• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Climate Debate with Greta Thunberg
#1
Climate,  Greta Thunburg,   big money and nuclear

Climate change has become the main, almost exclusive symbol of the destruction of the biosphere.  This appears to be a dangerous, misguided, even deplorable state of affairs.   Climate change due to carbon dioxide is now said to be the greatest threat the world has ever faced.   Greater than nuclear warfare.  

“The threat from a nuclear war remains… but we have something worse, which is a certainty. That is climate change,” he said.
“If we don’t act, we will perish. We must act for survival.”
https://phys.org/news/2019-10-global-ecl...nobel.html

I have a question about the cause of not just climate change, but even the sources of the observed carbon dioxide increase.   There is data available on the internet about the carbon sequestration ability of forests and there are estimates of how much forest has been cut down.  Using that data, I arrive at the figure that the sequestration of carbon dioxide by the amount of trees that has been deforested is equal or greater than the anthropogenic contribution to C02.

reasonable looking evidence for anthropogenic source of Co2, given the time windows of change;

Anthropogenic Influences on Atmospheric CO2
https://www.researchgate.net/publication...pheric_CO2

"We identify anthropogenic contributions to atmospheric CO2 measured at Mauna Loa using a statistical automatic model selection algorithm (Autometrics). We find that vegetation, temperature and other natural factors alone cannot explain the trend or the variation in CO2 growth. Industrial production components, driven by business cycles and economic shocks, are highly significant contributors."

The same exercise could be done for the loss of carbon fixation from plankton, which some scientists say has been reduced 20 to 40%, perhaps in large part due to the decimation of whales and their fertilization of the upper ocean level.   Nuclear fallout, it could be mentioned, is highly absorbed by plankton chitin and this is thought to be a major reason that fallout is cleaned from the ocean column as the dead plankton fall to the bottom.

And so here is the question;  to what degree  do we see a rising carbon dioxide level because the carbon fixation has been destroyed by deforestation and whaling and perhaps other disruptions of the biosphere cycles,  and not because of fossil fuels?   Its not quite as settled as one might think.  Anthropogenic contribution is thought to be on the order of 3%  so natural flux becomes an issue.  For example co2 increases follow temperature increases.


There are a number of studies which attempt to determine how well anthropogenic forcing correlates to data.  Its not quite the resolved issue we are led to believe

  

 We should question if climate change is in fact the biggest and most imminent threat to the planet and mankind, or whether it might be nuclear war,  loss of food crop diversity, or indeed the commoditization of the entire living world.   Armageddon, from carbon dioxide,  is the latest commodity for the economic investment class.   A fate worse than nuclear war....some say

Would Greta Thunberg have gotten a yacht ride from Europe with  Princess Caroline’s son aboard the  carbon fiber Malitzia II racing yacht?   Hydrofoils no less

[Image: 0ea9bd5c707af30e92280cab0f52f938_w500.jpg]
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#2
The evils of civilization are always rooted in the monetary system

"Rockefeller's paradigm shift The global energy crisis that David Rockefeller and his Bilderberg group launched in late 1973 was far more ambitious than a mere effort to support the US dollar, although that played a certain role. It was part of a strategic, global plan quietly drafted in think tanks and leading universities from Chicago to Harvard to MIT and beyond in the final months of the 1960s as the Vietnam debacle was winding down. Also initiated at that time were the 1938 energy economy proposals of M. King Hubbert and his Technocracy Incorporated organization, whereby the overall standard of living for the majority of the world’s population would be linked directly to the availability, real or contrived, of energy -- especially of oil. The architects of what amounted to a global paradigm shift intended to use the perceived energy crisis to foster a new ideology of scarcity."

http://www.serendipity.li/engdahl/Hidden...litics.pdf
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#3
I think Arnold has perhaps changed his mind on Nuclear but I couldnt find anything on it

https://www.facebook.com/unitednations/v...128396831/

Greta Thunberg joins Arnold Schwarzenegger in call for climate action

Schwarzenegger: “I, myself think that nuclear power has a great future.

Thats a fun adventure sailing across the Atlantic in a hydrofoil racing yacht.  I notice they had time and money to create those sails with a message. The sails were a year in the making.  Greta got to go with Pierre Casiraghi nephew of Prince Albert of Monaco.    The one on the left
[Image: pierre-casiraghi-und-beatrice-borromeo-s...ommen-.jpg]

The high-speed yacht's sponsors including German carmaker BMW and Swiss wealth manager EFG International. She was invited by renowned German skipper Boris Hermann and by Pierre Casiraghi, the son of Monaco's Princess Caroline.  Malizia, the yacht, is owned by German property tycoon Gerhard Senft, who bought it from Swiss-French finance group Edmond de Rothschild.

