Remember me
▼ Content

James Hansen's Lecture: Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?


James Hansen's Lecture: Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?01-12-2017 05:01
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
April 7, 2017—James Hansen, known for his climate research and his Congressional testimony on climate change that raised awareness of global warming, delivered a featured talk, "Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?" at the 2017 AAG Annual Meeting in Boston. The session was chaired and moderated by AAG President Glen MacDonald. Hansen was also honored as the 2017 AAG Honorary Geographer during the AAG Awards Luncheon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOPul78Ilk
03-12-2017 17:39
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
monckton wrote:
April 7, 2017—James Hansen, known for his climate research and his Congressional testimony on climate change that raised awareness of global warming, delivered a featured talk, "Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?" at the 2017 AAG Annual Meeting in Boston. The session was chaired and moderated by AAG President Glen MacDonald. Hansen was also honored as the 2017 AAG Honorary Geographer during the AAG Awards Luncheon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOPul78Ilk


Funny how all of these people that are saying that we have to "avert disaster" are the same ones saying that it is too late.

This isn't about STOPPING the generation of power and its concomitant CO2 generation - it is about buying and selling "carbon credits". This is an entirely new investment strategy designed to make billions for investors like George Soros.

http://elementmarkets.com/emission-credits/?gclid=CjwKCAiA3o7RBRBfEiwAZMtSCa2VZuB0xFdptbp4ZJNiWGD3fgOWESIN_OyjPnnVluf5TsseuIogSBoCsCsQAvD_BwE

https://qz.com/974463/buying-carbon-credits-is-the-easiest-way-to-offset-your-carbon-footprint/

Etc.
Edited on 03-12-2017 18:26
03-12-2017 22:29
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Wake wrote:
monckton wrote:
April 7, 2017—James Hansen, known for his climate research and his Congressional testimony on climate change that raised awareness of global warming, delivered a featured talk, "Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?" at the 2017 AAG Annual Meeting in Boston. The session was chaired and moderated by AAG President Glen MacDonald. Hansen was also honored as the 2017 AAG Honorary Geographer during the AAG Awards Luncheon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOPul78Ilk


Funny how all of these people that are saying that we have to "avert disaster" are the same ones saying that it is too late.

This isn't about STOPPING the generation of power and its concomitant CO2 generation - it is about buying and selling "carbon credits". This is an entirely new investment strategy designed to make billions for investors like George Soros.

http://elementmarkets.com/emission-credits/?gclid=CjwKCAiA3o7RBRBfEiwAZMtSCa2VZuB0xFdptbp4ZJNiWGD3fgOWESIN_OyjPnnVluf5TsseuIogSBoCsCsQAvD_BwE

https://qz.com/974463/buying-carbon-credits-is-the-easiest-way-to-offset-your-carbon-footprint/

Etc.


Wanna know something funny?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/legendary-climate-scientist-likes-a-gop-proposal-on-global-warming/

The same man you just quoted: "What's the United States' best hope for solving climate change at this point?

The only effective way of addressing climate change is to make the price of fossil fuels include their cost to society. That could be done in a simple way by collecting a fee from the fossil fuel companies that would gradually rise over time—a carbon fee and dividend. Studies show this would benefit the economy and this is a conservative approach, where you let the market move you toward a better situation.

I call it a carbon fee because you would give all of the money to the public, a dividend to each legal resident. [A group of Republicans] have adopted [this approach] almost precisely as I proposed it in 2008. The starting level of the fee varies from one proposition to another—I believe that they start at $40 per ton of carbon. [I] suggest $55 per ton—[that price] yields a dividend of $1,000 per legal resident and $3,000 for a family with two or more children, with one half-share for each child [and] a maximum of two half-shares per family."

