Originally found over at BIGFURHAT's
Listen carefully, very carefully. This is the most important climate change clip you will ever watch - and only 4mins long. Watch and judge yourself. ABSORB the graph shown. THINK on it. USE your brain.
Originally found over at BIGFURHAT's
Listen carefully, very carefully. This is the most important climate change clip you will ever watch - and only 4mins long. Watch and judge yourself. ABSORB the graph shown. THINK on it. USE your brain.
very informative video
ReplyDeleteMuch like gender and the stolen election, this will be more science that the left ignores.
ReplyDeletemost people who follow you and your posts are thinking this guy is preaching to the choir. trying to preach this to others is often quite frustrating.
ReplyDeleteOne definition of an ice age is the presence of year-round ice on earth. So, by that, we’re still in an ice age. 12,000 years ago there was a 1 mile thick sheet of ice covering the northern US, and the planet has been warming ever since.
ReplyDeleteBut logic no longer applies, and so many have joined that weird climate cult. To paraphrase C.K. Chesterton: “once a man ceases to believe in God, he does not believe nothing, he’ll believe anything.
You wrote "USE your brain". You must be some kind of right-wing terrorist.
ReplyDelete0:48 -- "... the ice has not forgotten how cold or warm it was at the surface at the time the snow fell."
ReplyDelete((Disclaimer: I am an insufferable engineer and a reasonably-paranoid computer programmer. To wit, I tend to question everything. My husband loves me, anyway.))
Is he saying that ice temperature does not change after ice has formed? IOW, that an ice layer, once deposited, stays the same temperature, regardless of what temperatures are below and above it, and stays the same for thousands of years?
Oddly enough, on this Tuesday morning, I do find the whole concept of *kilometers* of ice layers and their temperatures to be somewhat exciting. I need help -- We're going out for coffee ... 😄
You've never noticed that the big, wet, sloppy snowflakes that form right around the triple-point of water are different than the small, dry, sintered flakes that fall when below 0°?
DeleteDifferent studies have different ways that "speak to you" and "tell you a story" like pulling a spark plug and "reading it" to "learn" if the ignition timing or carb jetting needs to change, if the plug is too hot or cold, or if there's oil from bad rings or valve seal.
Happens in most systems by looking at patterns, but pattern recognition is racist, so only racists can both make a system work and be too evil to work on the system.
Damn you, Schroedinger's Racist!
That was eloquent and accurate.
DeleteMN Steel, I don't follow how the shape or form of snowflakes relates to measured temperature. If the video had mentioned the type of ice or shape of flakes, I would have easily accepted it. However, the presenter clearly states that they inserted a thermometer down the drill hole, so they are measuring temperature. My concern stands.
DeleteYes, I also enjoy stories that "speak" to me, but this is not a story -- It is a persuasive presentation. It is meant to support a larger truth via presented facts. However, I feel this 'temperature' issue is a nontrivial smudge on the facts, which jeopardizes the entire argument.
When I get a moment, I'll contact the presenter, then report back here.
Follow the real science! - Love this, will share!
ReplyDeleteOne of things that I did some limited research on when this globull warming BS reared its ugly head was on the Medieval Warm Period cited in this clip. At that time, estimates of global human population are ~10% of what it is today. So, 90% less human population caused the climate to warm because of all the trees and brown coal that 90% less current human population level were burning to stay warm. This is the thinking that globull warming alarmists would have us believe.
ReplyDeleteOne of things that is never mentioned in globull warming discussions is Milankovitch cycles. I'm not going into detail, however if you look at the graphs of the cycles and how they relate to temperature, you'll find that we're just past the peak warm of the current cycle.
So, maybe those alarming "we're heading into an ice age" predictions from the 70's were correct after all. ;-))
Nemo
One more thing. Remember the apoplectic alarms from the 90's about polar bear populations declining and the polar bear being one of the poster childs of the globull warming movement? Funny that since then polar bear populations have increased to the point where they're no longer in danger, continuing to increase and now the bears get no mention in globull warming discussions. Can't imagine why that is.
You keep posting information like this and Greta will have you put against the wall.
ReplyDeleteWell, in the beginning, it was fire and brimstone. It has been said the earth has frozen over twice.
ReplyDeleteI recommend watching this! (Earth Disaster is Coming | ALL The Evidence) Sorry, don't know how to embed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j635Cv2aOlA
ReplyDeleteIrish,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing.
Here is a link to the same video on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE0zHZPQJzA
That would be good if sharing this with those who believe in anthropocentric climate change
(Scoutergreg)
The last sentence sums it up succinctly.
ReplyDeleteWait?!.......What?!.....
ReplyDeleteMeasure temperatures to 1/1000th of a degree?
Color me HIGHLY skeptical.
I could believe measuring to 1/2 of a degree, even 1/10th of a degree.
But 1/1000th?........Even the act of thinking at a distance of a mile away would change the reading.
And his postulation that the temps measured down the drill hole are the same as the temps of the surface of the earth at the time period when that particular layer of ice was formed/laid down?
Again, color me HIGHLY skeptical.
I'm thinking that mass at that depth would tend to RAISE temps due to pressure, and being closer to the core of the earth. Which would change (over time) temperatures from when that layer was originally laid down.
Think miners and mines at miles under the earth's surface, and how much warmer it is down in the mines then at the surface.
Much of the rest I would tend to agree with, but............I'm skeptical on other parts.
Explain it to me, in enough detail for the layman (me), without making me glassy eyed (zzzzz......).
And NO calculus.
President Elect B Woodman
That’s how “the warmest year on record” keeps being generated. All measurements are + or - some uncertainty. Past years are reported at the -, the current warmest year ever are reported at the + level. Anyone paying attention knows all these years are average within uncertainty. But that doesn’t work to alarm anyone.
DeleteThere are underground mines in my region that I've had opportunity to visit several times for studies, summer and winter. When it's 100 degrees on the surface, there's ice on the walls at 100 feet. When it's 20 below on the surface, there's ice on the walls at 100 feet. The temperature below doesn't warm, our bodies adjust. Also, even the strip mines deliver ore to the crushers that is ice laden-- even in August.
DeleteFor one example, visit the underground mines in Tower, MN.
Seen it before and of course it goes un noticed where it desperately needs recognition.
ReplyDeleteThe larger point, being skeptical of the present viral hysteria, is valid despite any questions of the methodology of the experiment; those questions are easily posed to the principles and I presume they've been answered.
ReplyDeletehttps://thesilicongraybeard.blogspot.com/p/imagine-there-is.html?m=1
ReplyDeleteBeing from North Dakota, I hope it gets so cold everyone else leaves this continent.
ReplyDelete