Greta Thunberg

ThatOwlWoman said:
Heh, I never heard of him either until the RWers kept bringing him up, as though we all had a Little Red Book of Alinsky quotes.

BTW, Arctic thawing of the permafrost has already caused disease outbreaks, including at least one human death.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/01/anthrax-outbreak-climate-change-arctic-circle-russia
Click to expand...

The Guardian is where I've been reading most of the stuff about permafrost. I hadn't heard about the little boy's death. It's scary that all this frozen bacteria can be a new threat, when they said anthrax hadn't been seen since 1941 in that area. I wonder how people can protect themselves.
 
christiefan915 said:
Microbiology isn't science? Geography isn't science?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. An understanding of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics, Stefan–Boltzmann law, and Equilibrium Thermodynamics and how they pertain to CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is what's needed.

Also an understanding of convection, conduction, radiation and the ability to distinguish them helps.
 
christiefan915 said:
The Guardian is where I've been reading most of the stuff about permafrost. I hadn't heard about the little boy's death. It's scary that all this frozen bacteria can be a new threat, when they said anthrax hadn't been seen since 1941 in that area. I wonder how people can protect themselves.
Click to expand...
Wonder no more. Anthrax vaccine. Another form of adaptation.
 
christiefan915 said:
I guess she doesn't think microbiology (re: AOC) is science. :dunno: Or that you don't have to be a scientist to learn about science.
Click to expand...

Apparently there's a lot of that going around. Sailor rejected Greta's, her family, and various elected leaders' words about climate change because they supposedly don't have a science background.
 
anonymoose said:
Irrelevant. An understanding of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics, Stefan–Boltzmann law, and Equilibrium Thermodynamics and how they pertain to CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is what's needed.

Also an understanding of convection, conduction, radiation and the ability to distinguish them helps.
Click to expand...

Tell it to Sailor. He's the one who said Trudeau, AOC and Greta have no scientific background whatsoever.
 
christiefan915 said:
The Guardian is where I've been reading most of the stuff about permafrost. I hadn't heard about the little boy's death. It's scary that all this frozen bacteria can be a new threat, when they said anthrax hadn't been seen since 1941 in that area. I wonder how people can protect themselves.
Click to expand...

I don't know. All kinds of things are coming out of the ice now -- old plane wrecks, mammoth and other carcasses, ancient graves, etc. Wait till it's some virus modern humans haven't been exposed to.

Try not to worry though. It's a Chinese hoax. The stable genius said so.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I don't know. All kinds of things are coming out of the ice now -- old plane wrecks, mammoth and other carcasses, ancient graves, etc. Wait till it's some virus modern humans haven't been exposed to.

Try not to worry though. It's a Chinese hoax. The stable genius said so.
Click to expand...

Lol about Chinese hoax. But re: the rest of your comment about things coming out of the ice, I've also been reading about how many bodies have been found on Mt. Everest since the ice has been thawing.
 
Anthrax vaccine:

"There is a vaccine that can help prevent anthrax, a serious infection caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthracis. However, this vaccine is not typically available for the general public. It is only recommended for people who are at an increased risk of coming into contact with or have already been exposed to B. anthracis."

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/anthrax/index.html

I'm sure Moose will mansplain how this vaccine will be effective against an organism that most likely has mutated many times over since it last infected a human being.
 
anonymoose said:
How did it mutate when it's been frozen for thousands of yrs.?
Click to expand...

Oh geeze. Okay, Bio 101. You should know this stuff.

We all have organisms living on and within is. We're exposed to thousands more each day. These organisms mutate over time, but you adapt with them so in general very few of them cause problems.

You live in Alaska, eh? So you're out hiking one day off trail alongside a stream, and you see something sticking out of the stream bank. Looks like a human arm. You jump down into the creek and check it closer, maybe touch it or tug on it a bit before you realize that it IS a human arm, with very old rotting fur around the elbow joint. You back away and call 911.

That old buried guy still has living organisms on him, some of which now exist on you. Hope none of them are pathogenic... because your current cooties that you co-exist with are very, very different than his.
 
christiefan915 said:
I know the climate has changed constantly over millenia and that multiple factors contribute to the changes. Why can't the activities of humans also contribute to change?

Btw, I never even heard of Alinsky until reading about Hillary's college thesis on him. That was 50 years ago. I don't know why conservatives think he's such a major influence on liberals today since most aren't radical.
Click to expand...

I've never said that there isn't an anthrogemic signal present. Indeed many times I posted the equation dF=5.35 x ln C/C0 used by the IPCC to predict the extra climate forcing due to a doubling of CO2 concentration. A doubling of CO2 alone give a forcing of ~3.7 W/m2 which at equilibrium is balanced by a surface temperature rise of ~1.1C by applying Stefan Boltzmann’s law.

As for Alinsky, his methods and rules are now so much a part and parcel of modern politics, especially by so-called Progressives, that the man himself was somewhat forgotten. The use and manipulation of Thunberg is a classic case in point in my view.
 
Last edited:
christiefan915 said:
Neither do the "climate hoaxers" in the trump administration so how can they deny everything with such assurance?
Click to expand...

Well that was the whole purpose of the PCCS, headed up by Dr. Will Happer. Surely if you're going to throw trillions upon trillions of dollars at a problem you ought to apply due diligence? To do otherwise would be criminally negligent. I would also point out that there is a huge world of difference between outright denial and scepticism. Anybody that has any familiarity with the scientific method knows that scepticism is at the very heart of scientific enquiry. Accusing your opponents of being deniers is classic Alinkyism in my view, explain to me how it is otherwise. I will leave it up to Prof. Richard Lindzen who literally wrote book on Atmospheric Physics to explain further.

Stated briefly, I will simply try to clarify what the debate over climate change is really about. It most certainly is not about whether climate is changing: it always is. It is not about whether CO2 is increasing: it clearly is. It is not about whether the increase in CO2, by itself, will lead to some warming: it should. The debate is simply over the matter of how much warming the increase in CO2 can lead to, and the connection of such warming to the innumerable claimed catastrophes. The evidence is that the increase in CO2 will lead to very little warming, and that the connection of this minimal warming (or even significant warming) to the purported catastrophes is also minimal. The arguments on which the catastrophic claims are made are extremely weak – and commonly acknowledged as such. They are sometimes overtly dishonest.
Click to expand...

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/16/make-america-greater-approve-the-pccs/

https://judithcurry.com/2012/02/27/lindzens-seminar-at-the-house-of-commons/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top