[Image: ?m=02&d=20190828&t=2&i=1423793160&w=640&...XNPEF7R231]

Im writing a letter to Monaco's Princess Caroline right now to have some new sails with CAFE RAD LAB on them.
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#4
Dude says "AOC's resolution is more like forcing a much needed moral compas in to our socio-ecological way's of "being here""

Im not sure thats true Dude.   The new green deal is a kind of continuation of previous green deals and they all involve business as usual.   Its my contention that business as usual is the actual cause of the destruction of life on earth.

these are businessmen.  Milking the carbon theory for all its worth

[Image: image1170x530cropped.jpg]
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#5
I happen to believe in the destruction of the biosphere and rising C02 levels.   Why they are rising and what impact they have as a stand alone focus is another story.   Im one of those radicals that believes the human population is the largest anthropogenic problem.   No matter if one thinks carbon is the culprit, or nuclear and chemical supertoxins, it all stems from our population...

You might check out these videos.  The second is rather more aesthetic

global warming Dr Willie Soon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JJ3yeiNjf4

whales and the climate
https://youtu.be/M18HxXve3CM
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#6
rising Co2,  loss of plankton carbon fixation and the decimation of whales

What is the true cause of extra C02?

'Black Box' plankton found to have huge role in ocean carbon fixation
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...085344.htm

"Blue whales were once a mighty force to reckon with in the Southern Ocean, but thanks to aggressive commercial whaling throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, their populations have been reduced to 1% of historic numbers."

"Considering lateral nutrient transport by 13 species of gray whales, the study found that the Southern Ocean — a vast region of low biological productivity surrounding Antarctica — is operating today at 2% of its historic nutrient cycling capacity. The North Pacific and North Atlantic are faring only slightly better, with nutrient transport across the ocean surface occurring at 10 — 14% of its former capacity."

https://gizmodo.com/how-whale-poop-balan...1738976114

https://youtu.be/M18HxXve3CM

Plankton is reduced,  true or not true?

Phytoplankton Population Drops 40 Percent Since 1950
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...opulation/


I appreciate the hard work of all these researchers, but frankly after reading numerous papers, I don’t think they have any idea if total plankton is increasing or decreasing or staying the same.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/03/15/t...ing-to-it/
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#7
Quote:I happen to believe in the destruction of the biosphere and rising C02 levels.   Why they are rising and what impact they have as a stand alone focus is another story.   Im one of those radicals that believes the human population is the largest anthropogenic problem.   No matter if one thinks carbon is the culprit, or nuclear and chemical supertoxins, it all stems from our population...

Yes. It is a believable fact. Mankind is in full bloom. Temporarily. Losing biological support fast.
Humans did not create background radiation...

 
Reply
#8
Pppfffftt....it's routine. Now get back in your cages, the economy demands you too. Better keep collecting those coupons..LOL!

https://www.nirs.org/wp-content/uploads/...leases.pdf
 
Reply
#9
Climate data

One can see very convincing climate data graphs.  But there are more graphs when one searches.  At the bottom of the this paper are compilations of data sets about global warming.  One has to look for themselves...do they look like the widely published authoritative and convincing climate graphs we always see?

https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2018/1...rint=print

a compilation of 73 data sets on climate change over time

[Image: hockey_04-640x310.png]

Part of the problem is that many of the graphs we see only refer to data sets for one region, continent or hemisphere.  Compare the graph above to this one.   

[Image: hockey_stick_visual.png]

Is CONSENSUS  or majority agreement the definitive clue to correctness of the climate theory?    There is a list of scientists here who disagree with the mainstream view.  It may be a minority, yet it is still a considerable number.  If any one of these scientists is correct, then the consensus view will be proven wrong. 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sc...al_warming

 All Im saying here is that this is where we are at.   The only conclusion I have is that the modelling of the global, indeed solar system flux of climate influences and feedbacks is one of the most complex things ever studied.  The correct scientific mindset is to have an open mind.   The disruption of the biosphere is due to many  things besides carbon dioxide, and it is the comprehensive view that is important.

