Deniers, explained.

[Buzz]

Please read the posts before you attack.

[h=4]"The continent warmed from 1982-1998, but a cooling trend since 1998 has nearly wiped out all the previous warming.[/h][h=4]Overall, there has been no significant temperature change in North America since 1982."[/h]

Yes... I read it.

Now, why is Kenneth Richard ignoring the facts and lying about there being cooling since 1998? And what about the lie that there is no significant warming since 1982? This is a lie even without considering the last 5 years.

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes.

I understand some denier blog told you this paper from last year was important.

Not sure why your handlers at WUWT want you to spam it every other post tho.

The quoted text from the abstract refutes your earlier post.

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes... I read it.

Now, why is Kenneth Richard ignoring the facts and lying about there being cooling since 1998? And what about the lie that there is no significant warming since 1982? This is a lie even without considering the last 5 years.

The text is self-explanatory. Warming 1982-1998 countered by cooling 1998-2014. Just as he said.

 

[Slavister]

The text is self-explanatory. Warming 1982-1998 countered by cooling 1998-2014. Just as he said.

And as usual, we are back to this...

:lamo :lamo

No that will not be "enough". But it's funny how you pretend there is a cooling trend in a graph clearly showing warming.

You can't first ignore 2019 because of El Nino but then ALSO fail to compare subsequent points (like 2020) in your pretend-trend to only the year that you ignored.

:screwy

Let's review...

Here is what's happening


View attachment 67288968


Can't everyone see this is cooling? Here is Jack Hays's proof applied to much of the last 150 years, using the same "logic"


View attachment 67288969

 

[Buzz]

The text is self-explanatory. Warming 1982-1998 countered by cooling 1998-2014. Just as he said.

There wasn't even enough cooling from 1998 to 2014 to counter all the warming from 1982 to 1998.

Kenneth Richards is lying and you are oblivious to reality.

 

[Jack Hays]

And as usual, we are back to this...

Your prejudice is your prison. I can't help you with that.

 

[Jack Hays]

There wasn't even enough cooling from 1998 to 2014 to counter all the warming from 1982 to 1998.

Kenneth Richards is lying and you are oblivious to reality.

You're not a careful reader.

". . . The continent warmed from 1982-1998, but a cooling trend since 1998 has nearly wiped out all the previous warming. . . ."

 

[Helix]

If we all wish really really hard, climate change will never have happened. The problem is that the sciency people refuse to wish.

 

[longview]

If we all wish really really hard, climate change will never have happened. The problem is that the sciency people refuse to wish.

We do not need to put in that much effort!
The climate change that has happened so for, is mostly for the better.
The nature of the warming is that more land become arable, while not reducing arable land in other places.
The sea level is raising, but the rate of the raise, does not seen to be affected by the warming.
And innovative people are always looking for ways to do something more efficiency.
Simple stuff like LED light bulbs, high efficiency air conditioners, and better insulation,
have greatly reduced CO2 emissions in many first world countries.
This trend will continue, and will ease the transition of the 3rd world into an energy economy.
These things are and will continue to happen, without any additional effort, because people will always
choose a path that saves them money!

 

[Helix]

We do not need to put in that much effort!
The climate change that has happened so for, is mostly for the better.
The nature of the warming is that more land become arable, while not reducing arable land in other places.
The sea level is raising, but the rate of the raise, does not seen to be affected by the warming.
And innovative people are always looking for ways to do something more efficiency.
Simple stuff like LED light bulbs, high efficiency air conditioners, and better insulation,
have greatly reduced CO2 emissions in many first world countries.
This trend will continue, and will ease the transition of the 3rd world into an energy economy.
These things are and will continue to happen, without any additional effort, because people will always
choose a path that saves them money!

lots of money will be saved when our major coastal cities are underwater. Maybe we can grow gills like Kevin Costner and dive for treasure!

 

[longview]

lots of money will be saved when our major coastal cities are underwater. Maybe we can grow gills like Kevin Costner and dive for treasure!

