Climate Change is about CONTROL

For you out there who think you know about CO2 here is a very good scientific explanation of why CO2 is not the enemy.

Climate change is a false premise for regulating or taxing carbon dioxide emissions. Nature converts CO2 to calcite (limestone). Climate change may or may not be occurring, but is is surely NOT caused by human fossil fuels use. Changes in temperature cause changes in ambient CO2, with an estimated 800 year time lag.

Others have shown the likely causes of climate change, and they DO NOT include human use of fossil fuels. There is no empirical evidence that fossil fuels use affects climate. Likely and well-documented causes include sunspot cycles, earth/sun orbital changes, cosmic ray effects on clouds and tectonic plate activity. The further point here is that earth naturally recycles all carbon dioxide.

Here’s why. Fossil fuels emit only 3% of total CO2 emissions. 95% comes from rotting vegetation. All the ambient CO2 in the atmosphere is promptly converted in the oceans to calcite (limestone) and other carbonates, mostly through biological paths. CO2 + CaO => CaCO3 (exothermic). The conversion rate increases with increasing CO2 partial pressure. A dynamic equilibrium-seeking mechanism.

99.84% of all carbon on earth is already sequestered as sediments in the lithosphere. The lithosphere is a massive hungry carbon sink that converts ambient CO2 to carbonate almost as soon as it is emitted. All living or dead organic matter (plants, animals, microbes etc. amount to only 0.00033% of the total carbon mass on earth. Ambient CO2 is only 0.00255%.

Full implementation of the Paris Treaty is now estimated to cost $50 trillion to $100 trillion by 2030–$6,667-$13,333 per human being. Nearly two-thirds of humanity’s cumulative savings over history. And will not affect climate at all.

 

3d year in a row!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-1045am:homepage/story&utm_term=.13ff2845f09a

 

Oh yeah really try these. And so what if you are right, which you are not, that the earth is warming a bit? The earth warmed in the Roman era, cooled some than warmed again in the Medieval Warm Era than cooled a lot during the Little Ice Age. Whats your point? That the earth might be warming? Is this a new phenomenon if it is warming? You say hottest on record but since when? Since the earth is 4.5 billion years old what the hell do we really know?

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...-office-2016-2015-temps-essentially-the-same/

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/01/18/bbc-ignore-the-satellite-record/

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427823/paris-climate-conference-no-warming

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...atellite-data-no-global-warming-past-18-years

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...izarre-warns-of-return-back-to-the-dark-ages/

 

You "deniers" of the democrats and leftist global warming fraud might want to try listening to not me, not Fox News and not an oil industry spokesman but an MIT climate scientists views on global warming.

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen on 'hottest year' claims:

'To imply that a rise of temperature of a tenth of a degree is proof that the world is coming to an end has to take one back to the dark ages.'

'As long as you can get people excited as to whether it's a tenth of a degree warmer or cooler, then you don't have to think, you can assume everyone who is listening to you is an idiot.'

'The whole point is so crazy because the temperature is always going up or down a little. What is astonishing is that in the last 20 years it hasn't done much of anything.'

'What they don't mention is there has been a big El Nino in 2016 and in recent months the temperature has been dropping back into a zero trend level.'

'It gives you something to believe in. It’s a religion.'

 

On a roll this morning try this global scamers

It been is Cold Out There
As temperatures plunged across the Northeast in February, the wind chill at Whiteface Mountain near Lake Placid dropped to a body-numbing minus 114 degrees. Breaking 117-year-old cold records. “Life threatening,” says National Weather Service. Meanwhile, our leaders prattle on about “global warming”. Massive blast of Arctic air from the Plains to Florida to Maine. “This is an extremely dangerous situation,” says announcer. “People are urgently being warned to stay indoors.” The temperature in Buffalo could drop to 30 degrees below zero F. Other places could see 50 degrees below zero. The National Weather Service has issued wind chill warnings for a large portion of the Northeast and New England, saying “life-threatening” cold conditions will be possible.

In Boston they just had the coldest Valentine’s Day ever. According to the National Weather Service, Boston temperatures dropped to minus-9 F (-22.8 C), making this the coldest Valentine’s Day in the city since 1957. Today’s temperatures are expected to reach a high of 10 F (-12 C), likely setting a record low high for the day. Worcester also set a record low of minus 16 F (-26.7 C).

The mercury plunged to 1 degree F (-17.2 C) at JFK International Airport on Sunday, shattering the old record of 4 degrees set back in 1979. Not only the coldest Valentine’s Day on record in Central Park, it was the coldest morning of any month since Jan. 19, 1994, when the low dropped to -2 in Central Park. Just what we would expect when things get warmer!

In Oshawa, the temperature dropped to -27.1, easily breaking the old record of -25.6 set in 1887. Toronto’s minus 26.3 beat the -23.2 set in 1979, while Colburg’s -26.4 beat the -24.1 figure set just last year, in 2015. Toronto’s -26.3 was not only the coldest February 13 on record, it was lowest temperature recorded in the metropolis on any date since January 16, 1994.

Airports and highways were closed as the worst cold front in decades hit several Chinese provinces. The temperature in Genhe City in northern China’s Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region dropped to minus 47.8C on Thursday, nearing its historical record of minus 49.6 degrees.

Mexico is having its coldest winter in its history. The situation is particularly worrying in the north, where the thermometer reached the -17 ° C mark. In Mexico City it snowed in January, a phenomenon not seen in the capital since 1967. The snow and cold forced the government to declare a state of emergency is declared in 24 of the 32 states in the country.

