Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by XXXIII

Warmist, please answer me this...
So, We went from 300 ppm to 400 ppm co2 in the atmosphere.
That's a delta of 100ppm, which is the equivalent of 1/100 of 1%, and because of this the climate goes to hell???
This just seems like a negligible change

Welcome to CF.

A delta from 300 ppm to 400 ppm is 400/300 or about a 33% increase. Doesn't seem negligable.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by fryewe

Those Texans are all bitter clingers...they cling to their religion and thermometers, I guess...

Watch: NASA’s chief climate scientist Gavin Schmidt claims Texans won’t listen to ‘liberal, Jewish atheist from NYC’ about ‘global warming’ | Climate Depot

Seriously??! NASA's chief climate scientist?!! Outrageous & also pathetic. Just more stereotyping, over-generalizations, condenscension, and overt political bias. And some believe executive branch agencies such as NASA & NOAA, to say nothing of IRS & Energy, haven't been politicized? No wonder Americans' trust in their govt. is at historic lows.

Public Trust in Government: 1958-2015 | Pew Research Center

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

...then how would John Cook make a living without all those Paypal donations?

Ha ha.

Can you prove John Cook "makes a living" from Skeptical Science? For that matter, can anyone show that Al Gore actually makes an income from his AGW advocacy?

Going below the belt is sort of counter to your portrayal of yourself as a genuine skeptic of the science.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by XXXIII

Warmist, please answer me this...
So, We went from 300 ppm to 400 ppm co2 in the atmosphere.
That's a delta of 100ppm, which is the equivalent of 1/100 of 1%, and because of this the climate goes to hell???
This just seems like a negligible change

But that's an actual increase of 33%. - (Shock, horror!)

Meanwhile the global average temperature (if there were such a thing and you could trust NOAA/GISS and their adjusted data to derive it) increased from an annual range of 285.15K-288.95K in the middle of the 20th Century to a range of 285.95K - 289.75K. That's more than 0.2% ! (more shock, horror!)

[fryewe]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Welcome to CF.

A delta from 300 ppm to 400 ppm is 400/300 or about a 33% increase. Doesn't seem negligable.

And a delta from 1 to 2 ppm would be a 100% increase...but it's neither the percentage nor the magnitude of the change nor the absolute value of CO2 concentration that's important.

The effect on temperature or climate, the magnitude of that effect, the consequent related effects and their magnitude, and whether those effects are net positive or negative to society, and whether the effects and their magnitudes are important enough to the society to make changes, and whether society is agreeable to the scale of the changes that are important.

And all arguments have to go through every one of those elements in order for society to agree to take itself back to pre-industrial levels of fossil fuel use. Without winning every one of those arguments, warmists will inevitably try to invoke the precautionary principle to jump to the solutions they want. And claim..."but, science!!!"

And in doing so, the they lose credibility of being really interested in the science.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Ha ha.
For that matter, can anyone show that Al Gore actually makes an income from his AGW advocacy?

Who's Getting the Big Speaker's Fees? - BusinessWeek

Al Gore



Claim to Fame: Vice-President, 1993-2001; former U.S. Senator
Fee: $100,000

With an Academy Award and a Nobel Prize under his belt, Al Gore has become a kind of Renaissance celebrity. Not surprisingly, Gore's global warming lecture is a big seller. The Smoking Gun, a Web site, nabbed a copy of the speaker's contract for a 2007 "Environmental Media Lecture," which revealed some interesting tidbits.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/washi...?id=24551590#2

Al Gore, $100,000-150,000: Since his time as Vice President and his famous run for president, Al Gore has made a name for himself as a strong opponent of global warming and an environmental activist. Gore has maintained his draw as a speaker because of this activism, and now routinely charges in the $100,000 range for speeches. Having an Oscar-winning film and a Nobel Peace Prize under his belt sure can’t hurt either.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Ha ha.

Can you prove John Cook "makes a living" from Skeptical Science? For that matter, can anyone show that Al Gore actually makes an income from his AGW advocacy?

Going below the belt is sort of counter to your portrayal of yourself as a genuine skeptic of the science.

You may be right, L-E. Maybe John Cook's Paypal donations only go towards website maintenance, or for paying his wife for the logo & design work? He has, after all, co-authored some textbooks, and "is the Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at The University of Queensland." Probably tough to have the time to make ends meet, however, when you are "currently completing a PhD in cognitive psychology, researching how people think about climate change." John Cook - The Global Change Institute - The University of Queensland, Australia.

Al Gore has been widely reported to have made at least $100M since he lost his bid for the presidency in 2000. You mean all of those speeches, movies, books, articles, and consultations about CC were pro bono? Or just maybe he was paid, but he donated all his fees, royalties, & revenues for carbon offsets? Given the size of his homes & how much he flies around in his private jet, he probably needs all the carbon credits he can get.

A "genuine" skeptic of the science? As opposed to a skeptic who's disingenuous about his skepticism?? Are you sure you're putting me into the correct "skeptic category," L-E? I mean, c'mon, this science stuff is hard enough to understand without mixing up the us vs. them thing.

[fryewe]

Originally Posted by StuM

Meanwhile the global average temperature (if there were such a thing and you could trust NOAA/GISS and their adjusted data to derive it) increased from an annual range of 285.15K-288.95K in the middle of the 20th Century to a range of 285.95K - 289.75K. That's more than 0.2% ! (more shock, horror!)