Please consider that the sea level will continue to rise, until it begins to fall, and Humans can do nothing about that!
Tide gauges on both sides of the Atlantic, show a fairly stable trend, back into the nineteenth century.
Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides & Currents

Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides & Currents

 

[Helix]

Please consider that the sea level will continue to rise, until it begins to fall, and Humans can do nothing about that!
Tide gauges on both sides of the Atlantic, show a fairly stable trend, back into the nineteenth century.
Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides & Currents

Sea Level Trends - NOAA Tides & Currents

Yep, we can't do anything. Might as well all get hummers, put straight pipes and truck testicles on them, rev it up and yell "hell yeah," and convert our homes to coal heat.

Yee haw

 

[longview]

Yep, we can't do anything. Might as well all get hummers, put straight pipes and truck testicle on them, rev it up and yell "hell yeah," and convert our homes to coal heat.

Yee haw

Hyperbole aside, we are already doing plenty. and the economics will continue to work as they already have.
At some point, supply and demand, will cause oil to stop being used for transport fuel, why, because the man made fuel will be less expensive
on it's own. Oil supplies are currently high, and prices are low, but this combination, has greatly harmed the companies
that caused the oversupply.
Fracking pioneer Chesapeake Energy is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy - CNN
The companies that paid a premium to frack their wells, are now paying for that added overhead cost.
In some cases, they loose money with each barrel pumped.
At some point the supply will run down, and the price will increase.

 

[Helix]

Hyperbole aside, we are already doing plenty. and the economics will continue to work as they already have.
At some point, supply and demand, will cause oil to stop being used for transport fuel, why, because the man made fuel will be less expensive
on it's own. Oil supplies are currently high, and prices are low, but this combination, has greatly harmed the companies
that caused the oversupply.
Fracking pioneer Chesapeake Energy is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy - CNN
The companies that paid a premium to frack their wells, are now paying for that added overhead cost.
In some cases, they loose money with each barrel pumped.
At some point the supply will run down, and the price will increase.

Alternatively, we could invest in renewable infrastructure and hire displaced workers to build it. They did that near my town, and it was really good for the regional economy.

 

[longview]

Alternatively, we could invest in renewable infrastructure and hire displaced workers to build it. They did that near my town, and it was really good for the regional economy.

Who says that man made finished fuel products are not renewable infrastructure?
If we store surplus solar and wind energy as carbon neutral fuels, like gasoline, or jet fuel, it is just as renewable as anything else!
P.S. The existing refinery workers, can do the job, so no one is displaced to need rehiring.
What we really need is a national policy to govern how home generators are allowed to attach to the electrical grid.
The policy would have to include the cost of grid maintenance.

 

[Helix]

Who says that man made finished fuel products are not renewable infrastructure?
If we store surplus solar and wind energy as carbon neutral fuels, like gasoline, or jet fuel, it is just as renewable as anything else!
P.S. The existing refinery workers, can do the job, so no one is displaced to need rehiring.
What we really need is a national policy to govern how home generators are allowed to attach to the electrical grid.
The policy would have to include the cost of grid maintenance.

There's no need to go out of our way to spew more carbon into the atmosphere. We're moving away from that model.

 

[longview]

There's no need to go out of our way to spew more carbon into the atmosphere. We're moving away from that model.

You are not following, the man made fuel can be carbon neutral, the CO2 is simply recycled.
A gallon of gasoline takes about 4.5 pounds of carbon to produce, if that carbon is extracted from atmospheric CO2,
when the gasoline is burned, no net CO2 is added to the atmosphere.
In addition, the fuel is compatible with all the existing infrastructure and demands,
so we would not have to wait for all the cars in the world to transition to electric, and passenger jets could become CO2 neutral.

 

[Helix]

You are not following, the man made fuel can be carbon neutral, the CO2 is simply recycled.
A gallon of gasoline takes about 4.5 pounds of carbon to produce, if that carbon is extracted from atmospheric CO2,
when the gasoline is burned, no net CO2 is added to the atmosphere.
In addition, the fuel is compatible with all the existing infrastructure and demands,
so we would not have to wait for all the cars in the world to transition to electric, and passenger jets could become CO2 neutral.

We'll do a lot better to just move away from carbon based fuels. As the third world moves more towards having a sizable middle class, we'll be even more ****ed if they start burning more carbon.

