Global fry-up.

Climate change: 'Exceptionally hot' 2020 concludes warmest decade

_116516907_2020_temp_anomalies_map_640-nc.png


_116517415_eeeb61a5-9fec-4ca3-b3bc-24de0e65f865.jpg


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-55663544


UN: World facing ‘catastrophic’ temperature rise this century
Global temperatures in 2020 were among the highest on record and rivalled 2016 as the hottest year ever.


2020-12-09T135847Z_355743915_RC2PJK9QI0YN_RTRMADP_3_CLIMATE-CHANGE-ICEBERG.jpg


The world is on course for a “catastrophic” temperature rise this century, the United Nations has warned.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/14/world-facing-catastrophic-temperature-rises-un
 
Let's assume for discussion that the whole anthropogenic CO2 emissions is the problem here...

CO2.jpg


main.png


CO2-for-Forbes.png


Which nation(s) are the problem here?
Why should the US rejoin the Paris Climate Accords?

Now, if we go to the other side of the coin and look at those that are screaming the loudest for more CO2 reduction....

emissions.jpg


20191126_greenhouse_gas_emittersv3.1574783329055.png


What we find is some very disingenuous lying going on...
 
The blame for the slow reaction can be laid squarely at the feet of the likes of the Brit maggot and other self-serving eco-criminals . A legal punishment for them has not yet been devised- but it will come.

Define 'climate breakdown'. Define 'climate change'. Define 'global warming'. Define how 'extreme weather' has anything to do with any of these undefined buzzwords. How are you going to make a crime out of something you can't even define?
 
Climate change: 'Exceptionally hot' 2020 concludes warmest decade
,,,deleted propaganda images...
UN: World facing ‘catastrophic’ temperature rise this century
Global temperatures in 2020 were among the highest on record and rivalled 2016 as the hottest year ever.


The world is on course for a “catastrophic” temperature rise this century, the United Nations has warned.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. You are still denying statistical math.
 
Let's assume for discussion that the whole anthropogenic CO2 emissions is the problem here...

Which nation(s) are the problem here?
Why should the US rejoin the Paris Climate Accords?

Now, if we go to the other side of the coin and look at those that are screaming the loudest for more CO2 reduction....

What we find is some very disingenuous lying going on...

Why assume something that isn't possible in physics?

No gas or vapor can warm the Earth. You can't create energy out of nothing.
No gas or vapor can prevent energy from being absorbed by the Earth or being radiated by the Earth. You can't reduce entropy in any system.
No gas or vapor prevents matter from radiating light due to thermal energy. You can't ignore the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Most of the light from the Sun is infrared light. It is only infrared light (and lower frequencies) that is converted to thermal energy. Visible light does not convert to thermal energy upon absorption. It converts to chemical energy (i.e. photosynthesis).

CO2 does absorb some frequencies of infrared light. It does absorb some of the energy from the Sun, but not a huge amount. Most is absorbed by the surface and ocean water. Some is absorbed by clouds.

The surface is warmer than CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is incapable of warming the surface. You cannot heat a warmer object with a colder one.

The surface does heat CO2 in the atmosphere by radiant heating. The surface is cooled by this process, just as it is when heating the atmosphere by conduction.

ALL matter converts thermal energy to electromagnetic energy (light). This is according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is in the form of light that all matter, including CO2, radiates energy into space.

You cannot trap heat.
You cannot trap light.
You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

No need to worry about CO2. This naturally occurring gas in the atmosphere is vital to plant life. It has absolutely NO capability to warm the Earth.

The Church of Global Warming is a fundamentalist style religion that denies science and mathematics. Moon is a devout believer in this religion.
 
.
Useful rule of thumb, pretty much anything climate related emanating from the Guardian, NYT, Daily Kos or from Moonshi'ite is going to be hysterical bullshit, you can take that to the bank!

No, Roy Spencer Is Not A Climate “Denier”
Share


Yesterday, the New York Times and other media outlets repeated the falsehood that I am a climate “denier”.

I usually ignore such potentially libelous statements, otherwise I’d be defending myself every week.

So, to set the record straight, here’s what I believe… I’ll let you decide whether I’m a climate “denier”.

I believe the climate system has warmed (we produce one of the global datasets that shows just that, which is widely used in the climate community), and that CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning contributes to that warming. I’ve said this for many years.

• I believe future warming from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would be somewhere in the range of 1.5 to 2 deg. C, which is actually within the range of expected warming the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has advanced for 30 years now. (It could be less than this, but we simply don’t know).

• As people who frequent this blog well know, I have held these views for many years. I routinely take other skeptics to task for believing such things as “there is no greenhouse effect”, or “it’s impossible for a cold atmosphere to make the Earth’s surface even warmer”.

So, Why Is Roy Spencer Called a Climate Denier?

In the case of global warming, alarmists apparently insist that you must believe that global warming is a “crisis” or an “emergency”, or else you will be thrown under the bus.

They claim we must embrace expensive (and ineffective) sources of alternative energy. But, like Bjorn Lomborg (who actually believes the alarmist predictions of future warming) and many others, I believe it will be much worse for humanity if we abandon fossil fuels before alternative technologies are abundant, affordable, and practical.

Human flourishing requires access to affordable energy, which is required for almost all human activities. It is immoral to deny fossil-fueled electricity to the world’s poor, and its replacement in even the richest countries still destroys prosperity, especially for the poor.

For believing these things, I am declared evil, apparently on par with a Holocaust denier (thus the rhetoric).

