact events.

    What changes are likely to occure next? The Suns magnetic field has dropped off significatly, and it is predicet to remain low for 30-40 yrs. If this continues as predicted, a little ice age is more likely, than a warmer world.
     
  11. Oldguy

    Oldguy Master Survivalist
      280/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Damn a sane logical post awesome:)
     
  12. Ystranc

    Ystranc Master Survivalist
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Well if it's all due to happen over the next 30-40 years I'll have a ringside seat and see who is right. Pandemic, volcano, pollution, nuclear war, global warming or Planet X.....
    .....I shall watch with interest from my hill top.
     
  13. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    on BBC1 next Thursday at 9pm there are some climate scientists who DONT believe climate change is a hoax, there are always 2 sides to every story.
     
    TMT Tactical and Ystranc like this.
  14. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0

    If I make it the next 30-40 years I will be a medical miracle, and won't give a flying, Philadelphia you know what about what Mother Nature has to throw at me.

    Hick Industries: I have heard that the volcanic eruption in Iceland in 2010 put more carbon into the atmosphere than mankind has done in its entire existence on the planet. Is this true? Can you confirm or deny? I have also heard that volcanoes are the major contributor to carbon and there are thousands of eruptions every day. Not a thing we can do about it. True? False?
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  15. Hick Industries

    Hick Industries Expert Member
      155/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Reasonable question. Every major volcanic eruption or impact event released tremendous amounts of dust, ash, CO2, and SO2. While these events are typically limited in duration, they do release far more than all of mans activities combined. They also cause the earths temp to drop, not increase.
    This may be a real shocker to most people who have not studied geology, but the ice core data confirms what geologists have known for a hundred years. We live in a geological period known as the plistocene, which is charaterised by a repeating cycle of ice ages. The earths climate get much, much colder and massive sheets of ice cover much of the norrhern hemisphere. While these ice age events vary in magnitude, they typically last 80,000 yrs, and in between we enjoy much shorter interglacial periods of warm weather that last 20,000 yrs. This cycle of warm and cold began 2-3 million years ago, and there is no chance that it will not continue.
    At no time does measured data support the hypotheses of man made global warming. While the earths climate does change, and has changed dramatically, these changes are not driven by greenhouse gases such as CO2. Tbey are caused by the vagarities of earths orbit, and solar output.
     
  16. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The 2010 Eyjafjallajokull eruption, although not insignificant at a maximum 30,000 tonnes day-1 of CO2 emission, is nowhere near the global human activity contributed 29,195 million tonnes of CO2 to the air (per the US Energy Information Administration) or one millionth of what people put into the air each year.

    Volcanic ash -- now that was significant (and scary) if you were flying through the ash cloud at the time. But the CO2 inputs were negligible.

    Citation here.
     
    TMT Tactical and Hick Industries like this.
  17. Hick Industries

    Hick Industries Expert Member
      155/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I guess you missed the part about volcanoes cooling the planet, not warming it up.

    How much CO2 it emmits is not really important, since CO2 is not causing the climate to change.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  18. Oldguy

    Oldguy Master Survivalist
      280/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Look up "Milankovich Cycle"

    Forces far beyond man involved!
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  19. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Actually, I was responding to our colleague Mr Morgan's earler comment.

    I am neither a climatologist nor a geologist, although I have taken (and am presently enrolled in) 5 or 6 geology classes. My class this semester at CSI ( the College of Southern Idaho) is Field Geology 273; our trip next month will be a week at Yellowstone NP.

    I hope to learn a lot!
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  20. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0

    Thank you clarifying. There is so much written about both sides of the equation it is difficult to know what is true, and what is not. Who do you believe?

    My next question is about the " Carbon Footprint ". I have read both sides of that argument, and I still don't know who to believe. Is it a real concern, or is it blown out of proportion? Maybe you and Hicks Industries can debate the issue here.
     
  21. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I don't believe anything on faith alone. I try to research an item as much as I can, and make an effort to read both sides of any issue. With issues that are (or are supposed to be) science-based, the data and numbers are out there; then only point of concern is that there are people out there who will use dishonest statistical methods to 'twist' the results. We need a lot more knowledge and skills in these particular fields in order to accept the conclusions that are both valid and true. Both the Climate Change proponents and the Climate Change deniers have used these tricks, so we can't say that "A is always right and B is always wrong".