Unforgiving cold in the north of Vietnam has killed more than 50,000 cattle and poultry, according to newspaper reports. This includes more than 9,000 animals and 43,000 poultry. 29 Jan 2016 – Snow fell on Kuwait on Thursday morning for the first time in the country’s history.

In the Krasnodar region and Adygea in southern Russia on the nights of 13 and 14 March the ground froze and air temperatures dropped to -1, -2 degrees. The freeze poses a risk to early blossoming apricots and plums. Morning frost could also endanger emerging winter wheat seedlings. In Mongolia, animals are dying in mass from a brutally cold winter. “This winter is the harshest I have experienced,” said Bayankhand Myagmar, 50, who has already lost 400 of her 700 animals.

 

Are you predicting the weather? Most of the stories you cite have no dates. They either haven't happened or happened in the past. Isolated events indicate nothing when they aren't connected in time or place or even context.
How do you explain NASA's report out yesterday that 2016 was not only the hottest year on record but the third year in a row that broke the record. Is your excuse that NASA jiggered the numbers and its all a lie? What about the evidence that Artic sea ice is at its lowest extent in recorded history?
I've been reading your posts see no place where you've actually explained your position. Like Red you google the shit out of articles as if shear volume will win an argument. Sport correlation doesn't explain causality.
Yes there are long term variation in many natural cycles that effect the weather. However you can see that man made processes are the straw that breaks the camels back. There there is both data and process that explain what is happening.
Now as many here who agree there is man made warming happening there are significant differences in what needs to be done. I believe we have time and means to deal with it without drastic action. Using natural gas as power generation etc. Remember there are 4 billion people in the world who want to live like us. That takes energy. How we produce that energy will have significant effect on what happens. Look at China their unrestricted use of coal has poisoned their air. Central planning always ruins the environment and that is not the answer. A well regulated free economy like our is the key.

 

My big problem with your last paragraph is I dont think it takes a rocket scientist or even a climate scientist to understand my position. If you really have read my post as you say you have I shouldn't have to tell you my position on climate change (which used to be called global warming until the leftist realized the earth was not cooperating with their agenda) but I will anyway. My position is the democrats and the left has been using the climate as a tool to advance world socialism and extract money from wealthy nations. "What needs to be done about it"? That man can control the weather and earths present and future climate is not only ridiculous its arrogant and places man as God. The left started this agenda in the 40's, then in the 60's tried the global cooling scare along with other doomsday predictions such as "The Population Bomb" scare, the DDT scare, the running out of natural resources scare and the oceans dying scare among other scares. All their predictions are always wrong they are never right. Al Gore lives in a 24,000 sq ft house has 4 SUV's and a large airplane and flies around the world lecturing us on cutting back our lifestyles and making money offvthe carbon credit scam at the same time. Yet old Al is looked at by the left as a God getting a nobel prize for his fraudulent error filled An Inconvenient Truth.

"Global warming," from its inception has always been an engineered pretext for extortion, a centralization of power and control. This is why the "science" doesn't hold up. As with so many things, their hope is, people will see only what they're trained to see. Like the official stories of 9/11 and the JFK assassination, millions of Americans aren't buying.

Here an explanation in case you missed this in the thread. I love this from a scientist I respect and have total faith in, explains it best;

"Climate change is a false premise for regulating or taxing carbon dioxide emissions. Nature converts CO2 to calcite (limestone). Climate change may or may not be occurring, but is is surely NOT caused by human fossil fuels use. Changes in temperature cause changes in ambient CO2, with an estimated 800 year time lag.

Others have shown the likely causes of climate change, and they DO NOT include human use of fossil fuels. There is no empirical evidence that fossil fuels use affects climate. Likely and well-documented causes include sunspot cycles, earth/sun orbital changes, cosmic ray effects on clouds and tectonic plate activity. The further point here is that earth naturally recycles all carbon dioxide.

Here’s why. Fossil fuels emit only 3% of total CO2 emissions. 95% comes from rotting vegetation. All the ambient CO2 in the atmosphere is promptly converted in the oceans to calcite (limestone) and other carbonates, mostly through biological paths. CO2 + CaO => CaCO3 (exothermic). The conversion rate increases with increasing CO2 partial pressure. A dynamic equilibrium-seeking mechanism.

99.84% of all carbon on earth is already sequestered as sediments in the lithosphere. The lithosphere is a massive hungry carbon sink that converts ambient CO2 to carbonate almost as soon as it is emitted. All living or dead organic matter (plants, animals, microbes etc. amount to only 0.00033% of the total carbon mass on earth. Ambient CO2 is only 0.00255%.

Full implementation of the Paris Treaty is now estimated to cost $50 trillion to $100 trillion by 2030–$6,667-$13,333 per human being. Nearly two-thirds of humanity’s cumulative savings over history. And will not affect climate at all."

 

Yes professor scientist do
"have the accumulated totality of information, don't pretend to have it all figured out" as you say but guess what Einstien so do the scientist I trust in. They too are "rational truth seekin professionals" as you say. Calling me a "blustering blowhard" and "silly amatuer" wont change the fact that you are wrong just as history has shown you climate doomsdayer are always wrong. Your man made climate change argument (which used to be called global warming until the leftist realized the earth was not cooperating with their agenda) is falling apart so you resort to childish insults.

"DUCK SEASON"!