RE: The Global Warming Hoax
Hi Alex,
first of all I am grateful that we can have a respectful and open discussion here.
You are right, everything should be questioned and constantly checked.
But the basics of thermodynamics and the behavior of radiation with different wavelength crossing greenhouse gases is a very very clear thing that is 100% scientific basic knowledge.
If this would not work as described by science the earth would be as cold as the moon an inhabitable.
Again, it is all very clearly described here: https://skepticalscience.com/
And where I have to say I am getting angry is citing Gregg Braden here. I mean this guy.. I just made the effort and watched the video... his charts are close to outright scam...
It is again described here: https://skepticalscience.com/ in the Q+A section, just browse the site.
Just randomly referring to this medieval ages chart: What he did: He selected a very short period of time (since 0 ) and he ended it in the 1930s... If he would have added temperatures until 2017 we are already at +1 degree... so even in his crappy chart it would be literally off the charts... and even in a very steep curve...
I do not know where you took the wrong corner... (at least IMHO) but this might help you to get the science base back in your global warming thoughts. https://skepticalscience.com/
i WILL read from that website.. forsure.. i already had a little look
its been a VERY long two day i must tell you, mostly on facebook so i am running out of steem now (excuse the pun)...
Gregg is not a scam artist so far as i know.. and presenting data is incredibly easy to do badly.. either intentionally or not..
the MAIN take home message from that video though was not really about the least 50 years but more about the last 500,000 years.. which is that CO2 has 'traditionally' always lagged temperature rise by around 1000 years,, and has never preceeded it.. So the last 50 years is not really relevant to this.. His other main point was that the sun really does direct and dictate our climate..
SO just want to make sure that much is clear..
i AM VERY HAPPY to be wrong mate.. the main problem for me is that i cannot take anyone seriously who proposed compensation without reduction. To me climate change goes hand in hand with Sustainability.. and whilst i see NO efforts in the direction of sustianability and all this focus on compensation i will continue to be very skeptical. Also, i really dont like how the third world and developing countries have to pay through the teeth for this whilst they had almost nothing to do with the problem .. oh man, the list goes on..
anyways,, im VERY tired now, and fully appreciated your calm tone and civilised manner! as i say im very happy to be wrong, and until very recently have preached the global warming story for 17 years!! xx
as you are tired I will give you the shortcut: https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
in one sentence: he is completely wrong again.. and this is mainly due to the fact that climate science is not simple at all.. and he "forgot" some major facts...
but your response is very interesting and in one hint bang on:
This whole idea of compensation and carbon credits/trading was set up with good intentions but converted to a money machine and at the end did not bring the desired effects.. at least for those who did not just want to make money with it.
I had very good insights into this complex already since the early 2000's and for me it was clear from the beginning, that this would definitely not be the best solution. Add to that criminal behavior of man and you end up with a pretty bad leaking ship.
As long as the free or liberal market is the foundation for our economic system the only thing that really would work is a global carbon tax.
But just imaging proposing a global carbon tax (with a high amount that really has a regulating function) to the US, China and India... here you go...
And for course people who with or without that tax voluntarily tune down their carbon footprint.
And: "if it really was so bad the global elites would take strong action" is not an argument at all as egomaniac stupidity is equally distributed between the rich and poor, literate and non literate, clever and stupid.
As a person that has very high ethical standards it is amazing time and time again for how little money some are willing to sell their soul.