    I personally believe that climate change runs in natural cycles, many of which we understand and some which we do not. But I also believe, based on my understanding of the chemistry behind airborne pollutants, that anthropogenic pollution is adding a lot, and that is probably enough icing on the cake to tip the system and bring about a catastrophic swing in the Earth's overall climate, which will be very dangerous to everyone's health within the next ten or twenty years.


    I'd love to talk about carbon footprint, and what its good and bad points are, but much of this morning will be involved in some very difficult scientific endeavors on my part, including presenting my final proof to Fermat's Theorem, feeding the goats and the chickens, and trying to rebuild a hay feeder that the ()*&^#& goats won't tear down. I lied about the proof to Fermat's Theorem.

    Hopefully I will be able to talk to the carbon footprint thing after lunch, and I guarantee that no electrons will be harmed by the resulting post.
     
    TMT Tactical and Morgan101 like this.
  22. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Thank you for sharing. I try to read all I can on both sides as you say, but often it is so far past my understanding of science it makes my head hurt. I would really appreciated someone, a true scientist, that could translate science into Everyday Joe the Plumber language, so we could all understand it.

    I look forward to your post on the carbon impact, at your leisure, and trust that no electrons will be harmed in the process. At least not on my part. I don't think I have any electrons I could harm. Good luck finding a feeder the goats won't tear down. If you do find or build one you should patent it. I would think it would be in high demand.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  23. Oldguy

    Oldguy Master Survivalist
      280/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Morgan101
    Just look at the raw data available and disregard all opinions and conclusions from the talking heads!
    Earths climate is based on cycles! see "Milankovich Cycle" no talking heads just a combination of cycles that have been correct in the past and will be come the future.
    Human pollution may change things locally but they are not much on the global scale.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  24. poltiregist

    poltiregist Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Leese see here if I have this right . The U.S. citizens are supposed to empty their bank accounts and give the money to less successful countries , shut down the power grid , stop all fossil fuel production , farm with draft animals , eat only what they can grow or kill . If we don't we are somehow bad and don't care about the planet or our kids . This sounds like the united states communist partys" Green new deal" bill that just got voted on . The results was it didn't receive even one favorable vote . Even the communist that wrote it up wouldn't vote for it . Untill the United States falls under Communist rule I think this idea will go nowhere . Even under Communist rule the dictator at the top will line their own bank account and not give it to a failed country . If the temperature isn't comfortable enough it looks like a plan B is in order .
     
    TMT Tactical and Morgan101 like this.
  25. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I appreciate your advice. I really do. Looking up the Milankovich Cycle provides data, but at the same time it makes my point. If you tell me it is 100 degrees F I know it is hot. If you tell me it is 15 degrees F I know it is cold. WTF are benthic forams and Vostok ice cores? I don't understand the data, and I don't understand what is meaningful.

    The Earth's axial tilt varies between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees over a cycle of 41,000 years. What is significant; .1 degrees? .5 degrees? 1 degree? How does that affect the climate? Is that affect helpful or harmful? O.K. The Sun is gonna do whatever it wants, and the Earth is gonna do whatever it wants. Does mankind have any affect whatsoever?
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  26. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    do
    No, you DON'T have it right.
    • We're not supposed to empty our bank account to give to anyone else.
    • What we should do is to figure out the most cost-effective way we can to stop pollution. That means cleaning up our air and water without breaking the bank and driving our economy into the toilet.
    • We're not supposed to shut down the power grid, especially because, over the past five years or so, we've made it a lot more efficient and able to withstand heavier-than-normal loads (and even big solar flares) without crashing.
    • We're not going to farm with draft animals because it's is simply not as efficient (and thus costs more) than a Mahindra tractor in your back yard, and a John Deere combine down the road.
    • We're not going to "eat only what we could grow or kill" it would trash the economy, and I'd never be able to drink orange juice or eat lobster again.
    • The Democratic Party is not more the "Communist party" than the Republican Party is the "Nazi party". Both the Democrats and the Republicans want a big, nosy, intrusive government to tell you how to live your life and extort all your wealth. The Democrats tell you they're the protector of your rights and freedoms. The Republicans tell you the same. They both lie. The whole concept of those statist pigs' plan is to convince the more naïve of the citizenry that only they are right, and the other guy is wrong.
    I'm not any more thrilled with these überliberals out there with their crackpot social schemes than you or anyone else here is, but we are facing an existential challenge, and the sooner we all get ourselves in prepper mode, the better off all of us (and our brats and grand-brats) will be.
     
