Global Warming: "Pseudoscientific Fraud"

[creekster]

This could probably be cross-posted to the Random Stuff Worth Reading on the Internet thread, but the parallels between the "impact vs volcano" debate and the climate change debate are fascinating to me.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...debate/565769/

That's a great article. This quotation reminded me of our now rarely seen SU, may his cantankerousness rest in peace:

Though geologists had bickered for 60 years before reaching a consensus on continental drift, Alvarez declared the extinction debate over and done within two years. “That the asteroid hit, and that the impact triggered the extinction of much of the life of the sea … are no longer debatable points,” he said in a 1982 lecture. “Nearly everybody now believes them.”

[Jeff Lebowski]

This could probably be cross-posted to the Random Stuff Worth Reading on the Internet thread, but the parallels between the "impact vs volcano" debate and the climate change debate are fascinating to me.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...debate/565769/

You should have put it in the other thread. There are very few parallels. In the extinction case, you are debating what happened over a very narrow period of time millions of years ago from scanty geologic evidence. In the GW case, you have massive amounts of data about something that is happening right now. And far greater consensus. Apples and oranges.

Really interesting article. I read this a few days ago.

[creekster]

You should have put it in the other thread. There are very few parallels. In the extinction case, you are debating what happened over a very narrow period of time millions of years ago from scanty geologic evidence. In the GW case, you have massive amounts of data about something that is happening right now. And far greater consensus. Apples and oranges.

Really interesting article. I read this a few days ago.

WRT the data you are correct. But the parallels aren't found in the quality, quantity or recency of the data. They are found in the overlay of personalities onto that data and its meaning.

Either way, the article is well worth reading.

[Jeff Lebowski]

WRT the data you are correct. But the parallels aren't found in the quality, quantity or recency of the data. They are found in the overlay of personalities onto that data and its meaning.

Either way, the article is well worth reading.

The personality issues are with the politicians in the global warming world. The vast majority of the scientists get along fine and are in agreement on the basics. The disputes are grossly exaggerated.

[falafel]

The personality issues are with the politicians in the global warming world. The vast majority of the scientists get along fine and are in agreement on the basics. The disputes are grossly exaggerated.

That's exactly what Alvarez would say!

[BigFatMeanie]

That's exactly what Alvarez would say!

- -

[Jeff Lebowski]

That's exactly what Alvarez would say!

Lol. Nicely done.

It would be interesting to read an article from the other scientists' perspective. Keller sounds like she might be a nutcase.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Trump has been tweeting this week about the extreme cold on the east coast, asking (with apparent derision) what happened to global warming. Meanwhile, the feds just released a chilling report that the effects of climate change on the U.S. will be even more dire than previously reported.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/23/healt...-bn/index.html

[Uncle Ted]

Yet another reason to not buy that Tesla...

Electric vehicles in Germany account for more CO2 emissions than diesel ones, according to a study by German scientists.

When CO2 emissions linked to the production of batteries and the German energy mix - in which coal still plays an important role - are taken into consideration, electric vehicles emit 11% to 28% more than their diesel counterparts, according to the study, presented on Wednesday at the Ifo Institute in Munich.


Mining and processing the lithium, cobalt and manganese used for batteries consume a great deal of energy. A Tesla Model 3 battery, for example, represents between 11 and 15 tonnes of CO2. Given a lifetime of 10 years and an annual travel distance of 15,000 kilometres, this translates into 73 to 98 grams of CO2 per kilometre, scientists Christoph Buchal, Hans-Dieter Karl and Hans-Werner Sinn noted in their study.


The CO2 given off to produce the electricity that powers such vehicles also needs to be factored in, they say.


When all these factors are considered, each Tesla emits 156 to 180 grams of CO2 per kilometre, which is more than a comparable diesel vehicle produced by the German company Mercedes, for example.


The German researchers, therefore, take issue with the fact that European officials view electric vehicles as zero-emission ones. They note further that the EU target of 59 grams of CO2 per km by 2030 corresponds to a “technically unrealistic” consumption of 2.2 litres of diesel or 2.6 litres of gas per 100 kms.


These new limits pressure German and other European car manufacturers into switching massively to electric vehicles whereas, the researchers feel, it would have been preferable to opt for methane engines, “whose emissions are one-third less than those of diesel motors.”
[...]

http://brusselstimes.com/business/te...an-study-shows

Yes, both my wife's car and mine are clean diesel burning vehicles. EV owners: shame on you! You are killing the planet.

[Bo Diddley]

Yet another reason to not buy that Tesla...


http://brusselstimes.com/business/te...an-study-shows

Yes, both my wife's car and mine are clean diesel burning vehicles. EV owners: shame on you! You are killing the planet.

I've often wondered what the net result is in using electric vehicles.

[Moliere]

Yet another reason to not buy that Tesla...


http://brusselstimes.com/business/te...an-study-shows

Yes, both my wife's car and mine are clean diesel burning vehicles. EV owners: shame on you! You are killing the planet.

I’ve long said that natural gas (methane) burning engines are where we’ll end up at some point until a better solar or wind technology is found or some other type of renewable.

[SeattleUte]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nu...et-11547225861

[CardiacCoug]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nu...et-11547225861

Yes! The anti-nuclear power (like the anti-vax) coalition is one of the ignorant left and the ignorant right.

The ignorant left think we need to destroy the economy and move to wind power and that nuclear energy is somehow dangerous. The ignorant right deny the reality of climate change altogether.

Absolutely it just makes so much sense for the entire world to invest heavily in safe nuclear power.

[ScoopJahoop]

I wonder whatever happened with the mini reactor that was supposed to provide power to the Utah municipal power group. Small reactors that can’t melt down seem like a pretty solid way forward assuming it’s really a thing.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco...moving-forward

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yes! The anti-nuclear power (like the anti-vax) coalition is one of the ignorant left and the ignorant right.

The ignorant left think we need to destroy the economy and move to wind power and that nuclear energy is somehow dangerous. The ignorant right deny the reality of climate change altogether.

Absolutely it just makes so much sense for the entire world to invest heavily in safe nuclear power.

Agree 100%

The Green New Deal should have included a massive push for nuclear power.