View Single Post
Old 10-23-2018, 11:29 PM   #3418 (permalink)
niky
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philippines
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 1,739
Thanked 589 Times in 401 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
The US by far puts the most money and man power into the UN and then they try to screw us every way possible.

China is being ignored.
Maybe some one can find a report of where the UN asks china for a ludicrous amount of money to fix their global warming?
I think that would be like trying to find cheap solar power.
The US puts money and manpower into the UN to protect its interests.

UN rules apply to all. As long as one of the big eight in the Security Council doesn't object. (The US uses that seat to protect Israel, for example)

China is not being ignored. Again: I've been paying attention to these issues for decades, and China used to chafe at climate agreements.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...nge-mark-lynas

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hagen-document

Now it's clamping down on itself.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15756235

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/poli...nese-polluters

Because China in 2011 was where the US was in the 70's... choking to death on its own pollution. Now it's pulling back. No pull back is instant. It takes years to set change in motion. But it's doing it. Increases in *gross* emissions will continue as population and productivity grow, but China has been working on lowering the rise.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-o...-gas-emissions

Whether they'll hit their targets or not (maybe not) and whether you trust them or not (eh... who does?), China has been doing a bit more than paying lip service to emissions.

Again, again... been listening to the left complain for decades that climate legislation is a capitalist conspiracy to keep the proletariat poor. So again (again again), mildly amused that the right is now taking the same position. Only this time it's a socialist conspiracy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
I know it's not a scientific paper.
It's a sign of the times. Because you or Neil maybe both have insisted that the global cooling scare was limited to one or 2 out of context magazine articles.
Well it kind of looks like people were writing books about it too.
Larry Niven wrote about a new Ice Age in "Fallen Angels" in 1991, taking potshots at climate scientists and the idea of global warming. (albeit in a rather tongue in cheek manner. I do like the way they burned down Detroit to create a heat island greenhouse to stave off the harsh winter. ).

"2012" froze New York.

What pop culture puts out has nothing to do with scientific consensus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Oh so now that it's exposed it's not a hoax.
Whut?

Again, pop culture =/= scientific consensus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
I saw an article by the AP calming there is an ipcc report saying that global warming may pause for up to 11 years.
I thought that was kind of odd, with all the CO2 china is pumping out.
Cite the exact article, please.

Journalists are often not scientists. And the headlines do not always reflect the whole truth or even the flavor of the truth.

https://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-gl...ming-pause.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
I've been learning about ringing Gauge Blocks. Northern societies had an advantage in that they could put steel stock in ice caves overwinter and do finer precision machine work.
That's interesting. Gotta look that up.

Easier to store food, as well. Though the ancient Persians found a way:

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2017/...-refrigerator/

(given, the dry climate and cold winters helped, also, it's a fascinating concept.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
Velikovsky did nothing wrong. ...at least according to Electric Universe theory.
He's a good example of confirmation bias... looking for data to prove his ideas right rather than basing his ideas on a thorough reading of the data. Some of the dates don't line up with his theories.

Gotta admit, though, he was an awesome researcher. And it's still a fascinating read.

Last edited by niky; 10-23-2018 at 11:37 PM..
 
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to niky For This Useful Post:
aerohead (10-24-2018), NeilBlanchard (10-24-2018)