Yes let's assist the racist violence of BLM, the corruption of long standing career politicians and the enrichment of all the kids like Hunter Biden. Making literally billions of dollars from graft and corruption! First thing Trump should do is have two terms in and then two terms out. Perhaps if these bludgers had to work half the time it would curb some of their enthusiasm?

Dear JBowyer,

My goodness you do crap on and it is mostly projection from a cultist.

Trump has taken nepotism to unheard of levels of any US president. Both his daughter and son-in-law are prominent parts of the administration with security levels well beyond what officials were comfortable with.

"Don Jr. and Eric have repeatedly managed to cash in on their newfound positions of political privilege in their business dealings. So, too, have their sister Ivanka and brother-in-law Jared Kushner, both of whom hold senior positions in the administration and whose companies and investment portfolios netted them anywhere between $29 million and $135 million last year, per their financial disclosure forms."

...

"When news of Jared and Ivanka’s White House employment broke, observers noted the hirings appeared to be clear violations of federal anti-nepotism laws. Kushner, the heir to a mid-Atlantic real estate empire, had no experience that would qualify him for the many tasks to which his father-in-law would assign him: solving the opioid crisis, handling Middle East peace negotiations, modernizing the federal government, and reforming America’s criminal justice system.

On Inauguration Day, however, the Department of Justice released an opinion concluding that the statute does not apply to White House staff, allowing Kushner’s employment to go forward. When intelligence officials held up his application for a top-secret security clearance—a delay due in part, the New York Times reported, to concerns about Kushner’s foreign business interests—his place in the administration, theoretically, was in jeopardy. His father-in-law stepped in, though, overruling the officials and ordering then-chief of staff John Kelly to issue Kushner a clearance anyway."

http://www.gq.com/story/trump-kids-profit-presidency

JB,
what is life like on the unreal planet on which you dwell?
Sure as hell it isn`t Earth.

"Why did Prof. Noam Chomsky call the US Republican Party 'The most dangerous organization in the history of the world'?"

Because he is an extreme left idiot, as is anybody who says "the Arctic is burning", or that Donald Trump is a "neofascist".

Bored with the China virus, all the climate idiots and liars are stirring.

Donald Trump has been nominated for the Nobel Peace prize for his recent Arab/Israeli efforts. That should make the bedwetters squeal.

A world dictated to by panic merchants is not a safe world either.

Of course there is climate change. It is well and truely precedented, but...best of luck with that side of the argument.
Will the cows ever come home?

Dan

Why did Prof. Noam Chomsky call the US Republican Party 'The most dangerous organization in the history of the world'?
Well, he would, wouldn't he, being a leftist & all & trying desperately to avert attention from the Lefties !
Portray a lie as truth & the truth as a lie !

ITS THE SUN, STUPID !

Bazz,
NO IT ISN'T, STUPID!
http://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

_______________________________________________________________________________

Diver,
Nobody's trying to cause a panic. What people are trying to do is get everyone to take action.

Aidan there is nothing more stupid than "taking action" against the wrong reason for anything.

Poor little CO2 is responsible fore nothing, except for fertalising all the food we need to survive.

As a farmer concerned about the dire implications of ‘climate change’ (as in man-induced climate change) I decided to check the science for myself.

What I found astounded me.

The science underlying the way greenhouse gasses actually operate in the real world, make it clear that carbon dioxide cannot possibly be the ‘principle driver of the current warming period’ as assumed by the IPCC and its naive, media brainwashed, or agenda-driven adherents.

Water vapour is overwhelmingly the major greenhouse gas both in its much wider activity spectrum of operation within the electromagnetic radiation (EMR) range of Infrared radiation emitted from Earth and in its very much higher atmospheric concentration.

Carbon dioxide on the other hand only effectively operates at a spike centred at 14.9um, an area also partially covered by water vapour.
Methane's active zone is also almost completely covered and swamped by water vapour.
This spectrum saturation by water vapour severely limits any additional warming effect from these additional sources.

On top of that, deep in the IPCC’s own current scientific report, mankind’s total contribution to increasing atmospheric CO2 is calculated at only 4.3%. 95.7% of the increase is from well explained natural causes.

Runaway climate change from anthropogenic carbon dioxide is therefore an impossibility, however the benefits from increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide for farmers and all biota are absolutely enormous, but these are inexplicably completely ignored.

Climate Change believers would be better off if they first took the time to do their own independent due-diligence on this issue before making such patently obvious fools of themselves .

From the article..."According to the 2018 IPCC Report, the world has only a very short time left in which to stop the extraction and use of fossil fuels. If we collectively fail to do this within a decade or so," blah blah blah...

Well, yes its true that the IPCC said that. But then they ALWAYS say that. We've spent the last 30 years being told we only have x-years left before its too late. 'x' is sometimes 10 years, sometimes 7 years, sometimes 12 years. Remember we've only got 6 years before we have an ice-free Arctic. Except that, 15 years later, there's still ice there.

