The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[litesong]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Just wanted to share that,all the quanta I've seen for atmospheric Methane has been reported in parts-per-billion-by volume (ppbv)

Yeah, you noticed too, that russian reports of sky-high methane quantities are increasing so much, that reports can be made "per millions", now.

[freebeard]

Why would you let UN bureaucrats filter your science?

sciencedirect.com:Toward a myth-free geodynamic history of Earth and its neighbors
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...12825219302636

Disclaimer: I've only read the abstract and introduction. Wherein they weave a tale about science being rejected by major journals.

My title is adapted from “The persistent myth of crustal growth” by Richard L. Armstrong (1991, published posthumously2). Armstrong recognized that the then (and now) dominant view of Earth as having a mostly unfractionated mantle “is a myth dating from the 19th century and was established as geochemical dogma in the 1950s and 1960s.” He provides a detailed account of the history of the concept and recognized as spurious the geochemical assumptions cited in its support.
.... The popular view in North America and many other places, then and for almost 20 years more, was that such motion was impossible and the evidence was false. A 1962 manuscript by Canadian geophysicist L.W. Morley, the first to correctly interpret the magnetic lineations of oceanic crust as resulting from sea-floor spreading during alternating periods of normal and reversed geomagnetic polarity, was rejected by both Journal of Geophysical Research and Nature. Morley's insight was the key to plate tectonics, but others were credited with its discovery. In the same era G.J.F. MacDonald received major awards for his mathematical proof, based on wrong assumptions of mechanism and Earth's physical properties, that motion of the continents was impossible. Plate tectonics has now been accepted across the board.

I do recommend scanning the Abstract. It starts out

Several defective assumptions have hindered understanding the evolution of Earth and its nearest neighbors. These include the claim that the Lu-Hf and Sm-Nd isotope systems can uniquely define oceanic rocks, acceptance of the “CHondritic Uniform Reservoir” (CHUR) model and a steadily depleting but fertile mantle, and belief that Proterozoic rocks exhibit features resembling those of Phanerozoic plate tectonics. Earth's Archean was the era of internally mobile crust. In the period ~4.0–2.5 b.y. tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) crust formed by hydrous partial melting of a mafic protocrust leaving dense, depleted, garnet-rich residue. This delaminated and sank to at least 200 km beginning top-down re-enrichment of the mantle. The remaining stabilized TTG crust was then directly underlain by primordial low-density dunitic shallow mantle. Archean crust is granite and greenstone with no modern analogue. During the Proterozoic basins of volcanic and terrigenous sedimentary rocks formed on and between Archean shields. Where these basins thickened to ~40 km their deep regions partly melted by their own radioactivity and they were “inverted” by materials rich in highly evolved hydrous granites rising to mid-crustal level. This hydrous melting was enabled by a bombardment of icy bolides. Proterozoic dynamics were driven by vertical variations in density, reflect primarily the deposition and collapse of basins, and involved small horizontal motions only. Proterozoic paleomagnetic data cast doubt on the existence of a strong dipolar magnetic field at that time and there is no compelling evidence for Phanerozoic-like plate tectonics. Only near the end of the Proterozoic did downward recycling of fusible components enable a weak asthenosphere to develop over which lithospheric plates could slide. The Phanerozoic is the era of plate tectonics....

That's half of a paragraph!

[litesong]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Why would you let UN bureaucrats filter your science?

Why do you let exxon CEO boardroom propagandists make up "sigh--ants", that you repeat?

[freebeard]

Not because Exxon no longer exists.

Why do you assert that sciencedirect.com is in some boardroom's pocket. The parent is Elsevier. If you scan the wiki page you'll see plenty of drama around academic publishing vs money, but I don't see any connect to the little bubble you inhabit.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I had to look up DDG/?q=Chris+Martenson. That excerpt sounded like straight-up Bucky Fuller. except in lucid English.

I posted this last year but will put it up again. Chris Martenson's video lecture series that also opens our eyes to the systems relationships of Energy/ Economy/ Human wellbeing.
.
https://www.peakprosperity.com/crashcourse/
.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by litesong

Why do you let exxon CEO boardroom propagandists make up "sigh--ants", that you repeat?

Originally Posted by freebeard

Not because Exxon......no longer exists.

Ah, freebeard thinks changing the name from exxon to exxonmobil means the history of exxon no longer is true & doesn't reflect its present propaganda. freebeard twists itself so much, that its beard has worked.... free from its face.

[freebeard]

So now you're up-to-date on the merger.

What part of "Not because..." did you not understand?

You're doing better, no malapropisms. 'Itself' is still offensive though. Not that I take offense.

[freebeard]

I'm going to miss the Climate Consensus thread. [sniff] But four years is a pretty good run.

Originally Posted by they who shan't be named

03:55 to recognize good science and while
03:58 toxic chemical pollution and
04:00 deforestation both need to stop co2 is
04:04 plant food the UN NASA Princeton Yale
04:08 and Harvard are all singing different
04:09 climate tunes now and the media isn't
04:12 speaking a word of it

[litesong]

Originally Posted by freebeard

1)So now you're up-to-date on the merger.

What part of "Not because..." did you not understand?

You're doing better, no malapropisms. 'Itself' is still offensive though. Not that I take offense.

The merger of exxon & mobil means their position on AGW is the same.

I care not to understand u.

Good you are offended by "itself". I'll continue to use it.... I mean "itself".

[freebeard]

I care not to understand u.

Good you are offended by "itself".

Do you have any self-awareness at all?

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:

Robert Burns 1786
Back to ignoring now.