I'm so glad to see you mention snow cover and cloud cover. I've thought about this. Here in Colorado USA we are extremely affected by cloud cover. Relative humidity hovers between 10-20% (very dry climate). Therefore, radiational cooling is dramatic here. It can drop 20 degrees in 30 minutes after sunset. With less cloud cover nights can get cooler/colder, especially in summer. So the mean temperature which is the combination of high and low for the day are affected downward. Yesterday for example, it was 100 degrees in Boulder. This morning, with clear skies and calm winds overnight, it was 60 degrees. So the average for the day was 80. The same as if the range was 90/70. So it's 10 degrees hotter but the average mean temperature is the same because of the cooling at night. And snow cover has an effect too. In low snowpack years, there's less cloud cover in the Spring and early summer due to less evaporation from less snow cover. This adds to the effect as well. Curious on your thoughts. Thanks.
And I agree about mono crops. I just read an article yesterday that Mike Bloomberg is funding a massive initiative focused on 100 cities worldwide, with 14 in the US, all the “biggies” like Boston, Miami, NYC, Philly, Seattle, etc), to go to zero meat and zero dairy, zero private cars, 3 items of clothing a year, one flight less than 1,000 miles every three years. The rest of the world will cave right in after that, if successful. This is a big reason I don’t trust the climate people. As we saw with corona, the medical establishment was bought to come up with certain findings, and so I wonder what’s up here?
It’s still not been proven CO2 is a problem. What is known is that the earth is greener by far, and we have food enough to have 8 billion people, whereas back in the 80s it was 5.5 billion and no one thought we could sustain many more, and yet here they are, with less suffering from food insecurity than in the 80s. Yes, the temps have risen but we are fine. It was much warmer in the 30s than now.
It does matter where the temperature is taken. Airports are the worst, as are large buildings, and whatnot. We’re coming out of a little ice age.
Don’t forget, the EU, the Biden admin, and various other Western entities all are crazily pushing net zero. With China and India focused on their economies, as they should be, nothing the rest of us do will make a difference.
Fear of climate change is not more noble than the other fears.
I appreciated the ratcheting down efforts of a recent post, just as I appreciate a few mentions of Watts and his website (even if he’s used to support a fear he does not believe is justified), but I think we’d be all better off if we enjoyed the day and continued our calm and reasonable efforts to make the world a better place.
All that said, I do support the exploration of a wide range of subjects here, even if I totally disagree with a portion.
Decaf, I disagree on the premise " less suffering from food insecurity than in the 80s. We do have more food then 40 years ago. But what food do we have. The explosive growth of wheat corn and soybeans, especially in the US have added greatly to the overall "food" supply worldwide. But these crops are destroying the soil and the ecosystems and making us much sicker. So although we're feeding more people, at what cost. It's not sustainable IMHO. We need regenerative farming to sustain our species.
Yeah and I don't think the fact we have so much food in the west is because it's got warmer. It's because of unsustainable intensive farming. The greater distribution of the food, if that is true, is also not due to it getting warmer. It's affected by politics and war.
I agree, but the sustainable farming will come along at some point. Right now there are a number of cattle farmers, among others, who are applying regenerative farming to their business. Also while the nutrient value of some crops are much lower, it’s still good enough to sustain life for now. I think we’re always going to be behind the needs of the people. Just as in people’s private lives, many only get with it upon a serious diagnosis when it might already be too late.
And those people may well be totally legit. As you pointed out, they have the behavioral red flags that awaken suspicion.
The problem is that the media and various agencies have suppressed debate on this, like with the corona. Because there are many legit scientists on the other side and many who are in the middle. No one can study the whole picture and so we should be discussing it. And sometimes outsiders have insights because they’re free to make associations as they aren’t constrained by knowledge. Mind you, there’s a lot we can do to take care of the world and I find sometimes that when I take care of something I’m less bothered by the big picture because I’m doing my part.
There has been no proof of fraud. Yes the 1880s may have had less data and should be given less weight. Does that explain the rise in tempertures since the 1980s?