Here’s some of that rhetoric from the Daily Kos yesterday, which covered the firing of White House skeptical scientists Dr. David Legates and Dr. Ryan Maue (emphasis added):

“The bundle of boring and basic denial myths compiled to appease the deadly denial of the Trump administration was published first, it appears at least, by U-Alabama Huntsville Dr. Roy Spencer, who contributed a chapter. His post about the flyers was then bounced around the deniersphere, where the same audiences who gobble up unhinged conspiracies about voter fraud or satan-worshipping Democrats can eagerly read the climate denial versions of those violent fantasies.”

This is apparently what happens when you take frustrated creative writers and give them jobs as journalists.

Given recent political events it appears there is now a renewed efforts to have dissenting voices silenced through “cancel culture”, removal of websites, public ridicule, censorship, etc.

Unity in our country will, apparently, be achieved, because once dissenting voices are silenced, “unity” is all that is left.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/01/no-roy-spencer-is-not-a-climate-denier/
 
Last edited:
Air pollution will lead to mass migration, say experts after landmark ruling
Call for world leaders to act in wake of French extradition case that turned on environmental concerns


Sailesh Mehta, a barrister specialising in environmental cases, said: “The link between migration and environmental degradation is clear. As global warming makes parts of our planet uninhabitable, mass migration will become the norm. Air and water pollution do not respect national boundaries. We can stop a humanitarian and political crisis from becoming an existential one. But our leaders must act now.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-migration-say-experts-after-landmark-ruling


Mass migration to.......where ?
 
.
Useful rule of thumb, pretty much anything climate related emanating from the Guardian, NYT, Daily Kos or from Moonshi'ite is going to be hysterical bullshit, you can take that to the bank!

No, Roy Spencer Is Not A Climate “Denier”
Share


Yesterday, the New York Times and other media outlets repeated the falsehood that I am a climate “denier”.

I usually ignore such potentially libelous statements, otherwise I’d be defending myself every week.

So, to set the record straight, here’s what I believe… I’ll let you decide whether I’m a climate “denier”.

I believe the climate system has warmed (we produce one of the global datasets that shows just that, which is widely used in the climate community), and that CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning contributes to that warming. I’ve said this for many years.

• I believe future warming from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would be somewhere in the range of 1.5 to 2 deg. C, which is actually within the range of expected warming the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has advanced for 30 years now. (It could be less than this, but we simply don’t know).

• As people who frequent this blog well know, I have held these views for many years. I routinely take other skeptics to task for believing such things as “there is no greenhouse effect”, or “it’s impossible for a cold atmosphere to make the Earth’s surface even warmer”.

So, Why Is Roy Spencer Called a Climate Denier?

In the case of global warming, alarmists apparently insist that you must believe that global warming is a “crisis” or an “emergency”, or else you will be thrown under the bus.

They claim we must embrace expensive (and ineffective) sources of alternative energy. But, like Bjorn Lomborg (who actually believes the alarmist predictions of future warming) and many others, I believe it will be much worse for humanity if we abandon fossil fuels before alternative technologies are abundant, affordable, and practical.

Human flourishing requires access to affordable energy, which is required for almost all human activities. It is immoral to deny fossil-fueled electricity to the world’s poor, and its replacement in even the richest countries still destroys prosperity, especially for the poor.

For believing these things, I am declared evil, apparently on par with a Holocaust denier (thus the rhetoric).

Here’s some of that rhetoric from the Daily Kos yesterday, which covered the firing of White House skeptical scientists Dr. David Legates and Dr. Ryan Maue (emphasis added):

“The bundle of boring and basic denial myths compiled to appease the deadly denial of the Trump administration was published first, it appears at least, by U-Alabama Huntsville Dr. Roy Spencer, who contributed a chapter. His post about the flyers was then bounced around the deniersphere, where the same audiences who gobble up unhinged conspiracies about voter fraud or satan-worshipping Democrats can eagerly read the climate denial versions of those violent fantasies.”

This is apparently what happens when you take frustrated creative writers and give them jobs as journalists.

Given recent political events it appears there is now a renewed efforts to have dissenting voices silenced through “cancel culture”, removal of websites, public ridicule, censorship, etc.

Unity in our country will, apparently, be achieved, because once dissenting voices are silenced, “unity” is all that is left.

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/01/no-roy-spencer-is-not-a-climate-denier/

.
 
Global ice loss accelerating at record rate, study finds

Rate of loss now in line with worst-case scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The melting of ice across the planet is accelerating at a record rate, with the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets speeding up the fastest, research has found.

The rate of loss is now in line with the worst case scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading authority on the climate, according to a paper published on Monday in the journal The Cryosphere.

Thomas Slater, lead author and research fellow at the centre for polar observation and modelling at the University of Leeds, warned that the consequences would be felt around the world. “Sea level rise on this scale will have very serious impacts on coastal communities this century,” he said.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-loss-accelerating-at-record-rate-study-finds

About 28tn tonnes of ice was lost between 1994 and 2017

28tn tons;

If you see it comin' better lose your pride
A lot of men didn't, a lot of men died
One fist of iron, the other of steel
If the virus one don't getcha then the climate will
 
So, uh...we're not all going to die?

Fuck off ignoramus.

Sure , we're all going to die- but we have a choice as to how and when, although you're likely to get yours while looking for brains to eat in the mall.

200w.webp



Haw, haw..............................haw.
 
Back
Top