  27. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The whole idea of "carbon footprint" isn't good or bad; it's just a measurement, like pounds per square inch, or meters, or half-pints. The best way to define carbon footprint is "The total amount of greenhouse gases produced to directly and indirectly support human activities, usually expressed in equivalent tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)."

    Another definition (different, but the idea is the same) would be "the amount of carbon dioxide and other carbon compounds emitted due to the consumption of fossil fuels by a particular person, group, etc. also expressed in equivalent tons of CO2."

    Sounds pretty simple, right? Well, no, because although you can measure the output from your Ford F-150 from here to the store and back, just sitting in your house with the air conditioner on powered by electricity from the coal-fired generating plant three states away, or how much fossil fuel-powered energy it took to grow your food, take it to the supermarket, and cook it (and don't forget the methane-producing farts emitted by Sam the Steer who died in order that you might have your double quarter pounder with cheese).

    Measuring anyone's carbon footprint is, obviously, a tricky job; depending on whether you're a global warming fan or a global warming denier, it's pretty easy to cherry-pick the data to show that my carbon footprint is smaller than yours nyaah nyaah nyaah.

    Bottom line: in my opinion the idea makes a lot of sense, but since it's (1) fiendishly difficult to quantify objectively and (2) has been politicized up one side and down the other, it's not worth much except as a club to get nyaah nyaah nyaah points when you're debating someone whose ideas ares contrary t yours,
     
    Morgan101 likes this.
  28. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    most of the climate change and pollution in general is down to too many humans on the planet consuming all the resources and not giving a tinkers damn about the consequences, well mother nature has a way of getting her own back, a good SHTF will sort all that out, its just a matter of when not if.
     
    poltiregist likes this.
  29. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Thank you. I think that sums it up perfectly.
     
  30. TexDanm

    TexDanm Shadow Dancer
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    2
    All of the numbers that the end of the world because of American cars fail to take into account the fact that just a very few decades ago most of the world was using coal to make energy, coal poweredships and trains and people were heating and cooking with wood and coal. If the elevated co2 levels were man made the sudden up sweap would have happened in 1900 rather than 2000. Co2 is the result of oxygenating any carbon source. We call that fire.
     
  31. TexDanm

    TexDanm Shadow Dancer
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    2
    The thing is that you won't be exposed to two sides. They will only allow those that say what they are paid to say be on the show. This is like believing the trained pony experts that lawyers hire to testify in courts. They say whatever you pay them to say.

    Believe me, you have to dig deep and hard to get both sides of the story. Universities don't pay for people that are going to cut their financial throats. Once again, There is big money in bad news and not much in good news. How much money do you think the Catholic church would have if not for them "saving" you from hell. Jesus sent nobody to hell and only talked about love and forgiveness. THAT is why there is no book of Jesus in the Bible. Humans NEVER learn and con men keep using the same cons over and over.
     
    Morgan101 likes this.
  32. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    big protests in London about climate change going on as we speak.
     
  33. poltiregist

    poltiregist Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    What does the protesters want the world to do ? I expect when the food supply started running short because of trying to not use those nasty fossil fuels , they would protest about that to .
     
  34. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Master Survivalist
      407/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Here's the thing about "global warming/climate change," what ever the word du jour is that fits the political religious narrative. Because quite frankly, I think "global warming/climate change" has become less about science and more about a religious doctrine of sorts. Really. Just read about Al Gore and how he latched onto the concept and ran with it all the while making money. Never mind the fact the Noble Peace prize is nothing but a joke especially since Obama got one and for what? He was only in office like a month?

    Anyway, is pollution bad? Yes. Should we lessen the amount of it? Yes. Do third world "shitholes" as Trump would say care like China or India? No. Yet we have regulation upon regulation to combat air pollution and everything else. Hell, during Obama's term his EPA went after tiny puddles in farmer's fields! Then I read the EPA bought a boat load of night vision goggles. WTF for!? If there is one thing for certain, the government doesn't know anything and spends your money like no tomorrow. And believe me when I say the government doesn't know anything. The EPA had all of these air monitors strapped to light poles and what have you around NYC after the 9/11 aftermath and they all claimed the air was perfectly fine. Yet to this day people are dying from inhaling the toxic air from the collapsed buildings. NASA was even caught fudging the numbers about "global warming/climate change" As it stands now it's mostly a garbage in garbage out science embraced upon by those who want control.

