Climate Change in 12 Minutes - The Skeptic's Case
Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money
By Dr. David M.W. Evans "We check the main predictions of the climate models against the best and latest data. Fortunately the climate models got all their major predictions wrong. Why? Every serious skeptical scientist has been consistently saying essentially the same thing for over 20 years, yet most people have never heard the message. Here it is, put simply enough for any lay reader willing to pay attention..." https://mises.org/daily/5892/The-Skeptics-Case Freedomain Radio is the largest and most popular philosophy show on the web - http://www.freedomainradio.com Donations gratefully accepted at http://www.fdrurl.com/donate Dr. David M.W. Evans consulted full time for the Australian Greenhouse Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and part time 2008 to 2010, modeling Australia's carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of human endeavor with the most experience and sophistication in dealing with feedbacks and analyzing complex systems is electrical engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from being a warmist to a skeptic.
Comments
-
Has anyone seen how well plants thrive in a greenhouse? That's right, yields increase dramatically. If climate change (whatever that really is) is real, all you tree huggers should love it.
-
Kudos to your report note that CO2 is a Log to heat , and why then do they do not use LFTR aka MSR reactor. Note that when the earth was frozen to the equator CO2 levels were over 1,500 times greater than they are today , and the last Ice age melted without our help. I think that you will find the Orbit and the Sun to be a larger factor on the climate, that and other external space forces.
New LFTR
Remix 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BybPPIMuQQ -
Once you may encounter a black cat, just think of whether this day is better or worse than your average. Just in case it turns out below average, you have just proven the effect ob black cats! That is, following the logic that rising temperatures prove the effect of co2. Ps. please mind temperatures can only go up or down, by what so ever definition.
-
I don't like pollution and violent feedbacks
-
I think you've hung out with Monkton too much. You should debate a climate scientist. Data mining can proove what you want.
-
Can they predict when my temperature is no going to not be freezing cold?
-
Why do people keep trotting out the 97% consensus argument? If someone said 97% of people voted for Putin, you'd say the election was rigged. So why is 97% consensus accepted in climate change, especially when scientists are supposed to be trying to prove each other wrong, not affirm each other?
-
I am glad to learn that CO2 has no impact on global warming at all. Since the 1950's CO2 went up eight thousands of one percent. The air we breathe today has 0.0314% CO2 in it. That is at any standard hardly nothing at all. The planet is not heating up and has not been heating up for the last eighteen years.
-
all claims of global warming have been made on models that have been manipulated aka climate gate its all about money and not science The sun is what causes climate change not man made cheers
-
all you really have to do is show a photo of Algorzeera's 9K sq ft mansion in Montecito. CA or Leo DiCaprio's jet....they obviously don't believe their own CO2 tripe...so why should we ?
-
Trump will but an end to all this swarming BS and stop the funning. For the truth check out John L. Casey and adapt2030
-
Many of the climate models are created by people that have a vested interest in promoting "man-made" climate change. Much like those people that create opinion polls that would support a desired outcome (aka: Their own personal opinion).
These "climate models" use the minimal data collected since the late 19th century for their basis and totally disregard such things like the approx. 25,800 yr. cycle of the precession of the equinoxes, which has more effect on the future climate that man ever will have. JMO. -
.03 = 97. You must have FAITH.
-
Look up global warming Wikileaks... It's all political bullshit. I'm completely against pollution and it boggles my mind we aren't harnessing the sun for all of our energy, I think there's a conspiracy there. Money. Just like "global warming" it's a political, money scheme. Making us live less than the elite like Al Gore and Leo etc. who tell us hypocritically how to live less while they own multiple homes and travel everywhere via private jet.
-
How come he mentions feedbacks, and then assiduously avoids even naming them. The albedo effect of melting arctic ice cap (which is happening) so reducing the reflection of heat from earth's surface, the large-scale melting of permafrost in Siberian tundra leading to massive release of methane to name two huge ones he never even mentioned. And he thinks this is going to be taken seriously by scientists?
-
Scientific theories must first provide a means of falsifying the theory. How does positive feedback aspect of climate alarmism result in a falsification of the theory? Since they provide no such answer, the theory by its very nature is not scientific.
The climate changes and humans do have an impact (both are observable facts). The extent of that impact is what is debated and climate alarmists propose a theory based on positive feed backs being greater than negative feedbacks that has no evidence to support it and has no declaration of how the theory can be proven false. It's politics. -
climate change is a tax companies pay and pass the costs to the consumers ..
-
Calling out stormkang the libtard shill:
+stormkang is a typical retard working hard shill going through all these posts trying to discredit Stefan and when you present him with logic and reasoning he recoils back into the abyss CTR he came from.
stormkang I'm still waiting your arguments to discredit this video point by point rather than coming up with vitriol bullshits you spout. -
Damp, not dampen.
-
I agree mostly with the skeptics case. My only issue with it is that it assumes that CO2 emissions are the only human activity that is causing global warming.
What about the mass deforestation that we have done to this planet? Earth has already lost an estimated 80% of its forests. A scientist showed recently that the trees in the rain forests were releasing molecules into the air that was causing the participation of water to form clouds. Once the trees are gone, the clouds will leave as well. How do you think that this effect global warming? As stated in this video, clouds reflect sunlight back into space resulting in a cooling effect.
12m 53sLenght
5403Rating