 

[longview]

We'll do a lot better to just move away from carbon based fuels. As the third world moves more towards having a sizable middle class, we'll be even more ****ed if they start burning more carbon.

Why? In science we often time look at how nature deals with a problem.
Nature stores energy as hydrocarbons. Our bodies store energy as hydrocarbons.
What makes hydrocarbons a good energy storage device is the energy storage density.
Gasoline contains 33 Kwh per gallon, Even counting Carnot efficiencies, the best batteries are only about 20% of that.
Energy density - Wikipedia
(Gasoline W.h/kg 12,888.9, Lithium-ion battery W.h/kg 100.00–243.06)
If you look at all of our choices, the path of least resistance, is to make carbon neutral fuel.
It would solve several problems we have moving forward.

 

[Helix]

Why? In science we often time look at how nature deals with a problem.
Nature stores energy as hydrocarbons. Our bodies store energy as hydrocarbons.
What makes hydrocarbons a good energy storage device is the energy storage density.
Gasoline contains 33 Kwh per gallon, Even counting Carnot efficiencies, the best batteries are only about 20% of that.
Energy density - Wikipedia
(Gasoline W.h/kg 12,888.9, Lithium-ion battery W.h/kg 100.00–243.06)
If you look at all of our choices, the path of least resistance, is to make carbon neutral fuel.
It would solve several problems we have moving forward.

There's no need for our primary fuels to be carbon based.

 

[longview]

There's no need for our primary fuels to be carbon based.

Unless you have something with the same of higher energy density, it kind of is a very real need!
Short of a major technology breakthrough, it will be a long time before a passenger jet crosses the ocean on battery power.
Why should we switch out all the devices and all the infrastructure, when the same goal could be accomplished by
changing the source of our fuel?

 

[Helix]

Unless you have something with the same of higher energy density, it kind of is a very real need!
Short of a major technology breakthrough, it will be a long time before a passenger jet crosses the ocean on battery power.
Why should we switch out all the devices and all the infrastructure, when the same goal could be accomplished by
changing the source of our fuel?

because we're already in trouble. When the third world starts commuting in Buicks, that will be extra not good. It's past time to embrace a new model.

 

[longview]

because we're already in trouble. When the third world starts commuting in Buicks, that will be extra not good. It's past time to embrace a new model.

Who says we are in trouble? The people whose jobs are dependent on finding trouble?
What kind of trouble are we in? Crop yields are up, where the political stability allows, people are improving their lifestyle standards.
Even in the 2nd world countries, most people live better than the royalty from a few hundred years ago.
This enormous lifestyle improvement has been fueled by oil, but also by the energy density of fuels made from oil.
If we can do the same thing, without the new CO2 emissions, then why not, do so, until the next best things comes along.
Why throw away the one thing that has lifted humanity from the dirt, without a suitable replacement?

 

[Threegoofs]

Who says we are in trouble? The people whose jobs are dependent on finding trouble?
What kind of trouble are we in? Crop yields are up, where the political stability allows, people are improving their lifestyle standards.
Even in the 2nd world countries, most people live better than the royalty from a few hundred years ago.
This enormous lifestyle improvement has been fueled by oil, but also by the energy density of fuels made from oil.
If we can do the same thing, without the new CO2 emissions, then why not, do so, until the next best things comes along.
Why throw away the one thing that has lifted humanity from the dirt, without a suitable replacement?

Because your mythical ‘lets just make hydrocarbons out of atmospheric CO2’ isnt a real thing.

And yes, you will repost some press release you read five years ago on how its being worked on, and prattle on about $90 oil but you will miss the concept that you cant find any developments since then, because the idea is probably pretty unworkable

 

[Helix]

Who says we are in trouble? The people whose jobs are dependent on finding trouble?
What kind of trouble are we in? Crop yields are up, where the political stability allows, people are improving their lifestyle standards.
Even in the 2nd world countries, most people live better than the royalty from a few hundred years ago.
This enormous lifestyle improvement has been fueled by oil, but also by the energy density of fuels made from oil.
If we can do the same thing, without the new CO2 emissions, then why not, do so, until the next best things comes along.
Why throw away the one thing that has lifted humanity from the dirt, without a suitable replacement?

Most reputable scientists, and those who are less vulnerable to crackpot CT.