    #AOC is one of the dumbest people I have ever seen. She has no business being a representative of the people and a policy maker. She claims there are many things on which to impeach Trump, but when pressed on elaborating what those things are she couldn't say. That's the kind of plant life IQ this woman has. And to come up with a "Green New Deal" is horse shit because of one fact: Progress. From the time of the Industrial Revolution to now we have made monumental progress in terms of how we use fossil fuels. Ever hear of the London fog? It wasn't because of the dew point, it was the massive burning of coal. Many people died because of it and today China looks the same. In the U.S we have progressed in our technology, but places like China and India have a ways to go. But as we head further and further into the future and come up with more efficient means to create energy to do things, the idea of "global warming/climate change" becomes a moot point, null and void. Yet I have this sneaky suspicion that even when man kind has perhaps discovered cold fusion via the knowledge obtained from dark energy and dark matter, the Earth will still have climatic cycles of warm and cold.

    The thing that gets me is that the South pole is icing up, yet the North pole is melting. So something is going on, but that really doesn't fit the description of Earth getting warmer. It sounds more like we need to understand climate and everything else in between. Hell, satellites that give us this data is a relatively new thing. It would take at least 200 years to know if man is a real influence or not. And like I said, by that time energy usage will have evolved as it does through the natural course of time.

    Being quite honest. We don't have to worry about the Earth getting 2 degrees warmer creating a catastrophe. It's the magnetic field that's the real issue. And it's fading. The you really have a sixth extinction. It will be straight up book of Revelation. And there are super volcanoes out there that are just ripe for going off. Never mind a CME or X-flare which has and can happen.

    We are all but a fragile group of lifeforms in a very absolute chaotic universe.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2019
    poltiregist likes this.
  35. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Master Survivalist
      407/460

    Blog Posts:
    0

    Pretty interesting. They protest across the English Channel in France about high fuel costs all due to the government's ideas about "global warming/climate change." Yet they protest in England because of "global warming/climate change."

    Ever watch that South Park episode where Earth was an alien reality TV show?
     
    poltiregist likes this.
  36. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    they are protesting in France about the general cost of living.
     
  37. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Master Survivalist
      407/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    That's not what I heard. But then again, what dictates the cost of living? One variable is the price of fuel. The other is inflation due to your politicians spending untold amounts of money. And that's pretty much what's going on here. Look at a box of cereal. Sucker costs at least 5 bucks. Yet a bushel ( about the size of a bucket) of grain will net you about $5.

    Greed and power will destroy us all. It is natural law.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/04/europe/france-yellow-vest-protests-intl/index.html
     
  38. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    fuel over here is mostly tax, about 75% of the cost is tax.
     
  39. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Master Survivalist
      407/460

    Blog Posts:
    0

    That is pretty much what I thought. And I know Europe is a high tax place to live. Heck, we complain here in the U.S. Though with good reason. The Revolutionary War was fought over a smaller tax then we pay now. I mean, you have local, state and federal tax. Win the lotto? Guess what, at least half of that is tax. Unreal! Benjamin Franklin did say it best, "There are two things certain in life: Death and taxes."
     
  40. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    your lotto is taxed? ours isn't, at least not the Lotto win isn't, but any interest we make on it is, which is fair enough.
     
  41. TexDanm

    TexDanm Shadow Dancer
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    2
    Nearly EVERYTHING except food is taxed here and even food costs have hidden taxes. If you tax every person that touches it before it gets to the store a lot of the final untaxed cost IS tax.
     
  42. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    More CO2 in the atmosphere? Apparently so -- trees are getting larger. If it weren't for rapist China's massive use of coal-fired electricity production, the trees would be taking-out a high percentage of what other countries are pumping out. We here in the U.S. MUST go nuclear, yet Wash. D.C. won't allow / free-up energy companies to do so. Big Oil and Big Coal are the only major industries with enough economic clout to make nuclear energy possible. Such deep pocket industries must be allowed to invest and act. The federal government along with some state governments have royally screwed-up the energy industry. Government can get more done by doing less.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/08/trees-growing-larger-ever-help-ease-global-warming/

    "Trees are getting bigger because of more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and are likely to be helping to mitigate global warming more than climate models suggest, scientists believe.

