They say the victor writes the history of a period, and that may be so. But when enough time has passed it must be the case that the present will be seen as truly bizarre when it comes to the demise of the natural sciences and our understanding of the physical world around us. This must especially be the case when it comes to how energy moves in it, especially heat.
Thermal energy, or heat, is the energy that comes from the movement of atoms and molecules in a substance. Heat increases when these particles move faster.
Rather than acknowledging that most of the heating on planet Earth comes from the Sun, and how this energy is distributed changes with the seasons because of the tilt of the Earth relative to the Sun. Instead of acknowledging this – and considering how most of the heating occurs at the equator with the heat transferred to the poles – we have even the right of politics promoting the nonsense idea that global warming from carbon dioxide is real and it's manmade. I’m quoting Bjorn Lomborg, that is what he keeps repeating, and Jordon Peterson has made him the chief scientists, for the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship that is attempting to rewrite the story for the right of politics in The West.
This is the meme that has swept across the West with the ruling class pretending their scientists, who are often just political scientists, can not only know the average temperature of the Earth, but also control the temperature of the Earth.
To be able to do this, they will, of course, need to be able to dial back this heating as it moves from the equator to the poles, or should they be dialling it up?
Which should it be?
To dial down the average temperature of the Earth, should we be seeking to increase the yearly average heat transport poleward, or slow it down?
Richard Greene,
There is no climate crisis caused by CO2. There is a social health crisis caused by mass obsession over CO2.
And even if Jennifer has it wrong on CO2, what leads you to reject her regarding coral? Frankly your rejection of everything someone says if they say something you disagree with is selective and circular. If you were honest about applying that you would have to reject every consensus climate scientist. They have all made agregious errors.
Hi, Richard Greene. Jennifer is right: CAGW is fake. It's groupthink supported by world government WEF agitprop.
Thank you for many years of good articles o coral. I will miss them in the future. I will miss them because you apparently believe manmade CO2 emissions have no effect on the climate. That is a ridiculous claim from a Ph.D. scientist, and contradicted by almost 100% of scientists in the world since 1896, BASED ON EVIDENCE. A consesus that has withstood a 127 year test of time.
When I read a significant false statement by a scientist, such as the quote below, I no longer read anything else by that scientist.
In this article, I read and assumed the author agreed with this false statement:
"politics promoting the nonsense idea that global warming from carbon dioxide is real and it’s manmade."
Radical conservatives who attempt to refute CAGW scaremongering by claiming AGW is fake are the enemies of intelligent, logical conservatives. They are a gift for leftist fact checkers. Shame on you, Ms. Marohasy.
Hi Christopher,
I direct you to the link I provided....'Tomorrow's Weather' – thirty years on....
The Dry Cycle 'vanguard' moves at 15 degrees longitude per 30 Day/Night Interval Month,
(as per the Earth/Solar Orbital Calendar, pp 172 - 173)
It was not the water 'catapulted' into the atmosphere that caused the flooding event – rather it was the 'heat source' and the orbiting ash and aerosol cloud....the floods occurred two months after the eruption.