Thanks for the reminder that the absolute value of the "measured and averaged" temperature increase that is loudly proclaimed in the press and othr places is really just a probability distribution, and that the real value of the average temperature of Gaia could actually be lower than it was in the mid-20th century.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by StuM

Who's Getting the Big Speaker's Fees? - BusinessWeek

Al Gore



Claim to Fame: Vice-President, 1993-2001; former U.S. Senator
Fee: $100,000

With an Academy Award and a Nobel Prize under his belt, Al Gore has become a kind of Renaissance celebrity. Not surprisingly, Gore's global warming lecture is a big seller. The Smoking Gun, a Web site, nabbed a copy of the speaker's contract for a 2007 "Environmental Media Lecture," which revealed some interesting tidbits.


Washington's Highest (and Lowest) Speaking Fees - ABC News

Al Gore, $100,000-150,000: Since his time as Vice President and his famous run for president, Al Gore has made a name for himself as a strong opponent of global warming and an environmental activist. Gore has maintained his draw as a speaker because of this activism, and now routinely charges in the $100,000 range for speeches. Having an Oscar-winning film and a Nobel Peace Prize under his belt sure can’t hurt either.

While it is obvious we are warming, Al Gore is not credible and he did it to himself.

Al Gore, November 22, 2010, AP Wire:

"One of the reasons I made that mistake [over ethanol] is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for president" in 2000.

This article, via MSN and Reuters, pretty well sums it up.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40317079...-environment/#
Our former Vice President comes clean, admits he supported ethanol solely to get votes, and that it was based upon no science.

• The direct subsidies totaled 7.7 Billions dollars.
• Food prices have been placed in turmoil. Probably the worst public policy to come out of Washington in a decade. Independent United Nations expert stated US ethanol policy was a "crime against humanity." http://www.livescience.com/environme...uel-crime.html
• That there is no net benefit to the environment; the process of raising corn, distilling, and bring the ethanol to market is not zero impact.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Al Gore has been widely reported to have made at least $100M since he lost his bid for the presidency in 2000. You mean all of those speeches, movies, books, articles, and consultations about CC were pro bono?

Sitting on the boards of Google and Apple has not hurt his income. Your Google searches enrich Gore. So does your iPad, iPhone,etc..

Selling Current TV for $500,000,000 helped as well. He shared that with other partners.

Of course, he was born into wealth.

[SV THIRD DAY]

What CO2 belching Country did our buddy Al sell current TV to?.....ha ha ha....Mr green...as in the color or money!

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

How do you account for TOBS?

Well, you should take that up with NOAA. You have definitive evidence of a world wide conspiracy.

That temperature I listed was what I had at that moment .
If I were to tell NOAA my readings they would throw them out as being a local anomoly . It doesn't fit with their official readings. However that was warmer than the 9 am reading reported at JBLM.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Sitting on the boards of Google and Apple has not hurt his income. Your Google searches enrich Gore. So does your iPad, iPhone,etc..

Selling Current TV for $500,000,000 helped as well. He shared that with other partners.

Of course, he was born into wealth.

All correct no doubt, but it sounds like you are avoiding similar disclosures of the money he's made from being a sought after spokesman & pundit on behalf of the AGW cause. Or is $100,000/speech plus $1,000/day per diems plus 1st class air travel, lodging & expenses inconsequential? But he insisted on "sedans" rather than "SUV's" for ground travel when attending paid events, and "hybrids" whenever possible. It would be hard to make stuff like this up.

He sold Current TV to Al Jazeera, as Third Day intimated. I suppose they were the highest bidder, so why not?

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, XXXIII.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by thinwater

This article, via MSN and Reuters, pretty well sums it up.
Al Gore's mea culpa for corn ethanol support - US news - Environment | NBC News
Our former Vice President comes clean, admits he supported ethanol solely to get votes, and that it was based upon no science.

• The direct subsidies totaled 7.7 Billions dollars.
• Food prices have been placed in turmoil. Probably the worst public policy to come out of Washington in a decade. Independent United Nations expert stated US ethanol policy was a "crime against humanity." UN Expert Calls Biofuel 'Crime Against Humanity'
• That there is no net benefit to the environment; the process of raising corn, distilling, and bring the ethanol to market is not zero impact.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

To be fair... given the formal dance that is the US election cycle, both parties sing the praises of ethanol subsidies when the national spotlight is on the corn belt. Like, everybody. Let's see a currently sitting or campaigning US politician make the same admission that Gore has.

Originally Posted by Exile

All correct no doubt, but it sounds like [Jackdale is]avoiding similar disclosures of the money he's made from being a sought after spokesman & pundit on behalf of the AGW cause. Or is $100,000/speech plus $1,000/day per diems plus 1st class air travel, lodging & expenses inconsequential? But he insisted on "sedans" rather than "SUV's" for ground travel when attending paid events, and "hybrids" whenever possible. It would be hard to make stuff like this up.

Any ex-VP is going to be paid big bucks, to talk about anything. Gore isn't forcing his AGW roadshow down people's throats; people are requesting it, and willing to pay those fees. What does that tell you?

Gore is a conventionally rich ex-politician championing and supporting the cause of AGW. I guess every fake conspiracy requires a visible target to hiss at.

He sold Current TV to Al Jazeera, as Third Day intimated. I suppose they were the highest bidder, so why not?

Current TV was probably too classy for Faux News.