David Kreutzer:
In the week prior to the administration signing what should constitute aninternational climate treaty, one think tank, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, was subpoenaed for casting doubt on the agreement’s associated science of climate catastrophe.
As disturbing as such thuggery from state attorneys general would be in any case, the premise of the subpoena is faulty. The Competitive Enterprise Institute did not cast doubt on the dubious climate science. The actual data cast the doubt. The think tank and others have simply pointed out what the data show.
It looks like thoughtcrime has now moved from George Orwell’s novel “1984” to the twisted reality of our judicial system. Pointing out facts should never be a real crime.
The Heritage Foundation’s new Paris-bubble-popping science summary is also a case of letting the numbers tell a story. A story many never hear in the media-hyped spectacle that is international climate policy.
For instance, the chart above shows reconstructed average world temperature data for the past 500,000 years. Depending on the magnification and size of your monitor, each pencil dot would span something on the order of 1,000 years. The myriad 10-degree Celsius temperature flips all happened before man-made carbon dioxide could have had any impact—the final temperature spike started at the end of the last ice age.
Curt
Kreutzer works for the Hetirage Institute
They are also the paid mouthpiece for big tobacco
They will say anything for a price such as smoking doesn’t cause cancer
Or CO2 doesn’t cause climate change
Of course temps have changed 3 billion years ago the Earth’s temps were over 2000 degrees
The first leader of a major country to warn of climate change was the very conservative Maggie Thatcher in the 80s, not a liberal
Please note that graph Also correlates to the total CO2 in the atmosphere over time
Denying climate change is a loser for the GOP just as mist social issues are
The GOP has a tough year in 2016 why try to make it more difficult??
@John: What has made the climate cool and warm and cool and warm before coal plants? That’s the question, not who is or isn’t associated with “big tobacco”. Sheesh.
Here, Curt, let me provide the liberal response:
“Oh, yeah? Well, you’re a racist.”
Bill there has been many changes since the Earth was formed. Originally it was thought that the first temps of the Earth were about 3600F degrees
NOAA has a full page devoted to the many cycles that the Earth has gone through, including the part that CO2 has played both natural and man made CO2https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been
However that is all paleo history. Perhaps more important is “how has the tempreture been lately (last 11000 years)
well NOAA has a page for that and you can easily see that not only is it warmer now than at any time in the last 11000 years but that the temps are now increasing MUCH more rapidly than at any time in the past. It is this RATE OF CHANGE (dy/dx calculus) that is most worrisome https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what%E2%80%99s-hottest-earth-has-been-%E2%80%9Clately%E2%80%9D
There seems to be no other explanation available that was seen to be the cause of temp change in the past, no volcanic activity or orbital changes that caused past changes
The main mouth pieces for climate truthers and deniers are the same sources that were paid by the tobacco companies to deny that smoking causes cancer
Well John if you mean why was the Earth originally 3600degrees F and why did it cool? well if you had bothered to read the first link you would have seen, we ceased to be bombarded with huge meteorites
The other main forces that changed our temps were orbital, primarily changes in tilt. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/everything-you-need-to-know-about-earths-orbit-and-climate-cha
It is the tilt of the Earth that changes the amount of radiation that we receive from the Sun, not the distance. We in the Northern Hemishphere are actually closer to the Sun during our winter
Here is another rather simple explanation of things that can cause temp changes.
Please do not get too excited when you see that the strength of the Sun can cause a change in our temps. The Sun is now slightly weaker than in 1960 but of course our temps have gone up
http://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/climateChange/general/causes.html?src=topNav
Bill I must go to work now but if after reading those links I provided you still have questions aout what may be causing our temps to go up at THIS time or in the past I will happily provide some more links for you if you are unable to do so yourself
Bill I am unsure of how much high school level science you remember, however, you should also try to learn why the Sun’s radiation mostly ultraviolet can pass through the atmosphere ( with its increasing C02 levels easily but the infrared radiation leaving the Earth gets trapped by the same CO2
@john:
why choose ‘11000’, why not, oh say 150,000? Is that because it would not then be the hottest? Or may 350,000, then there would be two periods hotter. What were the coal miners mining 150,000 years ago? What was anyone mining 150,000 years ago? I’m going to speculate that the previous hot spells were NOT related to human activity. I’m also going to speculate that the current warm spell (not has hot as 150,000 years ago) is not related to humans either.