Strangely HE wants in on the sales of carbon credits. He wants his own and his children's pockets lined. monckton's hero.
03-12-2017 22:31
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
Wake wrote:
monckton wrote:
April 7, 2017—James Hansen, known for his climate research and his Congressional testimony on climate change that raised awareness of global warming, delivered a featured talk, "Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?" at the 2017 AAG Annual Meeting in Boston. The session was chaired and moderated by AAG President Glen MacDonald. Hansen was also honored as the 2017 AAG Honorary Geographer during the AAG Awards Luncheon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOPul78Ilk


Funny how all of these people that are saying that we have to "avert disaster" are the same ones saying that it is too late.

This isn't about STOPPING the generation of power and its concomitant CO2 generation - it is about buying and selling "carbon credits". This is an entirely new investment strategy designed to make billions for investors like George Soros.

http://elementmarkets.com/emission-credits/?gclid=CjwKCAiA3o7RBRBfEiwAZMtSCa2VZuB0xFdptbp4ZJNiWGD3fgOWESIN_OyjPnnVluf5TsseuIogSBoCsCsQAvD_BwE

https://qz.com/974463/buying-carbon-credits-is-the-easiest-way-to-offset-your-carbon-footprint/

Etc.


They generally are NOT the same ones. Again, you are making bigoted statements.

It is true that SOME (but not all) believers in the Church of Global Warming are saying it's already too late. It is also true that other (but not all) believers say we could avert 'disaster' (usually by some drastic action requiring governments to micromanage economies).

AGAIN you are making a compositional error involving people as a class. That is what what bigotry is.

A compositional error occurs when one extends an element of a class across the entire class improperly. When that class is people, the error (which is a fallacy) becomes bigotry. If the element in question is a physical trait, such as eye color, the error becomes racism.

ALL forms of compositional errors are a fallacy.

ALL fallacies are errors in formal logic. That's what a fallacy is. It's like a math error, but in logic instead.


The Parrot Killer
03-12-2017 23:16
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
monckton wrote:
April 7, 2017—James Hansen, known for his climate research and his Congressional testimony on climate change that raised awareness of global warming, delivered a featured talk, "Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?" at the 2017 AAG Annual Meeting in Boston. The session was chaired and moderated by AAG President Glen MacDonald. Hansen was also honored as the 2017 AAG Honorary Geographer during the AAG Awards Luncheon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abOPul78Ilk


Funny how all of these people that are saying that we have to "avert disaster" are the same ones saying that it is too late.

This isn't about STOPPING the generation of power and its concomitant CO2 generation - it is about buying and selling "carbon credits". This is an entirely new investment strategy designed to make billions for investors like George Soros.

http://elementmarkets.com/emission-credits/?gclid=CjwKCAiA3o7RBRBfEiwAZMtSCa2VZuB0xFdptbp4ZJNiWGD3fgOWESIN_OyjPnnVluf5TsseuIogSBoCsCsQAvD_BwE

https://qz.com/974463/buying-carbon-credits-is-the-easiest-way-to-offset-your-carbon-footprint/

Etc.


They generally are NOT the same ones. Again, you are making bigoted statements.

It is true that SOME (but not all) believers in the Church of Global Warming are saying it's already too late. It is also true that other (but not all) believers say we could avert 'disaster' (usually by some drastic action requiring governments to micromanage economies).

AGAIN you are making a compositional error involving people as a class. That is what what bigotry is.

A compositional error occurs when one extends an element of a class across the entire class improperly. When that class is people, the error (which is a fallacy) becomes bigotry. If the element in question is a physical trait, such as eye color, the error becomes racism.

ALL forms of compositional errors are a fallacy.

ALL fallacies are errors in formal logic. That's what a fallacy is. It's like a math error, but in logic instead.


And you're off and running again because yo're been criticized and identified.
03-12-2017 23:51
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Wake wrote:
Strangely HE wants in on the sales of carbon credits. He wants his own and his children's pockets lined. monckton's hero.


Well now who wouldn't that's how pockets work?
It's not rocket science.
It's a different branch of science altogether ... who's name currently escapes me.