We could perhaps stop the anthropogenic contribution of C02 with tax and trade or whatever, but lose the world due to glyphosate poisoning of the insect population, nuclear war or simply resource exhaustion
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#10
Didnt the ice cap melt?

https://realclimatescience.com/2019/07/n...s-ordered/

arctic sea ice melting
https://youtu.be/6j8SGs_gnFk

try the fixed month animation
https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/arch...age_select
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#11
Rapidly expanding nuclear arsenals in Pakistan and India portend regional and global catastrophe

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/10/eaay5478

===========

Greta Thunberg time line.   How did this happen?

August 20, 2018: Swedish student Thunberg, then aged 15, skips school to protest outside parliament for more action against climate change.

March 2019: Thunberg is nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.

May 2019: Thunberg is named one of the world’s most influential people by Time magazine, appearing on its cover.

August 14, 2019: Thunberg sets sail from Britain for the United States to take part in a U.N. climate summit

==============

I still havent received a reply from the Yacht Club of Monaco about making CafeRadLab  sails for the racing yacht Melissa II.   Im also hoping we are nominated for the Nobel peace prize.

Im excited to go for a cruise in this thing.   https://youtu.be/PheUNbnrjso
Raise awareness about how the elite are sucking the wealth from the masses and their corporate businesses are destroying the living world.
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#12
Burnin' down the house...

The Earth just had its hottest September on record

"September 2019 was roughly 1.02 degrees F warmer than the average from 1981-2010."
"Regions with the most markedly above average temperatures included the central and eastern USA."
"The recent ... record-breaking temperatures is an alarming reminder of the long-term warming trend."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati...865898002/


Quote:new vaccine modifies your DNA

Mankind is clueless when experimenting for dollars...

We think we are sure that the evidence could point to the possibility that maybe something has changed...

A New Insight Into How DNA Is Held Together by Hydrophobic Effects


Quote:Researchers at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, have discovered a new aspect to the way that DNA binds itself, and the role played by hydrophobic effects. They show how small changes in water properties can delicately control the binding process. The discovery opens doors for new understanding in research in medicine and life sciences. The research is presented in the journal PNAS.

https://scitechdaily.com/a-new-insight-i...c-effects/

Hydrophobic catalysis and a potential biological role of DNA unstacking induced by environment effects


Quote:The main stabilizer of the DNA double helix is not the base-pair hydrogen bonds but coin-pile stacking of base pairs, whose hydrophobic cohesion, requiring abundant water, indirectly makes the DNA interior dry so that hydrogen bonds can exert full recognition power. We report that certain semihydrophobic agents depress the stacking energy (measurable in single-molecule experiments), leading to transiently occurring holes in the base-pair stack (monitorable via binding of threading intercalators). Similar structures observed in DNA complexes with RecA and Rad51, and previous observations of spontaneous strand exchange catalyzed in semihydrophobic model systems, make us propose that some hydrophobic protein residues may have roles in catalyzing homologous recombination. We speculate that hydrophobic catalysis is a general phenomenon in DNA enzymes.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/35/17169

It is my understanding that life modifies your DNA.
Humans did not create background radiation...

 
Reply
#13
This is why the disruption we caused is very minor in comparison to what’s coming

The lead researcher said that "this is the most powerful" methane seep he has ever seen. "No one has ever recorded anything similar."
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/1...rea-arctic

https://t.co/7MVdLp5ssR

Time to Leave the Political Ghosts of 2016 Behind and Face the Future

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/09/...he-future/

"Not here to be vote shamed by the 1%. I am supporting the only candidate who will always put the needs of people first."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/0...ral-outcry