    "A new study from The Ohio State University has found that tree trunk volume in the US is up to 29 per cent bigger than it was 30 years ago, a finding that is likely to be mirrored elsewhere in the world.

    "Trees are known to act as a buffer zone against climate change by pulling in carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but the latest research shows just how much they have been bulking up on the extra fuel.

    “'It’s well known that when you put a ton of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it doesn’t stay up there forever,' said Brent Sohngen, professor of environmental and resource economics at Ohio State.

    “'A massive amount of it falls into the oceans, while the rest of it is taken up by trees and wetlands and those kinds of areas. Forests are taking carbon out of the atmosphere at a rate of about 13 per cent of our gross emissions.

    “'While we’re putting billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, we’re actually taking much of it out just by letting our forests grow.'

    "The team used historical data from the US Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis Program to compare how the wood volume of certain forest groups has changed over the past few decades.

    "The study estimates that between 1970 and 2015, there was a significant increase in the wood volume of trees, which correlates with a distinct rise in carbon emissions.

    "Elevated carbon levels are likely to have led to the equivalent of an extra tree ring growth for each tree in the 10 different temperate forest groups across the US, suggesting that trees are helping to shield Earth’s ecosystem from the impacts of global warming through their rapid growth, researchers said.

    "The phenomenon is known as 'carbon fertilisation', whereby an influx of carbon dioxide increases a plant’s rate of photosynthesis, spurring growth.

    "The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere mixes almost evenly, so every place on Earth has nearly the same amount, researchers said, suggesting other forests and wooded areas would have seen a similar increase in biomass.

    "The team found that trunk volume had increased by 12.3 per cent in 75-year-old forests and 28.8 per cent in 25-year-old forests.

    "Some studies from Europe have recorded greater tree heights over time, which researchers have speculated may be due to carbon fertilisation.

    "Experts had previously speculated that the amount of carbon dioxide that trees would be able to take up would be capped by a lack of other elements needed for photosynthesis such as nitrogen and phosphorus.

    "However the researchers said that did not appear to be the case. Instead, a lack of carbon dioxide appears to be the most important limiting factor in tree growth.

    "The team are hoping to repeat the research using global data, but said they hope it would show policymakers and others the value of trees in mitigating climate change.

    "The research was published in the journal Nature Communications."
     
    Brownbear and TMT Tactical like this.
  43. Brownbear

    Brownbear Master Survivalist
      360/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    There is good logic in this. The Carboniferous Period is what caused the coal fields, there was an abundance for flora and fauna and, of course, as we burn that coal, the CO2 is returned to the atmosphere.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  44. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    "Arctic Summer Sea Ice Stopped Declining a Decade Ago – But Scientists Have Hidden It"

    https://dailysceptic.org/2022/12/15...g-a-decade-ago-but-scientists-have-hidden-it/

    "We see here the end of the decline in summer sea ice started a decade ago. The low point on which most fanciful forecasts of a North Pole passage are based is 2012. Heller notes that sea ice changes are cyclical, not linear. And he is right. Drawing a straight line down from a 1979 high point to a lower point tells us nothing about current trends.

    "Heller then goes on to ask why the graphs start at 1979. The NSIDC and NASA say it is because satellite records started in 1979.Heller says this is a good story 'except for the fact that it isn’t true'. He goes on to quote the first UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report in 1990 that stated: 'Satellite observations have been used to map sea ice extent routinely since the early 1970s. The American Navy Joint Ice Center has produced weekly charts which have been digitised by NOAA [the U.S. weather service]'.

    "It might not be a surprise to learn that sea ice extent was lower in the 1970s and it peaked in 1979. By starting the graph in 1979 a ‘fake’ linear downward trend is produced. What they are doing, is hiding crucial data, Heller says."
    .
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  45. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Here is a wonderful speech by someone who uses reason over emotion. I deeply recommend that all watch this. I wish that watching this video could be made mandatory at all universities. Professors and students need to take-in the import of what is being said by this reasoned individual. Do watch before it is removed.

    British satirist, Konstantine Kisin

    https://twitter.com/hashtag/climatechange?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc^tfw
    .
     
