New theory about climate change
| New theory about climate change08-03-2017 18:48 | |
| AlfonsoHiguera☆☆☆☆☆ (3) |
"Everything is relative, nothing is absolute" I am pleased to present a new theory which shows that the current perspective about the problems of climate change is not based on reliable assumptions, being prisoner of western cultural precepts with little or no scientific basis, leading us to overlook fundamental objective data that would allow us to have a much more realistic view of the situation. Everything indicates that we are suffering the dramatic consequences of the absolute protagonism that western perspective enjoys in everything that surrounds science, an inevitable consequence of the fabulous scientific development of the last Century by the hand of western societies. A perspective that cheerfully disdains that, formerly, a warmer Earth was a planet with more favorable conditions for life, or that the underlying temperature of our planet is -0.4 ºF, or that if the temperature follows its natural course, life over our planet will disappear in a few million years... Let us take into consideration all the data, and not just those that make our (western) vision of climate change correspond with our most remote ancestral beliefs. Let me invite you to read more about it in: https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/253-4557581-8973623?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=snowball+earth+is+approaching |
| 08-03-2017 21:26 | |
| Tim the plumber★★★★☆ (1356) |
Oh God, another nutter.
Edited on 08-03-2017 21:26 |
| 08-03-2017 23:25 | |
| still learning★★☆☆☆ (244) |
Tim the plumber wrote: Trying to sell something for a few bucks. |
| 09-03-2017 20:45 | |
| AlfonsoHiguera☆☆☆☆☆ (3) |
I'm not trying to "sell something for a few bucks". If you want to read it for free, you can do it before having an opinion. Thanks. |
| 14-03-2017 19:20 | |
| AlfonsoHiguera☆☆☆☆☆ (3) |
Greetings again, I don't want to seem that I'm here trying to earn easy money with this controversial subject, so I will show you one of the central ideas of my work, but not before making it clear that I have tried to condense information as much as possible in the work I have published in Amazon, which is linked in my first post. The main thing is that the logic described below is understandable. Thus, it will be recognized that the current approach about climate change is totally wrong. Taking the evolution of the temperature of the last 50 million years, we see that it follows a predominantly descending slope, as we can see in the graphic below. (Uriarte, Antón. Historia del clima de la Tierra. 2003). As we can see, this has led to the formation of the polar ice caps, first in Antarctica and after in Greenland. People are completely opposed to global warming, which prevent us to realize that if the temperature of our planet follows the trend of the last 50 million years, it will descend more and more, until both polar caps are merged and Snowball Earth would destroy practically any form of life on our planet. Therefore, we can reasonably conclude that with this new data, our positioning against global warming is out of place. Attached image:  |
| 14-03-2017 19:36 | |
| litesong★★★★★ (2297) |
[b]AlfonsoHiguera wrote:... both polar caps are merged and Snowball Earth would destroy practically any form of life on our planet. Meanwhile: The solar TSI has been languid for many decades & low for 10 years (including a 3+year low setting a 100 year record). Yet, 385+ straight months of temperatures have past, all over the 20th century average. The last 3 years have been successively the hottest years ever recorded. When the TSI returns to normal, Earth will heat quicker than it does already. Presently, Arctic sea ice extent has been below 14 million square kilometers, ~ 1.8 million square kilometers LESS than the 1980's, which it has been the last two years..... & no years before then, since satellite records. Presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 9,600 cubic kilometers LESS than that of the 1980's. This is an equivalent cube of ice, 21.2 kilometers by 21.2 kilometers by 68,000 feet high, the energy needed to melt it being 30 times the energy consumption of the U.S. All this, while the sun's HEAT.... is low. https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=95V9E%2bjf&id=4FC0BEEDAF541FE3EDF1A01694FDEE4CCC8A3E34&q=Arctic+Sea+Ice+Volume+Graph+feb+2017&simid=608038143506452087&selectedIndex=9&ajaxhist=0 Edited on 14-03-2017 19:53 |
Join the debate New theory about climate change:
Related content
| Threads | Replies | Last post |
| I have a theory | 123 | 16-06-2023 19:16 |
| Evolutionary Biology and the Endosymbiotic Theory of Consciousness. | 111 | 08-06-2023 02:39 |
| What is the cause of climate change based on the greenhouse gas theory? | 82 | 04-02-2023 20:51 |
| There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N2 | 533 | 30-01-2023 07:22 |
| Relativity theory | 317 | 03-11-2022 19:38 |
| Articles |
| Theory |