In the United States, while a climate denier sits in the Oval Office, the Democrats are fumbling away our future in their own fog of delay and denial. In 2018, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sidelined the Green New Deal while forming a relatively toothless climate committee. This summer, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) refused to hold a climate debate to put a spotlight on candidates’ climate plans
These moves reveal a mainstream Democratic Party that is in deep denial about the danger of its cuddly relationship with capitalism and corporate power, two chief drivers of climate disaster. As Mother Jones reported, in 2018 oil and gas companies gave $198,000 to the nine Democrats sitting on Pelosi’s climate committee. The DNC had briefly banned accepting donations from the fossil fuel industry that year, until DNC Chair Tom Perez reversed the policy.
To meet this moment, we must create a new politics, economics and culture—a new system of producing and consuming far less—that makes climate repair and justice the central driving force of our actions. Climate change is not “another issue,” but the issue that defines the others.
Only one major U.S. politician has put forth a serious, urgent and comprehensive Green New Deal proposal: Sen. Bernie Sanders. Investing $16 trillion over 10 years (nearly five times what fellow presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren calls for), Sanders’ plan stands out for creating millions of jobs for displaced fossil fuel workers; pushing for publicly owned power companies; dramatically increasing financial support to decarbonize the Global South; and zeroing all emissions from electricity and transportation by 2030—all of it on a faster timeline than his rivals.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/...all-action
"Who would have thought that mankind massively converting O2 to CO2 in such a short timeline would cause problems on a planet that depends on CO2 being massively converted to O2 to support mankinds life?"   Pixels of light borrowed from Jebus. 
 
Reply
#14
For good measure..Some diversity of opinions on the same living spectrum aka the planet in the bipedal sub-bubble to be precise.. most if not all containing truth at the same time..how much precisely is unknown..combine it all nevertheless..ah there you go..you see..a living compass..


Climate Disruption: It’s Not Due to CO2

https://www.globalresearch.ca/climate-di...o2/5677036
"Who would have thought that mankind massively converting O2 to CO2 in such a short timeline would cause problems on a planet that depends on CO2 being massively converted to O2 to support mankinds life?"   Pixels of light borrowed from Jebus. 
 
Reply
#15
I rather like the way you state this DUDe   ".Some diversity of opinions on the same living spectrum aka the planet in the bipedal sub-bubble to be precise.. most if not all containing truth at the same time..how much precisely is unknown..combine it all nevertheless..ah there you go..you see..a living compass.."

However, if the opinions on climate are at nearly opposite sides,  then the truth must be established before humanity goes down the wrong path.  Like I said, what if you stopped  anthropogenic C02 but lost the world to resource exhaustion, nuclear accidents and wars  or any number of other influences?   The climate action aims to reduce carbon dioxide, but where do they talk about population control,  reducing toxins,  ending nuclear, ...indeed, saving the environment?   If we win the war on carbon dioxide but lose the Living Earth,  Im going to be very pissed off. 

Your link was an interview with Claudia Von Werlhof.    She may be a very fine, intelligent person.  She may be right about climate and many other things.  But she is a PhD in sociology  and is kind of an eco-feminist.   This is great, a wonderful field, but she unhesitatingly introduces HAARP and all kinds of things labelled 'conspiracy theorist'  into that mainstream debate of climate.   This is unfortunate in the sense that she will be immediately dismissed.  

Then Werlhof  talks about Rosalie Bertell.   It was Bertell who gave us the huge estimate of people sickened and killed by nuclear....1.3 billion.     People should know this, and put the climate thing into perspective, but my bet is that people in the climate debate will  throw out Bertell and nuclear with HAARP, chemtrails and everything else.  

Bernie and the other new green deal people want to spend trillions of dollars.   I wonder who will be the recipient of that money?  I know where it will come from.     And this under the constant banner of 'creating jobs'.   Personally, I find this insulting, Throw Nobel Peace Prize nominee Greta Thunberg, Monbiot and Schwarzenegger into the $16 trillion picture and it gets repulsive.

If we should spend trillions, we should spend it on things that really matter.   Will stopping carbon dioxide output save the planet?    I dont believe it will.   There may be a carbon dioxide problem,  but at this point anyway, it is not the biggest threat, the exclusive threat.   I would be in favor of cutting fossil fuel burning for many reasons other than carbon dioxide!

Let me be clear;  Im not a climate denier,  Im an earth first type.    I believe that if you poison the planet the planet will be poisoned.   If you exhaust the planet it will be exhausted.   