    Brownbear and TMT Tactical like this.
  46. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I hate the assumption by some that human actions have no effect on climate change and therefore people can do what they like, I find that niave in the extreme.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  47. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    That's not what the speaker, Konstantine Kisin, in the video is saying.

    What he is saying is that Western nations are destroying their economies attempting to fix global warming while China is the largest polluter. He states that China has around 150,000,000 living in poverty and India even more. These countries couldn't care less about spewing CO2 into the atmosphere. The speaker calls upon Western nations to stop the "woke" B.S. and get down to the business of funding technologies that will provide clean energy.

    He makes the point that England is only contributing 2% of the CO2 output and that if England suddenly sank into the ocean, that 2% reduction would have zero effect on solving the CO2 emissions problem. Yet, there is a panic when the real problem is not investing in clean energy.

    Neither China nor India EVER reduce their outputs while they have hundreds of millions of mouths to feed and rural towns to which they must provide electricity.
    .
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  48. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Does mankind contribute to pollution, absolutely. Is it the primary cause of global climate change, doubtful. Yes China and India are the worst offenders and are doing little to nothing to change their habits. The real problem is the environmentalist are putting the cart before the horse. They are advocating throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You do not ban fossil fuels BEFORE you have a solid replacement. SIASD!!!
     
    Brownbear, Old Geezer and TexDanm like this.
  49. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0

    "You do not ban fossil fuels BEFORE you have a solid replacement."


    Yes.

    Governments can incentivize energy companies such as oil companies, maybe even coal companies, to invest in nuclear energy and other proposed solutions. Companies cannot do this if Big Brother is constantly taxing them blind. If these energy companies are genuinely investing in a future of cleaner power generation, then stop taxing them into oblivion. Punishing them will get us nowhere!

    Governments have mountains of utterly useless pork-barrel projects that should be killed tomorrow afternoon. The people need to get angry about this and put the word on their Congressional representatives. The environmental nut-cases need to take their med.s, get sane, and support the companies who are coming up with clean/cleaner energy sources that can generate hundreds of teraWatts of power. America needs way beyond enormous amounts of power and most folk haven't a clue as to what is required. Communist professors have turned their students into perpetual children, even as are the professors themselves = societal sickness writ large.

    Many local power companies cut slack on their bills, even help finance methodologies, for those who insulate their homes for energy savings. For those living in climates with lots of sunlight, solar panels are a dynamite idea. Areas that get perpetual winds (coastal cities, for instance) can utilize the energy in those winds. There's even ocean tidal energy generation. It sure isn't going to be one solution.

    Demonizing nuclear energy is a sure path to failure.
    .
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  50. lonewolf

    lonewolf Legendary Survivalist Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    China and India are 2 of the worst polluters and until they come on board and change their ways nothing will change.
    Britain emits about 1 or 2% of global emissions which make little or no difference yet the UK govt has this fixation with ZERO carbon.
     
    TMT Tactical and Brownbear like this.
    1. Old Geezer
      Your government and the current American Executive Branch have lost their reason. One doesn't allow feelings to alter one's actions -- that's where reason comes in. CO2 a problem? Sure. Engineer solutions that even poor nations can employ. Smart people look for long-term solutions.
       
      Old Geezer, Jan 18, 2023
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
D-i-y Scientists Test A Vaccine News, Current Events, and Politics Oct 11, 2020
Taiwan, Who And Bioscientists News, Current Events, and Politics Feb 9, 2020
Scientists Research Disaster Resilience News, Current Events, and Politics Aug 13, 2019
Scientists Have Just Detected A Major Change To The Earth’s Oceans Linked To A Warming Climate Climate Change Feb 18, 2017
Using Helmet Cams, & Hidden Body Cameras, To Prove Self Defence, When Someone Is Seriously Injured. The Hangout May 11, 2021
Us Army Testing New,improved Covid Vaccine News, Current Events, and Politics Apr 7, 2021
Testing To Improve Resiliency Safety Mar 3, 2021
Berkeley,calif Helps Improve Diet / Health (pending) News, Current Events, and Politics Sep 23, 2020
Us Army Seeks To Improve ... Sci-Fi, Space Travel, and Future Technologies Sep 20, 2020
Pandemic Generates Some Improvements News, Current Events, and Politics May 7, 2020

Share This Page