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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

monckton wrote: Well nobody's perfect.....

monckton wrote:
Well nobody's perfect.
I can see him running for office.
After old Carrot Top.

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

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?

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?

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.

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

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.

Into the Night wrote:
What the hell is a 'fake' question???

monckton wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
What the hell is a 'fake' question???

You asking me?

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.

"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.

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.

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?

[b]Wake wrote: lite(song).... severely mentally challenged.....

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.

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.

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.

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.

Tim the plumber wrote:
What the fuck are you driveling on about?[/color]

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?

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.

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.