Small increases in temperature have dramatic effects. Are small amounts of iron and arsenic also irrelevant?
Ralph, please site your source for the claim that there is no blanket effect of Co2. I'd really like to read and study this. I'm open to learning but I'm suspicious of the claim. My wife works for NOAA here in Boulder Colorado, one of the epicenters of climate science and everything she tells me contradicts your assertion. Thanks and thanks for being contrarian. That's why I love this Substack and threads. BTW, lets keep it civil (-:
David, try WattsUpWithThat.com. They’re good, and that’s where I’ve heard a lot about CO2 being beneficial and temperature rises of the level we’re experiencing (and more) not being a problem throughout earth’s history.
Decaf, I'll take a look but with all the areas of uncertainty in the world, I firmly believe that climate change is real and dangerous. Of course there are extremists and doomsdayers who are looking to make a buck by scaring people. Just like there are deniers who do the same. Selling books and getting followers on your blog and podcast are big motivations. So I look at all sides with skepticism. However, having a spouse who works for NOAA and knowing and meeting some of the scientists there, I can tell you that most of them are really good honest people doing REAL science, not for profit but because they believe in their mission. None of them write books or have blogs or podcasts. They're just plodding along, looking at data and trying to make their best "educated" assessments of what they see. I'll let you know what I think of WUWT.
An amazing side note Ralph. Tony lives right here in my town, Boulder, Colorado. He's been active in some very admirable environmental causes. Not that this gives me any bias pro or con. Just a fun coincidence. I'll ask my wife if she knows him because she works at NOAA.
I'm so glad to see you mention snow cover and cloud cover. I've thought about this. Here in Colorado USA we are extremely affected by cloud cover. Relative humidity hovers between 10-20% (very dry climate). Therefore, radiational cooling is dramatic here. It can drop 20 degrees in 30 minutes after sunset. With less cloud cover nights can get cooler/colder, especially in summer. So the mean temperature which is the combination of high and low for the day are affected downward. Yesterday for example, it was 100 degrees in Boulder. This morning, with clear skies and calm winds overnight, it was 60 degrees. So the average for the day was 80. The same as if the range was 90/70. So it's 10 degrees hotter but the average mean temperature is the same because of the cooling at night. And snow cover has an effect too. In low snowpack years, there's less cloud cover in the Spring and early summer due to less evaporation from less snow cover. This adds to the effect as well. Curious on your thoughts. Thanks.
I think it's all about trends.
And I agree about mono crops. I just read an article yesterday that Mike Bloomberg is funding a massive initiative focused on 100 cities worldwide, with 14 in the US, all the “biggies” like Boston, Miami, NYC, Philly, Seattle, etc), to go to zero meat and zero dairy, zero private cars, 3 items of clothing a year, one flight less than 1,000 miles every three years. The rest of the world will cave right in after that, if successful. This is a big reason I don’t trust the climate people. As we saw with corona, the medical establishment was bought to come up with certain findings, and so I wonder what’s up here?
It’s still not been proven CO2 is a problem. What is known is that the earth is greener by far, and we have food enough to have 8 billion people, whereas back in the 80s it was 5.5 billion and no one thought we could sustain many more, and yet here they are, with less suffering from food insecurity than in the 80s. Yes, the temps have risen but we are fine. It was much warmer in the 30s than now.
It does matter where the temperature is taken. Airports are the worst, as are large buildings, and whatnot. We’re coming out of a little ice age.
Don’t forget, the EU, the Biden admin, and various other Western entities all are crazily pushing net zero. With China and India focused on their economies, as they should be, nothing the rest of us do will make a difference.
Fear of climate change is not more noble than the other fears.
I appreciated the ratcheting down efforts of a recent post, just as I appreciate a few mentions of Watts and his website (even if he’s used to support a fear he does not believe is justified), but I think we’d be all better off if we enjoyed the day and continued our calm and reasonable efforts to make the world a better place.
All that said, I do support the exploration of a wide range of subjects here, even if I totally disagree with a portion.