But as with most things, the committed always fear the latest prediction and forget all the previous failed predictions. T'was always thus.

So now we're told that the Republicans are the fossil fuel villains and the Democrats, by implication, the heroes. And its true that Biden, Harris et al have promised to get rid of fossil fuels.

Except....

Now that the polls are moving in the wrong direction, Biden is now telling the voters in places like Pennsylvania that he loves fracking etc. Its a damned lie (a lie I tells ya) that he wants to get rid of fracking and fossil fuels. Don't believe those videos where he actually said he'd get rid of fossil fuels - the're just Trump lies, or something.

So it seems the Democrats are gung-ho for burning carbon and that, therefore, they are also fossil fuel villains. Just don't expect the author to write about that.

like those who push the totally irrational evolution myth we have the same characters telling climate lies. If this prof believed half the nonsense he sprouted he would be criticising China and India. But like all those suffering tds they hate the depth of the putried swamp being exposed.

The moment I hear the term neo-fascist, then I know we have a left whinge Moron.

This idiot also forgets that China churns out roughly 50% more than the USA.

We have always had climate change! The sun waxes ( warms up) and the joint warms up! The ice retreats and sea levels rise. Then in around a 200 year cyclical cycle, it wanes (cools) and the joint cools and the ice once again advances and sea levels drop! And thus is has been for millennia.

What you don't get is a massive ice melt/retreat and sea level risings, a melting tundra and massive methane gas releases during a waning (cooling) phase. The highest record temperature in Siberia was, according to the article, 38C during june 2020. And the second hottest year on record was 2017 during a La Nina phase. And already well into a waning phase!

A waning phase we've been in since the mid-seventies (NASA). Even if we stopped emitting CO2 tomorrow, the levels will still rise. It' not just fossil fuels that create CO2 bt all carbon-based life forms. Humans, domestic animals etc.

What to do? Adapt and be dammed? Put with increasingly extreme weather events/wildfires etc., and insurance policies that send you bankrupt?

Build everything underground? Grow everything underground? Hold our tournaments in concrete covered weatherproof stadiums and creat an unparalleled demand for electricity that beggars belief! TBC.
Alan B.

Dear Ian McClintock,

You claim “95.7% of the increase is from well explained natural causes”.

I would like you to explain for us 'fools' what natural process you think has driven the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere from around 310 ppm in 1960 to near 410 ppm today.

The coal Lobby don't have an arguement? Resort, like the feeble-minded, to just labelling everyone they disagree with as lefty or liars. And without a shred of evidence to back those feeble-minded claims.

Yes, water vapour does contribute to stored heat, acts like a blanket to trap heat, as does humidity!

CO2 traps infrared heat, which is not insignificant. It also produces the greenhouse effect which is more luxuriant growth and moisture aspiration,i.e., the Greenhouse Effect. And contributes to the acidification of our oceans which are the lungs of the planet.

The irony is, we do not need to burn Fossil fuel. We can make all the fuel we'll ever need from seawater. And by removing the CO2,i.e., carbon content by just removing it in vaccuum towers then compressing and recompressing to make a liquid we can combine with liquid plasma, i.e., liquid hydrogen. The well-known frash process.

And make any endlessly sustainable liquid hydrocarbon transport fuel in whatever quantity we want or need, as alternatives for diesel or Jet fuel to mention a couple and plastics and fertilizer as well.

Interestingly, as we draw down oceanic CO2 levels the ocean absorbs more and more directly from the atmosphere!

The missing element and resisted with fundamental fervour, is truly affordale energy. (MSR thorium) So cheap that the fossi fuel industry cannot compete, that puts big nuclear out of business and decimates the profits of big pharma and all the roober barons currently sucking the economic life out of our's and many other economies! And the only reason we don't yet have it?
Alan B.

The popular statements on this are mainly one cycle based.
However it is not that simple.
J. Kauppinen & P. Malmi of Turku University in Finland and two others
at Kobe University have proposed the following.
There are THREE different cycles involved each with its own cyclic period.
1. The Milanovitch cycles involving the earths elliptical orbit and
the earths elliptical path around the sun.
The rotation of that ellipse around the sun.
Perhaps also some effect from Jupiter.

2. The variation in the radiance of the sun.
3. The eleven year cycle of sunspots.
4. A variation in the maximum sunspot intensity.

So there are possibly five different cycles going on.
None of them linked together.
Based on the above it seems that the maximum warming was about late
1990s according to the Turku & Kobe University teams.
The cycle could of course have a wide near flat top.
The warming time seems to vary between 1000 years and approx 500 years.
We now appear to be about to start on a cooling time to reach a
minimum in about 600 years time.

When all these cycles line up with a maximum sunspot period of perhaps
10 sunspot cycles each being very active at their peak the disturbance
of the earth magnetic field diverts more cosmic rays away from
entering the atmosphere.
Withe less cosmic rays entering fewer clouds are formed and so the
earth umbrella is partially removed and the earth gets a bit warmer.