@john: No, I’m still struggling with why we have experienced temperature fluctuations throughout the history of the earth, yet now (even though warming stopped 14 years ago) mankind has the power to stop it. Also wondering how temperature increases on other planets in our solar system is possible without mankind’s dirty influence and, most importantly, if the science is so “settled”, why is it necessary to lie about the data?
@john:
Not true, of all of the 3 previous periods going above 0, this one is the ‘slowest’ moving. Why do you feel it is necessary to ‘make things up’ to try to prove a point. Don’t you realize more people are using solar now than in those 3 previous highs and this consumption of solar is causing the warming to be slower. Why not try to stick to the truth?
@john:
I guess you’re in the deniers category, denying that man has nothing to do with climate change. Let’s see, you said in 3
Oh, so the insinuation is that it must have been ‘man’ that did it. Damned coal powered power plants.
Well then let’s look at what caused that warming 150000 years ago and then check and see if that same activity is being observed now shall we? Volcanic activity ? Solar strength? Orbital tilting? ANYTHING unusual happening right now that might precipitate this the quickest temp upswing that we know about ?
Well, there is that change in CO2
Why do YOU think the temps are climbing if not for CO2
Weren’t green house gases also high during past high temp times?
@John:
Definitely not CO2, it’s the same as it has been forever. Were green house gases high during past high temps? Damned coal miners. If you look at this graph http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html You’ll see that rises in CO2 came along at the same period as those 3 peaks in the graph above. But what has to be explained is what happened to all the humans that were mining coal 300,000 years ago that caused that CO 2 spike and 150000 years ago? If you can correlate those CO2 spikes to human activities the we can correlate this one to the same reason. So let’s have it, what were humans doing 300K years ago that caused a CO2 spike?
Don’t you ever think of things like that on your own? Does someone always have to point these things out to Dimocrats? Can’t they think for themselves?
Why would you possible lychnis that solar panels would cause a slower warming ? Don’t you know anything about the law of conservation of energy ?please tell me what percent of the earth’ surface is now covered by solar panels??
Are you saying that the same natural conditions that caused spikes in greenhouse gases are the same reasons that they are happening now ? But not say 309 years ago?
So let me get this straight…
If temps are truly rising faster than ever before, why did the AGW government cultists decide to change their propaganda from “global warming” to “climate change”?
Scientists and organizatioms who question the veracity of AGW alarmists are not to be trusted of believed because they allegedly are getting money from oil and coal companies….but the AGW alarmists (who have been caught multiple times falsifying data, and been egregiously wrong in dire predictions) are pure as the driven snow as they pump out their government bureaucratic-financed grants.
And how is it that the same ecomarxist cultists claimed during the 1970s “Ice age coming” scare the exact same need for government control of energy resources as the AGW crowd is agitating for to “stop” alleged global warming?
Sorry, but the track record of the UN is so pathetically bad that I am with team Captain America on this. The IPCC is a nothing but a pseudoscientific veneer for the totalitarian nature of UN bureaucrats.
Pete, Bill, Redteam, You can not argue with a rock! A rock has no ability to reason.
@John:
That’s one of the easiest problems ever, John. Geez
Earth Surface – Area not covered by panels= area covered by panels.
Es – Anc = Ac
See how easy.
Yes, the spikes today and everything in the past are all for the same reason. Hint: it was not coal miners or coal fired power plants. You need to get under one of your solar panels out of the sun. It’s got you hallucinating about those miners back 350,000 years ago.
A rock? where? Oh, I got it…….
@Randy: Randy, did you know that John drives a solar powered truck? In New York city amongst the skyscrapers.
@John: Hey John, if Coal mining is bad for the environment, is mining for Lithium to make batteries for electric cars also bad for the environment?
@Randy:
Yet enough rocks will sink us all.