As far as C02 and the danger to life in a general sense,  we can see (assuming it is at all accurate) that life was booming with a lot more carbon dioxide and that we have been cruising at the very lowest levels, perhaps even near the lowest survivable levels of this plant nutrient. (graph below)


They will have to argue climate until they are blue or engage in fisticuffs.  Im burned out on it.  various counter articles here
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/the-disturbing-correlation-between-atmospheric-co2-and-temperature-in-the-20th-century/

and here
https://www.c3headlines.com/climate-chan...o2-causes/

I noticed stock has a recent bunch of stuff on it at NukePro.  I can say its rather complicated and one can see that even in global warming believer blogs.
[Image: C-1QTEMW0AExIqt.jpg]
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#16
Every possible catastrophe is caused by carbon dioxide.  

the disturbing trend in hurricane landfalls
https://judithcurry.com/2019/02/27/hurri...landfalls/
[Image: slide01-1.png?w=500&h=375]
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#17
this is kind of nice....the pro and con positions on anthropogenic climate change.   Funny though, it ends with a pro warming narrative

https://climatechange.procon.org/
we are healthy with background radiation but unhealthy with the same dose from fallout
 
Reply
#18
"However, if the opinions on climate are at nearly opposite sides, then the truth must be established before humanity goes down the wrong path. Like I said, what if you stopped anthropogenic C02 but lost the world to resource exhaustion, nuclear accidents and wars or any number of other influences? The climate action aims to reduce carbon dioxide, but where do they talk about population control, reducing toxins, ending nuclear, ...indeed, saving the environment? If we win the war on carbon dioxide but lose the Living Earth, Im going to be very pissed off. "

Hi Code , Bernie has been ridiculised/attacked for an overpopulation opinion iirc , but can't remember at the moment where i saw it. AOC was been interupted by a trump plant who started pleeing we should start eating our baby's in order to save the planet. And tbh , if you don't pick up the calls for reducing all kinds of pollution and returning to a more symbiotic agro/econo/ecolo /equal human society then you are dwelling too much in the opposite counterarguments against the "climate movement" (as if it is a single thing with only one direction/coach) , just as i am probably to much setled/drawn in the pro-grassroot-activisme..because its the only activisme that is uniting people and getting arrested for it at the moment..all over the globe..incomplete and hijacked or not..

And i'm going out of my mind by the fact that that absolute insane whatever words one can come up with to describe that mirror of humanity's blackest ratf--ked conscience thats STILL in the WH..has still power to command/sellout ANYTHING at all..he who should be on a stretcher/straitjacket like hanni the canni since the moment he lied about hes inauguration crowd size..with his own private toilet with ganges quality content to drink from..if he can reach it in his straightjacket..no..instead he is still allowed f--king the world further over the event horizon..why is the abused for the zionist agenda/israel and whatever military not marching in and remove the psycho's that has been condamming their mercenary souls to hell for decades without wasting more russian roullette seconds..part of a bigger play or not..



I weep for the Kurds..more cheaply/voided of any empathy/responsibility planned ultra-caricatural backstabbing psychopathic genocide , more pollution by war , more global saturation of refugees and terrorist on murican's conto..and whats to come because he is still not in said straightjacket..i need to find back the info about the alternative channels his base is gathering/finetuning their psychopathic take/preparedness on the imminent future..but one can get a hint from the supporting comments on the mobster twitter page..if one can read the mindsets behind a village idiot attempt to selfconstrain their brief words..

There is no pollution threat on the planet bigger, more urgent than this situation at the moment..imho , and secondly..there is no local/global pollution/dehumanising threat he is not making worse as much as he can since..probably hes inception..

And i don't want "Capitalist's ! That's what we are !" Nancy as replacement..if this somehow ends without a unspeakable horrific total break down of everything..

DUDe
 
Reply
#19
"this is kind of nice....the pro and con positions on anthropogenic climate change. Funny though, it ends with a pro warming narrative

https://climatechange.procon.org/ "

Thank you for finding that Code
 
Reply
#20
Above post was mine to , forgot to sign again..

Fighting climate change means ending war
“The easy movement of high-ranking military officers into jobs with major defense contractors and the reverse movement of top executives in major defense contractors into high Pentagon jobs is solid evidence of the military industrial-complex in operation.”

I was utterly stunned when I read these words of former Wisconsin senator William Proxmire, quoted in an essay by William Hartung, not because of the point he was making — like, what else is new? — but because he said them in . . . 1969.
Oh, my God, 50 years ago!

https://tribunecontentagency.com/article...nding-war/
"Who would have thought that mankind massively converting O2 to CO2 in such a short timeline would cause problems on a planet that depends on CO2 being massively converted to O2 to support mankinds life?"   Pixels of light borrowed from Jebus. 
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Nukes Are No Answer To Climate Crisis Staup 1 759 06-14-2019, 08:06 AM
Last Post: Staup
  Krypton-85 and climate change Horse 0 607 06-06-2019, 07:54 AM
Last Post: Horse

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)