Anyway what a guy, the Indiana Jones of renewable energy ...



Dr. James Hansen, former director of NASA's Goddard Institute and Adjunct Professor at Columbia University's Earth Institute, discusses the urgent need to radically change our relationship with the planet. RT Correspondent Anya Parampil looks at the accelerating pace of climate change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt8EUMu6S7c
03-12-2017 23:56
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
monckton wrote:
Wake wrote:
Strangely HE wants in on the sales of carbon credits. He wants his own and his children's pockets lined. monckton's hero.


Well now who wouldn't that's how pockets work?
It's not rocket science.
It's a different branch of science altogether ... who's name currently escapes me.

Anyway what a guy, the Indiana Jones of renewable energy ...



Dr. James Hansen, former director of NASA's Goddard Institute and Adjunct Professor at Columbia University's Earth Institute, discusses the urgent need to radically change our relationship with the planet. RT Correspondent Anya Parampil looks at the accelerating pace of climate change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt8EUMu6S7c


Past director and someone that will soon have his phony "science" shown to be nothing more than the usual Nine-Percenter urge to kill other races on this planet.
04-12-2017 02:28
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Well nobody's perfect.
I can see him running for office.
After old Carrot Top.
04-12-2017 16:57
litesong
★★★★★
(2041)
monckton wrote: Well nobody's perfect.....
.... except for "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up", who is perfectly an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener.
Edited on 04-12-2017 16:57
04-12-2017 21:18
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
monckton wrote:
Well nobody's perfect.
I can see him running for office.
After old Carrot Top.


Well, hows that good old European Union going now? The collapse is eminent because it is composed of people like you.

You are telling us all about American elections when you can't even stop Brexit.
04-12-2017 23:16
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Wake wrote:
Well, hows that good old European Union going now? The collapse is eminent because it is composed of people like you.


... what swashbucklers?

05-12-2017 00:38
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
monckton wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, hows that good old European Union going now? The collapse is eminent because it is composed of people like you.


... what swashbucklers?



It isn't any surprise that you and your kind are failing the EU on every front. That instead of making it more difficult to start a war you have enabled the rebirth and rapid growth of nationalism with its concomitant dangers.

You and your kind are jokes and every time you post you show it.
05-12-2017 08:49
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Yeah and I bet you have the solution.
As for the 'collapse' of the EU - I blame the yanks ...

Obama to the British people: Just say no to Brexit

President Barack Obama made an appeal to Britons on Thursday in an op-ed for The Telegraph, outlining the benefits of the United Kingdom remaining in the European Union as the country is set to consider a referendum on its withdrawal.

Obama, who arrived in London on Thursday afternoon, will meet with British Prime Minister David Cameron and dine with Queen Elizabeth II and the duke and duchess of Cambridge, followed by a news conference and a town hall with British young people.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/obama-britain-brexit-222296

Yes, and in that order.
Hearts and minds eh?

I'll be honest - I did read that he talked David Cameron round.
Edited on 05-12-2017 08:54
05-12-2017 12:01
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(981)
Did Hanson actually say what the catastrophy would actually be?

As in what actually will be the trouble with a slightly warmer world?
05-12-2017 13:15
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Think of your question as the act of pouring water from a kettle leaving it somewhat drained.
Now, with the resources available to you at your fingertips - see if you can go and find the answer and fill it back up.
Let us know what you find out.
05-12-2017 16:28
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Did Hanson actually say what the catastrophy would actually be?

As in what actually will be the trouble with a slightly warmer world?


It would be catastrophic if we leave everything alone and he can't make a killing in carbon credits. It would be catastrophic if the human race continues to multiply because energy and food resources are unfettered.

They want to pretend that for some reason the human race is more deadly that the passenger pigeon flocks that would take three days for a single flock to pass or the Bison which would stretch as far as the eye could see from a tall hill. Or the animals of the African savanna that also were so numerous that they would multiply themselves into extinction. This same sort of thing would occur in the southern hemisphere as well.