A technique using Fourier analysis that extracts your data from your
noisy wifi signal is used to detect the time of maximum warming and cooling.

This is the explanation for the Roman, Medieval and our warming
periods and the Dark Ages cold period and the Maunder Minimum.
The author J Kauppinen was an IPCC penal member until his retirement
last year.
I cannot find the names of the Japanese scientists at Kobe University
at the moment but I am sure if you are interested you will find them.

https://tinyurl.com/y23a6nev

This article explains how catastrophic it might be if a glacier in the Antarctic breaks away:

http://www.9news.com.au/world/climate-change-antarctic-doomsday-glacier-melting-fast-causing-sea-rise/4a9023ca-6d8c-4016-9eaf-efb1e581662c

Sea-levels could rise by up to 64 cm as a result: this glacier is made of really, really heavy ice !

Joe

anyone been to Bondi lately? Pity people don't concentrate on real threats. Surely the last 50 years of climate alarmism have demonstrated the 'experts' are clueless or dishonest. Probably about as reliable as Dan Andrews 'super computer' to lockdown 5 million people. Wake up Australia.

Regardless of the situation re climate change the the orange haired behemoth is a nihilist.
He has the same kind of morals and instincts as the legendary shifty out house rat.

I get it you do not like Trump especially because he gets so much done. Well kiddies we will have to wait till November and some of us will cry, stamp our feet and chuck a tantrum.
Personally I prefer Trump to Biden and find it strange no one ever comments on his corruption telling a country get rid of that prosecution or no loan. Backed, of course, by the the sainted one Long Tall Barry. A real couple of con-men and you whine about Trump?

These links are interesting...

http://geosciencebigpicture.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/drawing.png

http://i.stack.imgur.com/zDOdq.png

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qhMlWRSzM0I/TW8Nsvvy5rI/AAAAAAAACLU/eOqI-3q_ipM/s1600/absorbspec.gif

I imagine as the sun burns out it's fuel there will be fluctuations in solar radiation at the Earth orbit.

However any "heated body" if it absorbs more heat/ energy than it loses it will heat up. I guess you can calculate the heat absorption by the solar radiation- you could probably calculate the radiation coming from the Earth using spectral equipment on satellites.

There seems to be some correlation between human activity and global warming.

There does however seem to be much more absorption from water vapor than CO2 looking at the absorption spectra. However the spectra tends to show the wavelength but not the intensity so well.

In the last few hundred years, industrial activity has massively expanded, and it's needed fuel to burn in order to power everything.

So, big mystery: that vast amount of fuel has created - guess what ? Heat. I'm not convinced that all, or much, of that heat has simply dissipated into the atmosphere, while the CO2 produced is the one and only villain contributing to global warming.

Is it that CO2 traps heat rather than let it dissipate ? I'm an ignoramus - obviously - on this issue, but am I onto something ?

Joe

Dear JBowyer,

I know you are keen to propagate the lies of your president but when you say; "and the enrichment of all the kids like Hunter Biden. Making literally billions of dollars from graft and corruption!" you are of course referencing Trump's rubbish claim that Biden "walk out of China with $1.5 billion in a fund".

Turns out it was complete rot and the entire fund of which Biden was one of several shareholders was worth just over $4 million.

The fact that you are swallowing the crap that Trump shoves down your throat on a daily basis doesn't mean you get a pity pass from the rest of us. We get to call it out.

SR and I get to call you out too. Who has made peace between Serbia and Kosovo? UAE and Israel? Oh yes you will say no that was Obama. You are a total dill mate. Your little mate Biden was actually boasting about getting a prosecutor fired. That's the prosecutor after little Hunter. You suffer total derangement and I cannot be bothered with you. He is not my president anymore than Biden shares his loot with losers like you, grow up!

Reply to SteeleRedux.

Thank you for your question.

There are many natural sources of carbon dioxide emissions into our atmosphere, but probably the most significant one that contributes to a slow, long-term increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration is from our oceans.

There is a direct relationship between the average temperature of the ocean waters and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, described by an accepted formula known as ‘Henry’s Law’.

As the oceans slowly cool, as they do under glacial conditions, CO2 is absorbed from the atmosphere and locked up there until it begins to warm up again.

During the cold glacial conditions experienced during the longer part of the ‘Ice Age’ cycle, atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide fall to an extent where plant life finds it difficult to survive (< 250 ppmv) and desert areas as a result increase substantially in size. These conditions can last from over 80,000 to some 120,000 years before the next Interglacial occurs.

We are very fortunately living in the Interglacial period during this current Ice Age and as a result the slow warming of the oceans means that there is a net release of carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere. This will continue for as long as the oceans continue to warm.

This carbon dioxide increase is highly beneficial to plant life and biota that depend on it.