Paper; Global Warming "The Biggest Science Scandal Ever"

CharminTide said:

Completely serious.

China, once the world's biggest polluter, is now the world's largest backer of green energy

Click to expand...

To change that, we have to get the infrastructure around electric vehicles up to speed — and it is going to be a big job, Keith says. “We need charging of electric vehicles to be as easy as driving a gasoline vehicle today. That means building the actual charging stations themselves, and then having an electricity grid that can support this additional demand for electricity. If we want fast charging, that means we need to provide a lot of electricity, often in locations where the grid may not necessarily be built for it today. It also means having mechanics who know how to fix electric vehicles — building out the whole ecosystem is critical and that is going to take a long time.”

Click to expand...

Keith says that electric vehicles are a step in the right direction — they give off no emissions, so cities themselves will be cleaner. But he also points out that the energy we are using to charge our electric vehicles matter. If consumers are recharging their vehicles with coal or natural gas, the plants that provide that energy are still giving off emissions, it is just happening outside of cities. “Electric vehicles help, but in the long run, electric vehicles need clean electricity in order to maximize their environmental benefits.”

Click to expand...

cuda.1973 said:

Electric cars.................the salvation on mankind...............

Or not:

http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/ar...er&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=electriccar



Oh, I thought it was supposed to be easy......just plug it into the outlet..............</sarcasm>




Really? Try telling that to a greenie.

"Oh, but we will just use solar!"

Ask them how much energy it takes to make one of those things. And how long they last.

Crickets.

"Then we will go to wind!"

So the other kook environmentalists go ballistic, when all the birds get hacked to bits.

The green revolution: still looking for the free lunch. I bet they even want "free electricity" for recharging.

"Right! Tax the rich! Make them pay for it." :biggrin2:

Click to expand...

CharminTide said:

"I'll be dead before any of the truly bad consequences are realized, so what do I care about slowing the rate of global warming?" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You have no idea what we will be able to do about it in the future.

Click to expand...

CharminTide said:

They realize that's where the profit will be in the near future, and we're actively handing that to them.

Click to expand...

CharminTide said:

You have no idea what we will be able to do about it in the future.

Click to expand...

CharminTide said:

China is actually one of the world's leaders in the green revolution, and they are among the countries most eager to embrace clean energy. They realize that's where the profit will be in the near future, and we're actively handing that to them.

Click to expand...

Earth’s 2016 surface temperatures were the warmest since modern recordkeeping began in 1880, according to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Globally-averaged temperatures in 2016 were 1.78 degrees Fahrenheit (0.99 degrees Celsius) warmer than the mid-20th century mean. This makes 2016 the third year in a row to set a new record for global average surface temperatures.

The 2016 temperatures continue a long-term warming trend, according to analyses by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. NOAA scientists concur with the finding that 2016 was the warmest year on record based on separate, independent analyses of the data.

Because weather station locations and measurement practices change over time, there are uncertainties in the interpretation of specific year-to-year global mean temperature differences. However, even taking this into account, NASA estimates 2016 was the warmest year with greater than 95 percent certainty.

“2016 is remarkably the third record year in a row in this series,” said GISS Director Gavin Schmidt. “We don’t expect record years every year, but the ongoing long-term warming trend is clear.”

Click to expand...

CajunCrimson said:

And yes, lobbies slow down certain types of progress, by building up worse solutions through tax breaks, and other forms of gubbament interference and waste.

Click to expand...

cuda.1973 said:

And in a year or two, NOAA will issue revised temp data, that will show it wasn't the highest on record.

They always do, but it never gets covered.

Click to expand...

Typical of most such temperature series, it zigzags up and down while showing two rising trends: the first peaks about 1200 AD and corresponds with a period known as the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), while the second peaks in 1980 and then shows decline. ...

There are, however, multiple lines of evidence indicating it was about a degree warmer across Europe during the MWP – corresponding with the 1200 AD rise in our Northern Hemisphere composite. In fact, there are oodles of published technical papers based on proxy records that provide a relatively warm temperature profile for this period.

Click to expand...

Anyway, Marohasy's study will be ignored completely. But if it cannot be, just like the Catholic church did to Copernicus, the modern scientific community will launch an anti-science jihad against this non-believing apostate who dared question The Faith.

Click to expand...

cuda.1973 said:

An inconvenient truth: new study claims planet was warmer in medieval times

"Holy denier, Batman!"

From the study (which appears at a site that requires a subscription, so this is taken from the linked article):



And the writer throws this one in, just to rub it into ManBearPig's face:



(Because ManBearPig is the foremost climatology expert. And documented prevaricator, but, again, I digress.)

Or, you could ask Judith Curry. I'm sure she has lots of glowing things to say about her former colleagues turned attackers. Because they believe in science, and stuff, don'tcha know.

Click to expand...

Step 1. Individuals and groups evolved a bias to maximize fitness by maximizing power, which requires over-reproduction and/or over-consumption of natural resources (overshoot), whenever systemic constraints allow it. Differential power generation and accumulation result in a hierarchical group structure.

Step 2. Energy is always limited, and overshoot eventually leads to decreasing power available to some members of the group, with lower-ranking members suffering first.

Step 3. Diminishing power availability creates divisive subgroups within the original group. Low-rank members will form subgroups and coalitions to demand a greater share of power from higher-ranking individuals, who will resist by forming their own coalitions to maintain power.

Step 4. Violent social strife eventually occurs among subgroups who demand a greater share of the remaining power.

Step 5. The weakest subgroups (high or low rank) are either forced to disperse to a new territory, are killed, enslaved, or imprisoned.

Step 6. Go back to step 1.

Click to expand...

92tide said:

i could be wrong, but the fact that john nolte is a hack combined with the copernicus non-sense in the lead in, make me think this will be like every other "omg, this study totes proves climate change is a hoax" that pops up here every few months.

Click to expand...