Man knows how to operate within the constraints of the ecology and that bugs the hell out of the environmentalists. Do you know that they blame the extinction of the passenger pigeon on man and not multiplying to such an extent that they ate themselves out of existence?
05-12-2017 17:41
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(981)
monckton wrote:
Think of your question as the act of pouring water from a kettle leaving it somewhat drained.
Now, with the resources available to you at your fingertips - see if you can go and find the answer and fill it back up.
Let us know what you find out.


What the fuck are you driveling on about?
Edited on 05-12-2017 17:41
05-12-2017 18:04
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Tim the plumber wrote:
If you have a pint of water in a kettle and heat it via the electric heating element then the amount of heat leaving the kettle is less tha that entering it. This situation continues untill it starts to boil whne the amount of heat energy leaving in the form of steam will be equal to the input as the temperature will remain constant.

If the power is switched off then the amount of heat energy leaving will be higher than that going into the kettle


That's 2 fake questions.
I'm not running around doing work for you.
05-12-2017 19:48
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
monckton wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
If you have a pint of water in a kettle and heat it via the electric heating element then the amount of heat leaving the kettle is less tha that entering it. This situation continues untill it starts to boil whne the amount of heat energy leaving in the form of steam will be equal to the input as the temperature will remain constant.

If the power is switched off then the amount of heat energy leaving will be higher than that going into the kettle


That's 2 fake questions.
I'm not running around doing work for you.


What the hell is a 'fake' question???


The Parrot Killer
05-12-2017 20:12
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Into the Night wrote:
What the hell is a 'fake' question???


You asking me?
05-12-2017 20:42
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
monckton wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
What the hell is a 'fake' question???


You asking me?


You wrote it. What the hell is a 'fake' question???


The Parrot Killer
05-12-2017 22:37
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
monckton wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
If you have a pint of water in a kettle and heat it via the electric heating element then the amount of heat leaving the kettle is less tha that entering it. This situation continues untill it starts to boil whne the amount of heat energy leaving in the form of steam will be equal to the input as the temperature will remain constant.

If the power is switched off then the amount of heat energy leaving will be higher than that going into the kettle


That's 2 fake questions.
I'm not running around doing work for you.


Spot - every day you look more and more a clown. You obviously don't even understand the simplest descriptions of physics.
06-12-2017 02:33
litesong
★★★★★
(2041)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed:...you look more and more a clown.
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" is S.K.'s "It".
Edited on 06-12-2017 02:34
08-12-2017 13:28
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(981)
monckton wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
If you have a pint of water in a kettle and heat it via the electric heating element then the amount of heat leaving the kettle is less tha that entering it. This situation continues untill it starts to boil whne the amount of heat energy leaving in the form of steam will be equal to the input as the temperature will remain constant.

If the power is switched off then the amount of heat energy leaving will be higher than that going into the kettle


That's 2 fake questions.
I'm not running around doing work for you.


There is no question at all in my post.

What the fuck are you driveling on about?
08-12-2017 16:03
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Tim the plumber wrote:
monckton wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
If you have a pint of water in a kettle and heat it via the electric heating element then the amount of heat leaving the kettle is less tha that entering it. This situation continues untill it starts to boil whne the amount of heat energy leaving in the form of steam will be equal to the input as the temperature will remain constant.

If the power is switched off then the amount of heat energy leaving will be higher than that going into the kettle


That's 2 fake questions.
I'm not running around doing work for you.


There is no question at all in my post.

What the fuck are you driveling on about?


As anyone can see monckton and litebrain are severely mentally challenged. Who the hell knows what goes on in their heads.

A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.

I really can't make out what to think of sites like this one. Allowing litebrain to ramble on posting to himself, allowing monckton to publish when he has already said that his ideal world would be without man just makes me wonder.
08-12-2017 18:34
litesong
★★★★★
(2041)
[b]Wake wrote: lite(song).... severely mentally challenged.....
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" continues as an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebag steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener.
08-12-2017 21:06
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
Wake wrote:
A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.


