• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Climate Crisis Rebuffed

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Perhaps Chuck reported that we were reading inconvenient facts...

    And MSM, bury all truth with FAKE twisted news.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
      Try this, starting on page 8 is the WSJ article, but the whole testimony is worth reading:
      https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Pielke%20Testimony_0.pdf https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Pielke%20Testimony_0.pdf

      This is strange though. I read it this afternoon on the WSJ site, with no paywall, in its entirety. Come back to copy and paste, and it is paywalled, went to every other link that had the same article, and every one is only partial, and links to the same paywalled WSJ article. Had to find his testimony to finally read it. Perhaps Chuck reported that we were reading inconvenient facts...
      This is exactly why I distrust the majority of the climate crisis b/s, as do many others .
      The distortion of info is sickening to push an agenda.

      Comment


        #18
        Another inconvenient paper. David Keith is another ardent supporter of the AGW hypothesis, and the need to do something about CO2, even has his own company to capture CO2. This is no denier.

        Yet he and a colleague wrote a paper showing that wind turbines cause more warming than they could potentially reduce.

        Harvard professor of applied physics and public policy David Keith and his postdoctoral researcher, Lee Miller, recently found that heavy reliance on wind energy actually increases climate warming! ...
        The study, published in the journal Joule, found that if wind power supplied all U.S. electricity demands, it would warm the surface of the continental United States by 0.24 degree C (0.43 Fahrenheit). That is far more than any reduction in warming achieved by totally decarbonizing the nation’s electricity sector (around 0.1 C or 0.2 F)) during the 21st century – assuming climate models are correct about the amount of warming that carbon dioxide emissions are allegedly causing...
        ...As the authors explain, the warming is produced because wind turbines generate electricity by extracting energy out of the air, slowing down wind and otherwise altering “the exchange of heat, moisture, and momentum between the surface and the atmosphere.”...
        And, as expected, the rest of the alarmists are trying to discredit them for having math skills, and understanding physics. As Chuck shows us every day, those skills are not permitted in these debates. Only belief and consensus(formerly called bullying)

        Link to the paper: Paywalled. https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30446-X?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com %2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS254243511830446X%3Fshowall%3D true https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30446-X?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com %2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS254243511830446X%3Fshowall%3D true
        Last edited by AlbertaFarmer5; Dec 14, 2019, 11:16.

        Comment


          #19
          Seems the Madrid Climate conference is running into rough times. Pitty!

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by burnt View Post
            An interesting clip from the "National Geographic".
            Yet another organization who thinks cognitive dissonance is a positive attribute. I've lost count of all the discrepancies in a single issue of NG on the issue of global warming. Such as an article about Doggerland ( the English channel before sea level rise inundated it), and warnings about unprecedented sea level rise now.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by sumdumguy View Post
              Seems the Madrid Climate conference is running into rough times. Pitty!
              Not that they really care since they're just a bunch of climate Madridiots.

              Comment


                #22
                And now our woke feminist and socialists profs are trying to recuit a bunch of home grown Gretas right here. Going after kids should be off limits.

                Turns out that Sauchyn guy isnt just some climate observer, he is chair of a socialist think tank at the university and he calmly targets Ag in the article.

                The only way to deal with this group is to give them what they want. Starve and freeze them for just a few weeks.

                https://outline.com/6CrtWs Looking to the future in Sask.'s unique environment

                WTF this is parenting?

                “My parents tell me that ‘we left you this huge mess and now you have to clean it up.’ And they say that at this point it’s unethical to have kids because of what (their) generation has done,” Sellinger said.
                “And it really upsets me that I’m not going to be able to have kids and I’m not going to be able to give my parents grandchildren. And I want to maybe hopefully make it better, so I can live a long happy life with a family that I can support and love.”
                Last edited by jazz; Dec 14, 2019, 14:03.

                Comment

                • Reply to this Thread
                • Return to Topic List
                Working...