Have a great day!
Decaf, I disagree on the premise " less suffering from food insecurity than in the 80s. We do have more food then 40 years ago. But what food do we have. The explosive growth of wheat corn and soybeans, especially in the US have added greatly to the overall "food" supply worldwide. But these crops are destroying the soil and the ecosystems and making us much sicker. So although we're feeding more people, at what cost. It's not sustainable IMHO. We need regenerative farming to sustain our species.
Yeah and I don't think the fact we have so much food in the west is because it's got warmer. It's because of unsustainable intensive farming. The greater distribution of the food, if that is true, is also not due to it getting warmer. It's affected by politics and war.
And chemical fertilizer. And maybe other factors, too, like the distribution of food, as you say. But the warmer weather is definitely a big factor.
At this point, we’re all believing what we like, so I won’t go on.
https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/burning-fossil-fuels-is-the-plan
and many in the global south may wish to emigrate there
I agree, but the sustainable farming will come along at some point. Right now there are a number of cattle farmers, among others, who are applying regenerative farming to their business. Also while the nutrient value of some crops are much lower, it’s still good enough to sustain life for now. I think we’re always going to be behind the needs of the people. Just as in people’s private lives, many only get with it upon a serious diagnosis when it might already be too late.
And those people may well be totally legit. As you pointed out, they have the behavioral red flags that awaken suspicion.
The problem is that the media and various agencies have suppressed debate on this, like with the corona. Because there are many legit scientists on the other side and many who are in the middle. No one can study the whole picture and so we should be discussing it. And sometimes outsiders have insights because they’re free to make associations as they aren’t constrained by knowledge. Mind you, there’s a lot we can do to take care of the world and I find sometimes that when I take care of something I’m less bothered by the big picture because I’m doing my part.
Shameless lies? Foolish cultist? A bit OTT isn't it! I'm pointing out my opinion on his graphs and logic. Now that's disinformation! Really?
There has been no proof of fraud. Yes the 1880s may have had less data and should be given less weight. Does that explain the rise in tempertures since the 1980s?
Small increases in temperature have dramatic effects. Are small amounts of iron and arsenic also irrelevant?
Ralph, please site your source for the claim that there is no blanket effect of Co2. I'd really like to read and study this. I'm open to learning but I'm suspicious of the claim. My wife works for NOAA here in Boulder Colorado, one of the epicenters of climate science and everything she tells me contradicts your assertion. Thanks and thanks for being contrarian. That's why I love this Substack and threads. BTW, lets keep it civil (-:
David, try WattsUpWithThat.com. They’re good, and that’s where I’ve heard a lot about CO2 being beneficial and temperature rises of the level we’re experiencing (and more) not being a problem throughout earth’s history.
Decaf, I'll take a look but with all the areas of uncertainty in the world, I firmly believe that climate change is real and dangerous. Of course there are extremists and doomsdayers who are looking to make a buck by scaring people. Just like there are deniers who do the same. Selling books and getting followers on your blog and podcast are big motivations. So I look at all sides with skepticism. However, having a spouse who works for NOAA and knowing and meeting some of the scientists there, I can tell you that most of them are really good honest people doing REAL science, not for profit but because they believe in their mission. None of them write books or have blogs or podcasts. They're just plodding along, looking at data and trying to make their best "educated" assessments of what they see. I'll let you know what I think of WUWT.
Thanks teacher. I guess I get a B- in english class today. I'll try and do better (-:
I'll watch the video and get back to you. And I'll make sure to CITE any data that may contradict the assertions there. Take care.
Sorry I brought up 'must do better' Tony Heller everyone!!!
Why Jo?
His misleading nonsense has been going round and round for years https://skepticalscience.com/zombies-devour-telegraph-fox-news-brains.html
An amazing side note Ralph. Tony lives right here in my town, Boulder, Colorado. He's been active in some very admirable environmental causes. Not that this gives me any bias pro or con. Just a fun coincidence. I'll ask my wife if she knows him because she works at NOAA.