The theories of thermodynamics and the theory behind the Stefan-Boltzmann law ARE published papers, dumbass.


The Parrot Killer
08-12-2017 21:43
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.


The theories of thermodynamics and the theory behind the Stefan-Boltzmann law ARE published papers, dumbass.


And the problem is that you don't understand them and misrepresent them most of the time.
08-12-2017 22:27
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.


The theories of thermodynamics and the theory behind the Stefan-Boltzmann law ARE published papers, dumbass.


And the problem is that you don't understand them and misrepresent them most of the time.


I understand them. I do not misrepresent them at all.

It is YOU that is trying to change these theories to variations of your own. It is YOU that has tried to decrease entropy in a system. It is YOU that has tried to change the equation of the S-B law (and continues to try to do so). It is YOU that tries to outright deny these laws.

Inversion fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
08-12-2017 23:56
Wake
★★★★★
(2772)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.


The theories of thermodynamics and the theory behind the Stefan-Boltzmann law ARE published papers, dumbass.


And the problem is that you don't understand them and misrepresent them most of the time.


I understand them. I do not misrepresent them at all.

It is YOU that is trying to change these theories to variations of your own. It is YOU that has tried to decrease entropy in a system. It is YOU that has tried to change the equation of the S-B law (and continues to try to do so). It is YOU that tries to outright deny these laws.

Inversion fallacy.


You can't even comprehend whole system and subsystem uses of these equations and argue about it again and again.

Then you actually believe that using words from your "Big Book of Words to Make You Sound Smart" actually has some sort of effect other than to make you look like a clown.
09-12-2017 11:38
moncktonProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(212)
Tim the plumber wrote:
What the fuck are you driveling on about?[/color]


You keep asking stupid questions and I'm drivelling on about it.
If you want to know James Hansens views are, watch the link.
I can't believe you are commenting with confidence on this forum whilst being essentially ignorant of the topic.
You'll be asking about plumbing next.
14-12-2017 12:50
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(981)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Did Hanson actually say what the catastrophy would actually be?

As in what actually will be the trouble with a slightly warmer world?


I ask again, because I will not spend my live watching drival on the internet unless somebody tells me what it is about.

Then could others stop driveling on with no idea what they are saying?
14-12-2017 19:25
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4531)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
A quarter of the time nightmare makes sense and the rest of the time he has these loony ideas that he knows what science is. If he just stuck to explaining things that are in published papers he would be fine.


The theories of thermodynamics and the theory behind the Stefan-Boltzmann law ARE published papers, dumbass.


And the problem is that you don't understand them and misrepresent them most of the time.


I understand them. I do not misrepresent them at all.

It is YOU that is trying to change these theories to variations of your own. It is YOU that has tried to decrease entropy in a system. It is YOU that has tried to change the equation of the S-B law (and continues to try to do so). It is YOU that tries to outright deny these laws.

Inversion fallacy.


You can't even comprehend whole system and subsystem uses of these equations and argue about it again and again.

Buzzword fallacy.
Wake wrote:
Then you actually believe that using words from your "Big Book of Words to Make You Sound Smart" actually has some sort of effect other than to make you look like a clown.

Inversion fallacy.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate James Hansen's Lecture: Global Climate Change: Can the Next Generation Avert a Catastrophe?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
'We should be on the offensive' – James Hansen calls for wave of climate lawsuits017-11-2017 13:17
James Hansen is wrong. The atmosphere, not the CO2 in the atmosphere, increases temperature by 33 C014-09-2016 23:08
Will the world (this generation) allow one man to fix things?1811-01-2016 13:15
Is James Hansen right or wrong?306-01-2016 03:31
Michael Oppenheimer, M2C2 Lecture, Pace Univ, 20142020-11-2015 00:41
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact