Quote:

DeSantis’s Florida Approves Climate-Denial Videos in Schools

WTF? No wonder America is in decline: the ascendency of populism, politics over reality.


Quote:

Wind and solar power pollute the Earth and make life miserable. Recent global and local heat records reflect natural temperature cycles. These are some of the themes of children’s videos produced by an influential conservative advocacy group. Now, the videos could soon be used in Florida’s classrooms. Florida’s Department of Education has approved the classroom use of material from the Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that produces videos that distort science, history, gender and other topics.

PragerU is NOT a university! Just a bunch of bible bashers pushing religious garbage.


Quote:

DeSantis's Florida Approves Climate-Denial Videos in Schools Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks at a press conference announcing awards for post-hurricane recovery. DeSantis’s administration has allowed schools to use videos that contain misinformation about climate change, which is worsening the impacts of the hurricanes that strike the state and causing sea level rise. Credit: Photo by Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images CLIMATEWIRE | Climate activists are like Nazis. Wind and solar power pollute the Earth and make life miserable. Recent global and local heat records reflect natural temperature cycles. These are some of the themes of children’s videos produced by an influential conservative advocacy group. Now, the videos could soon be used in Florida’s classrooms. Florida’s Department of Education has approved the classroom use of material from the Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that produces videos that distort science, history, gender and other topics. Education experts call the videos dangerous propaganda. Florida is the first state to allow PragerU materials in public schools, where teachers will have the option of showing the five- to 10-minute videos in their classrooms. Florida public schools have roughly 3 million students, more than the entire population of Kansas. PragerU CEO Marissa Streit says the videos will rebalance schools that have been “hijacked by the left.” “Young kids are being taught climate hysteria," Streit said in an interview. "They’re hearing that the world is coming to an end, and we think that there needs to be a healthy balance. “The climate is always changing,” Streit added, repeating a climate-denial motto that rejects fossil fuel burning as the cause of continuing record-high temperatures. For now, Florida has approved using PragerU videos only in civics and government for younger children. Some PragerU climate denial videos are classified under non-climate categories, which could enable their use in Florida.

Of course, deny denialism.


Quote:

Florida’s approval is alarming because children will watch the videos when they are at their most impressionable stage, in kindergarten through 5th grade, said Adrienne McCarthy, a researcher at Kansas State University who tracks PragerU. Extreme ideas are presented as common beliefs in many videos, she said. “They can take these right-wing, controversial ideas and cloak them in seemingly harmless and friendly rhetoric,” McCarthy said. “Then they create this kind of facade of normal conservative beliefs, and they use authoritative figures [in the videos] in order to convince the audience.” “It’s also targeted at the parents themselves, saying that if you want to be a good parent, you should be teaching your kids this,” McCarthy added.

What was it the Jesuits said? “Give me a child until he is seven and he will be mine for the rest of his life” this filthy mob of money grubbing bible bashers want to do that with todays children!


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/desantiss-florida-approves-climate-denial-videos-in-schools/

Meatball Ron also says slavery was good for the slaves.

Unsurprisingly, he's not doing too well in his GOP primary campaign.

A total dipshit.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 9:02am:

Quote: DeSantis’s Florida Approves Climate-Denial Videos in Schools WTF? No wonder America is in decline: the ascendency of populism, politics over reality. [quote]Wind and solar power pollute the Earth and make life miserable. Recent global and local heat records reflect natural temperature cycles. These are some of the themes of children’s videos produced by an influential conservative advocacy group. Now, the videos could soon be used in Florida’s classrooms. Florida’s Department of Education has approved the classroom use of material from the Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that produces videos that distort science, history, gender and other topics.

PragerU is NOT a university! Just a bunch of bible bashers pushing religious garbage.


Quote:

DeSantis's Florida Approves Climate-Denial Videos in Schools Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks at a press conference announcing awards for post-hurricane recovery. DeSantis’s administration has allowed schools to use videos that contain misinformation about climate change, which is worsening the impacts of the hurricanes that strike the state and causing sea level rise. Credit: Photo by Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images CLIMATEWIRE | Climate activists are like Nazis. Wind and solar power pollute the Earth and make life miserable. Recent global and local heat records reflect natural temperature cycles. These are some of the themes of children’s videos produced by an influential conservative advocacy group. Now, the videos could soon be used in Florida’s classrooms. Florida’s Department of Education has approved the classroom use of material from the Prager University Foundation, a conservative group that produces videos that distort science, history, gender and other topics. Education experts call the videos dangerous propaganda. Florida is the first state to allow PragerU materials in public schools, where teachers will have the option of showing the five- to 10-minute videos in their classrooms. Florida public schools have roughly 3 million students, more than the entire population of Kansas. PragerU CEO Marissa Streit says the videos will rebalance schools that have been “hijacked by the left.” “Young kids are being taught climate hysteria," Streit said in an interview. "They’re hearing that the world is coming to an end, and we think that there needs to be a healthy balance. “The climate is always changing,” Streit added, repeating a climate-denial motto that rejects fossil fuel burning as the cause of continuing record-high temperatures. For now, Florida has approved using PragerU videos only in civics and government for younger children. Some PragerU climate denial videos are classified under non-climate categories, which could enable their use in Florida.

Of course, deny denialism.


Quote:

Florida’s approval is alarming because children will watch the videos when they are at their most impressionable stage, in kindergarten through 5th grade, said Adrienne McCarthy, a researcher at Kansas State University who tracks PragerU. Extreme ideas are presented as common beliefs in many videos, she said. “They can take these right-wing, controversial ideas and cloak them in seemingly harmless and friendly rhetoric,” McCarthy said. “Then they create this kind of facade of normal conservative beliefs, and they use authoritative figures [in the videos] in order to convince the audience.” “It’s also targeted at the parents themselves, saying that if you want to be a good parent, you should be teaching your kids this,” McCarthy added.

What was it the Jesuits said? “Give me a child until he is seven and he will be mine for the rest of his life” this filthy mob of money grubbing bible bashers want to do that with todays children!


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/desantiss-florida-approves-climate-denial-videos-in-schools/[/quote]


Ohhhhh....sooo tewwible!!

In civics they allow both sides of an argument to be presented! The 'climate crisis'  agit-prop ( previously called global warming, AGW, climate change, carbon pollution, etc, etc) is not getting an uncontested run in schools! How CONSERVATIVE to tell children that things gave two sides!

Why can't we gave a climate inquisition to ensure that Holy Writ is not disputed?? There should be NO disputes. Children should recite the climate crisis credo every hour: credo quia absurdum.

Oh, yes!

I remember when people thought the US was the land of the free.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 12:29pm:

I remember when people thought the US was the land of the free.

Now fast becoming the land of the stupid

John Smith wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 8th, 2023 at 12:29pm: I remember when people thought the US was the land of the free. Now fast becoming the land of the stupid

Indeed.

It was once a great nation, but now it's a total joke.

https://catchafallingstarbook.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/16002825_1219137254843952_3398329288412064654_n.jpg
https://worldofwonder.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/310998011_10230255181783850_9069469247888953652_n.jpg

Exposing children to an alternative point of view not approved by the Climate Cultists!  The horror!  ::)

This goes against the science and inculcates children with falsehoods at a very impressionable age.

These videos are paid for by fossil fuel interests.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 1:52pm:

This goes against the science and inculcates children with falsehoods at a very impressionable age. These videos are paid for by fossil fuel interests.

So? What's wrong with fossil fuels?

CO2 Franko!

Causes AGW Franko!

AGW causes extreme heat Franko

Extreme heat kills people Franko

Heat melts ice and causes accelerating sea level rise Franko


Fossil fuel interests were the first to be shown strong evidence of burning fossil fuel, emission of CO2 and consequent AGW and rising sea levels Franko.

Exxon did its own studies which supported the earlier advice Franko.


You should seriously do some reading on this subject if you are going to talk about this Franko.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 2:03pm:

CO2 Franko! Causes AGW Franko! AGW causes extreme heat Franko Extreme heat kills people Franko Heat melts ice and causes accelerating sea level rise Franko Fossil fuel interests were the first to be shown strong evidence of burning fossil fuel, emission of CO2 and consequent AGW and rising sea levels Franko. Exxon did its own studies which supported the earlier advice Franko. You should seriously do some reading on this subject if you are going to talk about this Franko.

Nonsense, Juvenile.
Juvenile nonsense.

You wouldn’t know.

Read this website—history of discovery of AGW. It is a very gentle introduction to the science: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 2:17pm:

You wouldn’t know. Read this website—history of discovery of AGW. It is a very gentle introduction to the science: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

Frank doesn't get on too well with science.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 9:02am:

Quote: DeSantis’s Florida Approves Climate-Denial Videos in Schools https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/desantiss-florida-approves-climate-denial-videos-in-schools/

"Climate denial" - what a moronic formulation by the hysterics.


This is the video they ar ed all wetting their beds over.  More like "hysteria countering" video.
Kids, you are not going to die because of the 'climate crisis'because there isnt a climate crisis. What a terrible message to send to children!   :'( :'( :'(

https://youtu.be/pneZc2_YCHw

Franko does not know nothing about science—his grumbling is that of a conservative seeing change coming and not wanting that! A zero in this discussion.

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 3:40pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8th, 2023 at 2:17pm: You wouldn’t know. Read this website—history of discovery of AGW. It is a very gentle introduction to the science: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm Frank doesn't get on too well with science.

Now now - Frank is on the cutting edge of important science discovery. Frank can prove that there is no such thing as gravity. He argues that if there was gravity people would fall off the edge of the world. How could that be.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 4:11pm:

Franko does not know nothing about science—his grumbling is that of a conservative seeing change coming and not wanting that! A zero in this discussion.

Very Juvenile, wanker.

The scientific - ie testable- evidence for human- induced global climate change is non-existent.
Humans can certainly change local climate conditions. Anyone with an awning will testify to that.

Co2 is an essential, indispensible part of life on earth. What humans do is use fossil fuels - the sun's energy captured and stored by fossilised vegetation - like the batteries of the sun's energy they are.

Fossil fuels are nature's batteries for sunshine.

You have no idea about science or AGW science.

Read the website I linked.

Parts of AGW science—absorption of IR by GHGs—has been known since the 1850s! How the absorption etc works is just quantum mechanics so read up on that too.

Speaking like you do with ZERO knowledge is a waste of my and your time.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 9:04pm:

You have no idea about science or AGW science. Read the website I linked. Parts of AGW science—absorption of IR by GHGs—has been known since the 1850s! How the absorption etc works is justy quantum mechanics so read up on that too. Speaking like you do with ZERO knowledge is a waste of my and your time.

That CO2 is a greenhouse gas does NOT mean that anthropogenic CO2 controls the planetary climate.

It is a preposterous claim and you believe it precisely because it it is absurd.

It is the current iteration of medieval doomsday mongers. The end is always imminent for religion nutters like you, unless we all repent and change our ways, juvenile wanker.

I just read the science, Franko. Where you get your crap from I have no idea.

CO₂ has always driven climate in geological time.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 10:09pm:

I just read the science, Franko. Where you get your crap from I have no idea. CO2 has always driven climate in geological time.

Well, you are a dawg so of course you have no idea.
You just roll over and beg.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 8^th, 2023 at 10:09pm:

I just read the science, Franko. Where you get your crap from I have no idea. CO2 has always driven climate in geological time.

Stop exhaling, you polluting enemy of the planet.

HOLD YOUR BREATH!!

I read the science, Frankfurt, it is YOU who has no clue.

Clueless Frankfurt. Hates AGW because it means C H A N G E . Too bad.

The climate catastrophising is not about the science, Juvenile.
It is about politics. School kids like Greta, Greens Left politicians, doctors' wives, Teals etc are not scientists.

Frank wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 8:39am:

The climate catastrophising is not about the science, Juvenile. It is about politics. School kids like Greta, Greens Left politicians, doctors' wives, Teals etc are not scientists.

you should buy a mirror ::)

Tell me, Frankfurt, what do you know about Infra Red?

Specifically, Far IR, longer wavelengths.

You know the rainbow, right? Let us extend that spectrum a bit.

far infrared  (IR)
near infrared. (IR)
Red
Orange
Yellow
Green
Blue
Indigo
Violet
Ultraviolet  (UV)


So what do you know about IR?

John Smith wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 8:55am:

Frank wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 8:39am: The climate catastrophising is not about the science, Juvenile. It is about politics. School kids like Greta, Greens Left politicians, doctors' wives, Teals etc are not scientists. you should buy a mirror ::)

https://as1.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/05/50/21/96/1000_F_550219680_QA4pT2wm74o4vUcNq9WfXOXw5g8xJuFT.jpg

I guess Frankfurt won’t come back and be edumacated, might have to accept AGW is real, is happening and is reaching a sort of critical point.

SO MUCH CHANGE JUST AROUND THE CORNER!

Frankfurt’s tiny mind will implode.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 9:18am:

I guess Frankfurt won’t come back and be edumacated, might have to accept AGW is real, is happening and is reaching a sort of critical point. SO MUCH CHANGE JUST AROUND THE CORNER! Frankfurt’s tiny mind will implode.

Yeah, we are going nuclear, juvenile Radagast. Hold on to your toupee.


A “coal-to-nuclear transition” in the regions and tapping Australia’s world-leading uranium stocks are firming as centre­pieces of the Coalition’s 2025 energy policy to secure long-term baseload power, slash emissions and lower electricity bills.

Key election battlegrounds and coalmining regions in the NSW Hunter Valley and central and north Queensland, which are vulnerable to the rapid shift away from coal to renewables, are expected to be leading candidates for the future development of small modular reactors.

Opposition energy and climate change spokesman Ted O’Brien told The Australian that “views of local communities would be front and centre” if the Coalition rubber-stamps a coal-to-nuclear transition.

“A social licence should be a prerequisite for any major infrastructure that impacts people’s way of life. It’s one of the reasons why we’re speaking so openly about these matters now, even before we’ve settled a policy,” Mr O’Brien told The Australian.

“The Coalition is learning ­lessons from Labor’s misjudged attempts to steamroll over regional communities in their rush to roll out renewables and transmission lines.”

Nuclear will not happen here. It is WAY too expensive and takes WAY too long to build, think three decades for a middling sized nuke plant. I wish it would, would like to see it in the mix with renewables etc, help electrify the community, the economy, help phase out fossil fuels.

I have held to the belief that nuclear has a place but real world factors rule it out.

The Libs are no longer a Party of government tho, their policies no longer really matter, just like the Greens.

Now, what do you know about IR as it pertains to the climate?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 9:38am:

Nuclear will not happen here. It is WAY too expensive and takes WAY too long to build, think three decades for a middling sized nuke plant. I wish it would, would like to see it in the mix with renewables etc, help electrify the community, the economy, help phase out fossil fuels. I have held to the belief that nuclear has a place but real world factors rule it out. The Libs are no longer a Party of government tho, their policies no longer really matter, just like the Greens.

Nuclear is not excessively expensive nor does it take long to build. This is propaganda put out by the anti nuclear lobby.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx

https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-construction-time-for-reactors-since-1981/

These construction times could be reduced further if interference by anti nuclear bureaucrats and politicians was removed. 

Belgarion wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 10:04am:

Nuclear is not excessively expensive

that cost doesn't include the costs of securing the waste product for the next 1000 years ::)

I think the last reactor to be built—in the UK?—took 30 years and was still not operational. Nuclear costs a mozza!

Then there is the short and long term treatment of waste.

We need a breakthrough in nuclear technology.

LOL Frankfart is running at the speed of light from any discussion of the science.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-reactors-smrs

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200309-are-small-nuclear-power-plants-safe-and-efficient

What do you know about IR, Franko? Anything?

John Smith wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 10:29am:

Belgarion wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:04am: Nuclear is not excessively expensive that cost doesn't include the costs of securing the waste product for the next 1000 years ::)

Spent fuel is not 'waste'. 96% can be recycled and the remainder can be safely stored.

Although some countries, most notably the USA, treat used nuclear fuel as waste, most of the material in used fuel can be recycled. Approximately 97% – the vast majority (~94%) being uranium – of it could be used as fuel in certain types of reactor. Recycling has, to date, mostly been focused on the extraction of plutonium and uranium, as these elements can be reused in conventional reactors. This separated plutonium and uranium can subsequently be mixed with fresh uranium and made into new fuel rods.

Countries such as France, Japan, Germany, Belgium and Russia have all used plutonium recycling to generate electricity, whilst also reducing the radiological footprint of their waste. Some of the by-products (approximately 4%), mainly the fission products, will still require disposal in a repository and are immobilised by mixing them with glass, through a process called vitrification.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-we-do-with-it.aspx

I don’t suppose there is any point in asking Franko about black body physics?

Belgarion wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 11:55am:

John Smith wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:29am: Belgarion wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:04am: Nuclear is not excessively expensive that cost doesn't include the costs of securing the waste product for the next 1000 years ::) Spent fuel is not 'waste'. 96% can be recycled and the remainder can be safely stored. Although some countries, most notably the USA, treat used nuclear fuel as waste, most of the material in used fuel can be recycled. Approximately 97% – the vast majority (~94%) being uranium – of it could be used as fuel in certain types of reactor. Recycling has, to date, mostly been focused on the extraction of plutonium and uranium, as these elements can be reused in conventional reactors. This separated plutonium and uranium can subsequently be mixed with fresh uranium and made into new fuel rods. Countries such as France, Japan, Germany, Belgium and Russia have all used plutonium recycling to generate electricity, whilst also reducing the radiological footprint of their waste. Some of the by-products (approximately 4%), mainly the fission products, will still require disposal in a repository and are immobilised by mixing them with glass, through a process called vitrification. https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-we-do-with-it.aspx

Interesting.
More recyclable than wind turbines and solar panels.

Did Greta know that?  Or Juvenile Radagast?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttA3_ZZgi8E

Jesus! Breeder reactors are nothing new.

Nuclear is slow and expensive to build, storage of waste is a problem. It is not just the fuel rods that get radioactive  ::) ::) ::)

I guess Frank knows nothing useful, is against AGW just because it will bring change, not out of any informed cogitation.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 2:27pm:

Jesus! Breeder reactors are nothing new. Nuclear is slow and expensive to build, storage of waste is a problem. It is not just the fuel rods that get radioactive  ::) ::) ::)

You did not read the articles I linked then?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 2:28pm:

I guess Frank knows nothing useful, is against AGW just because it will bring change, not out of any informed cogitation.

I am very much in favour of changing filthy carpets and slobbering mutts, Juvenile Wank.

You have not a clue about science.

Your criticism of AGW science is that of a child and can safely be discarded.

You are going to experience so much change your brain will blow up. heheheheheheh

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 3:11pm:

You have not a clue about science. Your criticism of AGW science is that of a child and can safely be discarded. You are going to experience so much change your brain will blow up. heheheheheheh

:D :D :D

https://media.tenor.com/HNJY3VvXoOYAAAAC/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg.gif

You know nothing about IR.

You know nothing about black body behavior.

You know nothing.

From what you have said I presume you did go to Uni but could not finish your course.

Belgarion wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 11:55am:

John Smith wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:29am: Belgarion wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:04am: Nuclear is not excessively expensive that cost doesn't include the costs of securing the waste product for the next 1000 years ::) Spent fuel is not 'waste'. 96% can be recycled and the remainder can be safely stored.

can be is not the same as is ... you're lucky if 30 % of waste is recycled. The rest still needs to be stored

Rose colored spectacles for whatever option some idiot favors.

Quote:

DeSantis OKs climate misinformation in schools

The republicans are all about misinformation in schools.

In fact they would like to privatise so you have to pay more for their lies.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

From what you have said I presume you did go to Uni but could not finish your course.

https://media.tenor.com/HNJY3VvXoOYAAAAC/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg.gif

Dnarever wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 7:57pm:

Quote: DeSantis OKs climate misinformation in schools The republicans are all about misinformation in schools. In fact they would like to privatise so you have to pay more for their lies.

https://media.tenor.com/HNJY3VvXoOYAAAAC/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg.gif

Frank wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 8:21pm:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 7:57pm: Quote: DeSantis OKs climate misinformation in schools The republicans are all about misinformation in schools. In fact they would like to privatise so you have to pay more for their lies. https://media.tenor.com/HNJY3VvXoOYAAAAC/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg.gif

Yes Frank I know - you got nuffin.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 8:49pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 8:21pm: Dnarever wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 7:57pm: Quote: DeSantis OKs climate misinformation in schools The republicans are all about misinformation in schools. In fact they would like to privatise so you have to pay more for their lies. https://media.tenor.com/HNJY3VvXoOYAAAAC/how-dare-you-greta-thunberg.gif Yes Frank I know - you got nuffin.

Sorry - didnt see you down there.
Here:

https://media.tenor.com/Ogtin-jxHHgAAAAC/ducks-peas.gif
Happy??

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 9:18am:

I guess Frankfurt won’t come back and be edumacated, might have to accept AGW is real, is happening and is reaching a sort of critical point. SO MUCH CHANGE JUST AROUND THE CORNER! Frankfurt’s tiny mind will implode.

Frankfurt, who died this month at the age of ninety-four, was a professor of philosophy at Princeton University who made substantial contributions to moral philosophy. He is also the father of Bullshit Studies and On Bullshit is the nascent discipline’s seminal work.

Using his training as an analytical philosopher, Frankfurt then went further and defined this phenomenon: bullshit is not just lying, it is indifference to the facts: “the essence of bullshit is not that it is false but that it is phony.”

John Smith wrote on Aug 9^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

Belgarion wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 11:55am: John Smith wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:29am: Belgarion wrote on Aug 9th, 2023 at 10:04am: Nuclear is not excessively expensive that cost doesn't include the costs of securing the waste product for the next 1000 years ::) Spent fuel is not 'waste'. 96% can be recycled and the remainder can be safely stored. can be is not the same as is ... you're lucky if 30 % of waste is recycled. The rest still needs to be stored

Really? Source. ::)

The generation of electricity from a typical
1,000-megawatt nuclear power station,
which would supply the needs of more than
a million people, produces only three cubic
metres of vitrified high-level waste per year.

On average, the waste from a nuclear
reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs
for a year would be about the size of a brick.
Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste—
about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

There are three types of nuclear waste,
classified according to their radioactivity:
low-, intermediate-, and high-level. The vast
majority of the waste (90% of total volume)
is composed of only lightly-contaminated
items, such as tools and work clothing, and
contains only 1% of the total radioactivity.

By contrast, high-level waste—mostly
comprising spent nuclear fuel that's been
designated as waste from the nuclear
reactions—accounts for just 3% of the total
volume of waste, but contains 95% of the
total radioactivity.
    
          https://i.postimg.cc/sXWFGGRc/Screenshot-2023-08-10-at-02-22-31-imgurl-https-www-world-nuclear-org-getmedia-db0ef3ff-d2c6-4cbd-9.png

Approximately 97% of the waste can be recycled.

—Excerpted from World Nuclear Association website, 2023.

London mayor Sadiq Khan wants to pull trees down for cycle lanes... Cos climate change.

'Well he can fuck off...' Jeremy Clarkson

THAT'S what should be taught in schools. Clarkson for Education Tsar.

https://twitter.com/wolsned/status/1689626123515158528

Just so.

Climate crisis millenarians are out of their minds.

You just don’t like change.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 4:45pm:

You just don’t like change.

Oh?? So you ARE in favour of changing trees lining a street into a bike lane for Greta? A sign of your .... bravery??
Because in your emotion-shackled, shrivelled little souls it is ALL about fear and bravery.  When your idiotic pieties clash, you are paralysed and can only see emotion: not wanting to cut down trees for a bike lane MUST be about fear of change.
You bozos are THAT stunted.

Oh - and who was urging you BRAVELY to change, yes, change that filthy carpet your mutt was slobbering on when you brought it home and showed it off here?
Me. Change agent.

Did you do introductory logic while stuffing around at Uni, Franko?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 6:12pm:

Did you do introductory logic while stuffing around at Uni, Franko?

Dont tell me YOU did?

How did you go?

I am guessing 'must do better if planning to pursue any intellectually rigorous studies. Suggest consider dog walking and fruit preservation as more suitable to mental calibre.
Ps. Keep an eye on carpets and general cleanliness".

Pretty close, isn't it?
I betcha.

I assume you did not, in fact, study logic?

I read some stuff about logic.

More about philosophy of science.

All this stuff you mentioned earlier “I know how Unis work” suggests to me you flunked your course.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 6:42pm:

I assume you did not, in fact, study logic? I read some stuff about logic. More about philosophy of science. All this stuff you mentioned earlier “I know how Unis work” suggests to me you flunked your course.

Nailed it!

A typical loser saying, eh?

That's  enough circle wank from you, boys.

I know you enjoy it but it's  totally ineffective and unproductive.

Like your lives.

YOU*FLUNKED*OUT*


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

YOU*FLUNKED*OUT* ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

How many have you had already?
I m counting well over a dozen.

Hmmm no denials.

I was right.

This is delicious!

I stuck it out and got my BSc and got a fair way to another degree.

You flunked.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 9:02pm:

Hmmm no denials. I was right.

What do you want me to deny, juvenile wanker? That I stopped beating your dog?

What degree were you aiming for? What caused you to flunk?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 11^th, 2023 at 9:07pm:

What degree were you aiming for? What caused you to flunk?

Fvvck off, bozo.

I am not going to have a Bbwianesque credential anxiety competition with YOU, ffs.
Who would??

Just interested is all.

If it is painful I won’t ask anymore questions about it, or discuss AGW with you.

LAHAINA, HI — Representatives with the Hawaiian Department of Land and Natural Resources reached out to the public Friday, imploring whoever stole the ancient Tiki statue depicting Pele, goddess of fire, to please return it ASAP.

Though mainland officials first assumed the Hawaiian wildfire was a result of man-made climate change, they were eventually informed by the Hawaiian government that the goddess Pele has cursed the island of Maui because some idiot stole her Tiki statue.

"Look, I can't explain it. One day everything is fine — now everything is on fire," said Director Of Hawaiian Antiquities Joe Malerba. "Just please, whoever you are, RETURN IT IMMEDIATELY! OH NO, NOW MY DESK IS ON FIRE! OH NO, NOW IT IS ME. I AM THE ONE WHO IS ON FIRE!"

Officials on the mainland were at first skeptical that the wildfire could have a supernatural origin until they watched Disney's Moana. "We must restore the heart of Te Fiti!" President Biden informed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"Sir, that's a completely different god," corrected Admiral Michael M. Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations.

Skeptics have pushed back on a superstitious origin for the wildfire, proposing that perhaps the fire was caused by those fire dancers that are always spinning torches around for tourists on vacation while wearing highly combustible grass skirts.

At publishing time, the fires had receded after the statue was found in ex-Biden official Sam Brinton's luggage.

Very undergraduate, Franko, but then, that is all you know, right?

A man goes to the GP for his test results. “Bad news, I’m afraid,” says the doctor, looking at his watch. “You’ve only got three minutes to live.”

“Three minutes?” the man cries. “Surely there’s something you can do for me?”

“Well I could boil you an egg,” says the doc.

I was put in mind of this delightful old joke last month by the lugubrious face of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres (an honorary doctor nine times over) as he introduced the latest increment of climate concern, announcing, with deadpan comic timing, that we have now entered “the era of global boiling”.

It wasn’t immediately apparent what precisely will be boiling if the Earth’s temperature increases by one or two degrees over the next century (the thermal equivalent, by my unscientific calculation, of moving from Sydney to Port Macquarie). The oceans? The planet itself? Molten rock as it flows out of a volcano looks inhospitable enough, but boiling? Ouch, that’s seriously warm. Are you proud of yourself, Antonio? The sight of a grown man spouting such drivel in an attempt to frighten the simpletons among us is as ludicrous as it is contemptible.

The irritating thing is that by pointing out that nonsense, countenancing even the slightest deviation from the alleged consensus, you are damned by the zealots. God forbid you should suggest, with Bjorn Lomborg, that it might be smarter – and cheaper – to adapt to whatever climatic perturbations might inconvenience us (as Alfred Wainwright, who wrote the definitive walking guides to England’s Lake District, used to say, “There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”). Fail to applaud and indulge the grandiose ambition to change the world’s climate and no matter how much you treasure and respect nature, you’re treated as though you’re announcing a plan to pack the throats of loggerhead turtles with plastic bags.

What happened to civilised debate, the tacit agreement that it’s possible for decent, thoughtful people to hold a different view from yours that isn’t motivated by malice? We see the same attitude towards those who question the wisdom of establishing a permanent Constitutional voice as the most effective mechanism to address Indigenous disadvantage. Much easier to dismiss them as racists than engage with their arguments.

Meanwhile, follow the money back to the cynical beneficiaries – ni hao, Xi Jinping! – of our misplaced pieties. In Scotland, it was revealed this month, 16 million trees – you know, the tall, pretty things that soak up the carbon dioxide Antonio is worried about – have been cut down to make way for Chinese-built wind farms. Saving the planet; just not the wooden bits. Or here, where we scythe vast corridors through native bush and across lovingly tended farmland to accommodate transmission lines for “renewable” energy projects. (These are designed to spare us from using the coal and iron ore we’ve just dug up and sent thousands of kilometres so an environmentally irresponsible communist state can turn them into wind turbines, solar panels and electric cars, and sell them back to us at an inflated price; who could fault that logic?)
...
Steve Waterson is a senior writer at The Australian

Why not use your own words, just quoting excerpts etc [cutting remarks removed.]

I prefer to see science discussed.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 12^th, 2023 at 3:33pm:

Why not use your own words, just quoting excerpts etc [cutting remarks removed.] I prefer to see science discussed.

They formulate it better than I can.

They talk rubbish.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 12^th, 2023 at 5:13pm:

They talk rubbish.

Is that debate, juvenile?

No, just conforming what everyone sees and my quote from Waterson is just the latest spelling out of it.

You have no idea of physics so your opinion is irrelevant.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 12^th, 2023 at 6:26pm:

You have no idea of physics so your opinion is irrelevant.

Climate policy is not just about physics, juvenile.

It has lots of other aspects.

But just on physics: nobody has ever demonstrated that anthropogenic CO2 is changing the climate. Or that fossil fuel use, rather than, say, land clearing and deforestation are the main culprits in anything that anthropogenic Co2 MAY be implicated in.  Or the degree it contributes to an obviously complex system with MANY, MANY other factors that are also changing and fluctuating.

Greta Thunberg missed more physics cglasses than you had your carpet cleaned yet she is the Joan D'Arc of "climate cwisis'.


It is a millenial ist fantasy in desperate search for a crisis ridden by calculating anti-capitalists who had their arses handed to them in 1989 and were in search to another 'proletarian revolution' having lost the proletarian revolution.


Environmental care, reduction of pollution, of deforestation, of waste and land erosion - all very important and I am all for them. But the AGW agenda of deindustrialisation, energy crippling, third world gimme and differential treatment tells me that it has nothing to do with climate and everything to do with grabbing some money. If it was really about the climate and if it was really a crisis the huge pretend-third world countries like China, India etc would not be allowed to INCREASE CO2 output for decades.

It's a load of manipulative/ignorant/shifty bullshite.

Clearly—you know nothing about AGW science so your opinion on it is valueless.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 12^th, 2023 at 8:06pm:

Clearly—you know nothing about AGW science so your opinion on it is valueless.

Juvenile wanker is 'debating' - Bbwianesque.

Ian Plimer it s a scientist - but you would dismiss him as well. Lomborg?  Dismiss. Nova? Dismiss.  ANY counter argument? Dismiss.

But you call it debate.

Science has to be contestible. It is ESSENTIAL for testability. Morons like you dismiss all and any counter argument - which demonstrates that your own arguments are nor scientific but political. You conduct yourselves like partisan political shock troops, not like scientists interested in testing hypotheses and ideas and finding truth. You are the enemies of ideas that do not toe your political obsessions.

Try to be convincing, not just be another blinered, Bbwianesque moron who wants to win through by the sheer conviction of his own idiocy. It IS noticable, juvenile wanker, that you are not offering any compelling arguments, only pouting and "oh, you wouldn't understand" stupid, childish evasion.


Here, I say it again: humans do not control the global climate. We impact ecology, local circumstances by land clearing, water mismanagement, deforestation, soil erosion, overgrazing, pollution, overpolpulation (Africa, Asia, the tinted chappies who cant keep it in their trousers. How many Africans, Indians, Chinese, Indonesians does the world NEED?). All demonstrated, evident degradations. Your heater and car  and local manufacturong plant are not.

Human CO2 has NO demonstrable impact on the climate. CO2 is A GOOD THING. Plants live on it. Fossil fuels are an integral part of the ecology, being batteries for solar energy.

There is strong evidence that CO2 and the other greenhouse gases drive climate, causing strong warming.

The Earth hangs in the vacuum of space—right?

It gets hit with EM radiation, including visible light and near infrared from the sun—right?

The surface warms up as a result—right?


Even you will know that the above is true—right?

Now the surface emits far IR. When/if that IR reaches space it acts to cool the surface-atmosphere-ocean.


In the late 1940s the US Air Force had problems with its bombsights on strategic jet bombers and their heat seeking missiles didn’t work. Scientists were called in and the IR from the surface was found to be the culprit. So there is a lot of IR (far IR, the longer wavelength part of the IR spectrum) coming up from the surface.

We have known since the 1850s that CO2, methane and water vapor absorb IR—this is quantum mechanics. On average a photon of IR travels only 2 metres from the surface before being absorbed.

As IR is absorbed in the troposphere, the lower part of the atmosphere, it grows warmer and consequently the upper part of the atmosphere, the stratosphere, grows cooler.

IR is re-emitted to space from the upper part of the atmosphere. As this cools it emits IR at a reduced rate—emission varies with the fourth power of temperature.


We have spectrums of far IR at top of atmosphere. These show IR is retained at the emission lines of CO2 (predominantly) Ozone, methane etc.


So, sucks to be you but the evidence for AGW is very sound.


Have a good look at: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

No climate crisis, only climate hysterics.


https://youtu.be/QzrliPlEaU4

https://twitter.com/UltraDane/status/1691270081949700096

Did you read or only glance at and recoil from my previous post?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 13^th, 2023 at 4:08am:

There is strong evidence that CO2 and the other greenhouse gases drive climate, causing strong warming. The Earth hangs in the vacuum of space—right? It gets hit with EM radiation, including visible light and near infrared from the sun—right? The surface warms up as a result—right? Even you will know that the above is true—right? Now the surface emits far IR. When/if that IR reaches space it acts to cool the surface-atmosphere-ocean. In the late 1940s the US Air Force had problems with its bombsights on strategic jet bombers and their heat seeking missiles didn’t work. Scientists were called in and the IR from the surface was found to be the culprit. So there is a lot of IR (far IR, the longer wavelength part of the IR spectrum) coming up from the surface. We have known since the 1850s that CO2, methane and water vapor absorb IR—this is quantum mechanics. On average a photon of IR travels only 2 metres from the surface before being absorbed. As IR is absorbed in the troposphere, the lower part of the atmosphere, it grows warmer and consequently the upper part of the atmosphere, the stratosphere, grows cooler. IR is re-emitted to space from the upper part of the atmosphere. As this cools it emits IR at a reduced rate—emission varies with the fourth power of temperature. We have spectrums of far IR at top of atmosphere. These show IR is retained at the emission lines of CO2 (predominantly) Ozone, methane etc. So, sucks to be you but the evidence for AGW is very sound. Have a good look at: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

Anthropogenic CO2 is a very small part of the total planetary  CO2 ecology.  Look at the numbers, not the sly, dishonest graphic representation.
https://skepticalscience.com/images/Carbon_Cycle.gif

And we dont even know the total natural oceanic CO2 contribution. 70% of the planet is oceans. We have no idea about underwater volcanic activity with any accuracy.


Although our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year, it adds up because the land and ocean cannot absorb all of the extra CO2. About 60% of this additional CO2 is absorbed. The rest remains in the atmosphere, and as a consequence, atmospheric CO2 is at its highest level in 15 to 20 million years (Tripati et al. 2009). (A natural change of 100ppm normally takes 5,000 to 20,000 years. The recent increase of 100ppm has taken just 120 years). [Paragraph updated July 2022, to correct information on % of additional CO2 that is absorbed.]



So you are panicking about 40% of 29 = 12 versus 750.  Because that 12-in-750 increase in plant food overrides the sun, the moon, the stars, water, concrete surfaces, overgrazing, air pollution, water pollution, and every other factor in a complex and not fully understood system. 

Ummm Anthropogenic CO2 is additional to the natural carbon cycle and is additive. 1880 CO2 was 280ppm, 2023 CO2 is 421ppm, substantial increase.

29 - 11 -6 = 12ppm per year net.

Plants can’t take up much of our CO2 emissions.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 15^th, 2023 at 7:24pm:

Ummm Anthropogenic CO2 is additional to the natural carbon cycle and is additive. 1880 CO2 was 280ppm, 2023 CO2 is 421ppm, substantial increase. 29 - 11 -6 = 12ppm per year net. Plants can’t take up much of our CO2 emissions.

Crap.

Plant yields are increasing.
CO2  levels have been higher without corresponding warming.

CO2 is A greenhouse gas. ONE, minor greenhouse gas.  It is natural. It is the stuff of life on this planet. Fossil fuels are batteries of solar power, nothing else. Some cause more air pollution - cow and camel shite, brown coal- than others - gas, black coal.
But it is ALL natural, organically captured solar energy. THERE IS NO OTHER natural energy source. Rivers, winds, trees, coal gas - all the result of a sun-centred ecology.
If you want to detach from the sun you can go nuclear.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 15^th, 2023 at 7:24pm:

Ummm Anthropogenic CO2 is additional to the natural carbon cycle and is additive. 1880 CO2 was 280ppm, 2023 CO2 is 421ppm, substantial increase. 29 - 11 -6 = 12ppm per year net. Plants can’t take up much of our CO2 emissions.

Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' and feed peas to the ducks.

Sorry but you can't win Monk.

Facts only annoy the right.

We have about 4 1,000 year weather events every month and they don't get it.


Quote:

Phoenix, Arizona, recorded the hottest month ever in a U.S. city, as it hit 110 degrees Fahrenheit for 31 days straight, from June 30 to July 30.

OH the months low temp was 90 deg F. About 40 people died on first estimate, likely more.

Then there was the Hawaii fire (Maui). 100 dead and a 1,000 missing.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 15^th, 2023 at 9:49pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 15th, 2023 at 7:24pm: Ummm Anthropogenic CO2 is additional to the natural carbon cycle and is additive. 1880 CO2 was 280ppm, 2023 CO2 is 421ppm, substantial increase. 29 - 11 -6 = 12ppm per year net. Plants can’t take up much of our CO2 emissions. Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' Sorry but you can't win Monk.

Duckwit explains the climate change debate:


https://media.tenor.com/Ogtin-jxHHgAAAAC/ducks-peas.gif

CO2 greening has pretty much stopped—increasing just one nutrient is not going to give huge plant growth.

CO2 is the main greenhouse gas. Whether it is natural is irrelevant.

Water vapor might absorb more IR. The important thing is that in the stratosphere, from the outer part of which IR is reemitted to space there is not much water vapor present.

Nope, CO2, which is present in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, is the main GHG. It does not condense out as water vapor regularly does.

To underline the importance of CO2, when it dropped below 300ppm about 1m years ago we got the cycle of major ice ages, first 40K years apart, now 100K years apart.

Now CO2 is > 400ppm‚—will the cycle of ice ages continue or will the increased CO2 just melt more and more of the planet’s terrestrial and marine ice?

To show the importance of CO2, here is the spectrum of IR emitted to space from the top of the atmosphere:

---

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 16^th, 2023 at 6:45am:

CO2 greening has pretty much stopped—increasing just one nutrient is not going to give huge plant growth. CO2 is the main greenhouse gas. Whether it is natural is irrelevant. Water vapor might absorb more IR. The important thing is that in the stratosphere, from the outer part of which IR is reemitted to space there is not much water vapor present. Nope, CO2, which is present in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, is the main GHG. It does not condense out as water vapor regularly does. To underline the importance of CO2, when it dropped below 300ppm about 1m years ago we got the cycle of major ice ages, first 40K years apart, now 100K years apart. Now CO2 is > 400ppm‚—will the cycle of ice ages continue or will the increased CO2 just melt more and more of the planet’s terrestrial and marine ice? To show the importance of CO2, here is the spectrum of IR emitted to space from the top of the atmosphere:

Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas. By far.

It condenses and there is not a lot of it at the TOA to re-emit IR to space.

Read that website I recommended.

THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE
UK Channel 4 Documentary (2007)

4: "The hypothesis of global warming is falsified by the evidence"
Professor Frederick Singer
Former Director, US National Weather Service

Synopsis: 'Everything you've ever been told about Global Warming is probably untrue. This film blows the whistle on the biggest swindle in modern history. We are told that 'Man Made Global Warming' is the biggest ever threat to mankind. There is no room for scientific doubt. Well, watch this film and make up your own mind.' 

Written and directed by
@Martin_Durkin


https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1692926912446816409

https://staticg.sportskeeda.com/editor/2022/10/97ba7-16651055222215-1920.jpg

Stupid people do not read books or otherwise become informed about a subject. They look for prophets and don’t read books but watch YouTubes.

AGW science is sound science well supported by empirical data.

We are getting close to 1.5°C above preindustrial as well as 450ppm of CO2.

You want to argue the science without learning the science. You are a fraud like the little twerp ruining the Environment MRB, like lee.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 21^st, 2023 at 9:20am:

Stupid people do not read books or otherwise become informed about a subject. They look for prophets and don’t read books but watch YouTubes. AGW science is sound science well supported by empirical data. We are getting close to 1.5°C above preindustrial as well as 450ppm of CO2. You want to argue the science without learning the science. You are a fraud like the little twerp ruining the Environment MRB, like lee.

You have very little learning and a lot of blinkered dogma, juvenile.

EVERYBODY agrees that

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas
2. humans do generate CO2
3. There is observable and measurable climate variation.

The contention, the unproven hypothesis, the disproven theory is that 2. causes 3.

And this little clip from the 2007 doco The Great Global Warming Swindle very neatly demonstrates the falsity of AGW.  It provides facts and a scientific explanation for the falsity of the AGW hypothesis.

If you have any scientific or factual counter-argument to the points made, let's hear it. But if all you have is just more parrotting the yeah-but dogma, then you are no different to that other juvenile, the school-avoiding muppet Greta Thunder-ten-Tronckh.

Greta just says to listen to the scientists.

As to more CO2 causing more warming we have solid evidence for that.

In 1856 it was found that CO2, water vapor and CH4 absorb IR.

We have detected that the surface of the earth emits IR that would cool the surface (and oceans and atmosphere) if it reaches space.

We have spectroscopic evidence that at top of atmosphere the GHGs re-emit less IR to space.

This means more IR is retained in the atmosphere-surface-oceans which consequently warm.

Read that website I recommended. You have no idea what you are talking about!

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 21^st, 2023 at 10:21am:

Greta just says to listen to the scientists. As to more CO2 causing more warming we have solid evidence for that. In 1856 it was found that CO2, water vapor and CH4 absorb IR. We have detected that the surface of the earth emits IR that would cool the surface (and oceans and atmosphere) if it reaches space. We have spectroscopic evidence that at top of atmosphere the GHGs re-emit less IR to space. This means more IR is retained in the atmosphere-surface-oceans which consequently warm. Read that website I recommended. You have no idea what you are talking about!

You are like Miracle Max, juvenile.

https://media.tenor.com/9er2O7lY13AAAAAC/im-not-listening-princess-bride.gif

You are bringing nothing to this discussion. I bring fact.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 21^st, 2023 at 12:04pm:

You are bringing nothing to this discussion. I bring fact.

Facts for ya, juvenile.

https://watch.adh.tv/cpac-2022/season:2/videos/cpac-2022-prof-ian-plimer

Plimer knows nothing about climate science. His experience as a geologist is in metamorphic and igneous rocks/mines like at Broken Hill.

I will discuss the science not non-experts say.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2023 at 4:57pm:

Plimer knows nothing about climate science. His experience as a geologist is in metamorphic and igneous rocks/mines like at Broken Hill. I will discuss the science not non-experts say.

SOOOOOO...... lemme see..... the geological record of past climate variations, past CO2 levels have nuffin' to do wiv nuffin'. Just a load of rocks.





But no.

"Six out of the six ice ages started when we had far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than now. So how can carbon dioxide drive global warming?"

"We’re being asked to believe that traces of an emission of a trace gas into the atmosphere will change a whole planetary system, and this is contrary to everything we know from the past."

https://twitter.com/wideawake_media/status/1695392563031634241


Address this objection, juvenile.

Ummm the cycle of major ice ages started when CO2 dropped below 300ppm. It is now 420ppm—there may be no more major ice ages. The major ice ages were caused by orbital variations as the Serbian astronomer Milankovitch found.

There are three types of rock:

1. Igneous rocks, coming from deep in the mantle where it is hot. When the hot magma reaches the surface we have volcanoes, otherwise we have granite, diorite

2. Sedimentary rocks—rocks eroded, transported and deposited.

3. Metamorphic rocks—rocks of the other type that underwent heat and pressure that turns shale into slate etc.

Plimer worked in igneous and metamorphic rocks.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2023 at 8:48pm:

Ummm the cycle of major ice ages started when CO2 dropped below 300ppm. It is now 420ppm—there may be no more major ice ages. The major ice ages were caused by orbital variations as the Serbian astronomer Milankovitch found. There are three types of rock: 1. Igneous rocks, coming from deep in the mantle where it is hot. When the hot magma reaches the surface we have volcanoes, otherwise we have granite, diorite 2. Sedimentary rocks—rocks eroded, transported and deposited. 3. Metamorphic rocks—rocks of the other type that underwent heat and pressure that turns shale into slate etc. Plimer worked in igneous and metamorphic rocks.

Wat did YOU work in, juvenile?

All 3 Frank baby. I graduated.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2023 at 9:05pm:

All 3 Frank baby. I graduated.

So you are a geologist, too.

A BSc in geology, minor in Zoology.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 28^th, 2023 at 10:14pm:

A BSc in geology, minor in Zoology.

So you are Junior geologist next to Plimer by a very wide margin - yet you know better.
Because you read climate blogs.

Shurely shome mishtake.

I don’t read “climate blogs” but science papers!

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 1:40pm:

I don’t read “climate blogs” but science papers!

So does Emeritus Professor of Geology, Ian Plimer.
Coincidence??

What climate science papers has Plimer read and cited?

I was trying to teach you some aspects of climate science, guess it is easier to just believe a conman. Booby was like that too.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 3:21pm:

What climate science papers has Plimer read and cited? I was trying to teach you some aspects of climate science, guess it is easier to just believe a conman. Booby was like that to.

Bibliographies are listed at the end of his books and book chapters.
He was the professor and head of geology of the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne for 15 years. Do you really think he doesnt know the literature of his field? Really?



I dont need YOU to 'teach' me science just as I dont need Bbwian to 'teach' me history or sociology.  The argument between us is not about the science but the premises of our arguments and the selection of scientific and political facts to support the premises.
You accept the premise that 3% of 0.4% (human CO2 within total atmospheric co2) is decisively driving global climate. I don't accept that it's driving it in any way.

I an not disputing the science that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I am not even disputing that the climate changes, as it always has.  I am disputing the undue, scientifically undemonstrated premise of the climate catastrophising political stance like yours

Ummmm

CO2 1880 was 280ppm

CO2 2023 is 421ppm

(421-280) * 100 / 280 = 50% of CO2 is anthropogenic.

You poor puppy, you can’t even do a bit of arithmetic and think you know science?

ALL CO2 acts to increase surface temperatures.

If I were you I would be humble and try to LEARN some science.

Now is a good time for you to jump in with some new insult now Sore end ...

I know, what about Zucchini? You haven't used that one yet? :D :D

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 4:21pm:

Ummmm CO2 1880 was 280ppm CO2 2023 is 421ppm (421-280) * 100 / 280 = 50% of CO2 is anthropogenic. You poor puppy, you can’t even do a bit of arithmetic and think you know science?

Would you mind giving me the reference for that 1880 number, there's  a good juvenile.

John Smith wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 6:05pm:

Now is a good time for you to jump in with some new insult now Sore end ... I know, what about Zucchini? You haven't used that one yet? :D :D

I hear you are a part Abo. True?  Go on, tell us.

What ARE you?  Wee paki is a paki dreaming of the Highlands,  repulsive lying creep is a Yugo content farmer, I'm a Dane, Bbwian is Oirish, Lisa is Greek,  fd is a Queenslander, divided parrot a chink,  dnaraver a duck - what are you?

Not an Italian, after all, too resentful for such a great people (my apologies to Italy and Italians fir thinking you as one of them).

So what are you, mong? (There is your insult, enjoy it. Not everyone gets it, only mongs. So you are special at least in that regard).

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 6:29pm:

I hear you are a part Abo

you also heard the election was stolen



;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 6:36pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 6:29pm: I hear you are a part Abo you also heard the election was stolen ;D ;D

So it's true, you are part Aboriginal.
And ashamed of it.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/#tab-chart_6

No doubt you can find others if you know how to look.

But since you probably can’t here is another link for you to ignore:

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

And another one for good measure.


CO2 concentrations 200ppm in major ice ages, hmmmmm Plimer was wrong. Oh noes!

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 6:45pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 6:36pm: Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 6:29pm: I hear you are a part Abo you also heard the election was stolen ;D ;D So it's true, you are part Aboriginal. And ashamed of it.

I suggest, again, that you study logic. Also sarcasm.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 7:14pm:

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/#tab-chart_6 No doubt you can find others if you know how to look. But since you probably can’t here is another link for you to ignore: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/ And another one for good measure. CO2 concentrations 200ppm in major ice ages, hmmmmm Plimer was wrong. Oh noes!

SOOOOOO....... what is the source of your 1880 number, juvenile?

Dont obfuscate. If it's obvious, provide it.

Also, tapdance to this:
How did plants and animals survive around 200 million years ago when the carbon dioxide concentration went up to 6,000 parts per million?


Was the planet BOILING?

Actually looked at the links or did thinking about doing so give you a sore end?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 7:25pm:

Actually looked at the links or did thinking about doing so give you a sore end?

SOOOOOO....... what is the source of your 1880 number, juvenile?

Measuring the CO2 in Antarctic ice.

Here is an original paper describing how they estimated CO2 concentrations:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44397135

Four links, none of which you will look at or understand if you do.

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 7:23pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 7:14pm: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/#tab-chart_6 No doubt you can find others if you know how to look. But since you probably can’t here is another link for you to ignore: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/ And another one for good measure. CO2 concentrations 200ppm in major ice ages, hmmmmm Plimer was wrong. Oh noes! SOOOOOO....... what is the source of your 1880 number, juvenile? Dont obfuscate. If it's obvious, provide it. Also, tapdance to this: How did plants and animals survive around 200 million years ago when the carbon dioxide concentration went up to 6,000 parts per million? Was the planet BOILING?

Temperatures did go up tho the SO2 acted as aerosols reflecting some sunlight away, It caused the biggest by far extinction in geological history.

You may be able to understand this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event

It really DOES seem as tho the composition of the atmosphere, especially that of key component CO2, controls climate. thanks Frank, a really good illustration of this.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 8:20pm:

Measuring the CO2 in Antarctic ice. Here is an original paper describing how they estimated CO2 concentrations: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44397135

Doesnt say anything about 1880.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 8:45pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 7:23pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 7:14pm: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/#tab-chart_6 No doubt you can find others if you know how to look. But since you probably can’t here is another link for you to ignore: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/ And another one for good measure. CO2 concentrations 200ppm in major ice ages, hmmmmm Plimer was wrong. Oh noes! SOOOOOO....... what is the source of your 1880 number, juvenile? Dont obfuscate. If it's obvious, provide it. Also, tapdance to this: How did plants and animals survive around 200 million years ago when the carbon dioxide concentration went up to 6,000 parts per million? Was the planet BOILING? Temperatures did go up tho the SO2 acted as aerosols reflecting some sunlight away, It caused the biggest by far extinction in geological history. You may be able to understand this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event It really DOES seem as tho the composition of the atmosphere, especially that of key component CO2, controls climate. thanks Frank, a really good illustration of this.

Oh, now we are back to wikipedia isn't it....  It DOES seem, really, doesn't it....

Here, Frank, these two sources may give you some confidence that atmospheric carbon was around 280ppm circa 1880:

https://today.tamu.edu/2021/06/14/ancient-deepsea-shells-reveal-66-million-years-of-carbon-dioxide-levels/


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1600-0889.1986.tb00092.x

Plimer, primed with denialist crap, trotted out the trite trivia about CO2 being a trace gas.

Trace only in terms of gross composition by mass.

The main gases of the atmosphere, nitrogen, oxygen and argon or N2, O2 and Ar do NOT interact with infrared.

Maybe go back and read how the surface emits IR which, if it reaches space, cools the surface-oceans-atmosphere.

If the Earth didn’t have an atmosphere it would be bloody hot during the day and quite cold at night. Look up the diurnal temperature variation of the moon for an example (tho the lunar day is longer than ours still useful to look at it.)

If the earth had an atmosphere only of O2, N2 and Ar then some of the sunlight, as now, the visible and more energetic parts of the solar spectrum would be absorbed by the atmosphere but the IR would reach space no problem and nights would be cold. Have a look at the link to see how life on Earth would be affected by having NO greenhouse gases in our atmosphere:
https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/greenhouse-effect-our-planet/

But we have H2O vapor, CO2, ammonia (from bovine excrement) and manmade gases. These absorb the IR, hanging on to some of the heat poured in by the sun and the Earth is quite livable. These are the greenhouse gases and their tiny percentage of the total atmosphere is irrelevant: these gases keep us warm.

However, so far we have only talked about absorption of IR.

Are you comfortable so far Franky boy?

Do you notice something different about the way I have written the chemical symbols of the three most voluminous gases in the atmosphere? Can you explain the difference?

Linus wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Here, Frank, these two sources may give you some confidence that atmospheric carbon was around 280ppm circa 1880: https://today.tamu.edu/2021/06/14/ancient-deepsea-shells-reveal-66-million-years-of-carbon-dioxide-levels/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1600-0889.1986.tb00092.x

2.8 % or 4% of 0.3 - 0.4% .

What does this mean?


Quote:

2.8 % or 4% of 0.3 - 0.4%

A drop or two of funnel-web spider venom is enough to kill you Frank. The carbon may seem minute to you but that doesn't speak to its impact.

As JM explained, the nitrogen and oxygen in our atmosphere is transparent to IR radiation from the Earth's surface. It's the carbon that traps it. As atmospheric carbon rises, so does the temperature, all other things being equal..

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 8:51pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 8:45pm: Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 7:23pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 7:14pm: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-5/#tab-chart_6 No doubt you can find others if you know how to look. But since you probably can’t here is another link for you to ignore: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/ And another one for good measure. CO2 concentrations 200ppm in major ice ages, hmmmmm Plimer was wrong. Oh noes! SOOOOOO....... what is the source of your 1880 number, juvenile? Dont obfuscate. If it's obvious, provide it. Also, tapdance to this: How did plants and animals survive around 200 million years ago when the carbon dioxide concentration went up to 6,000 parts per million? Was the planet BOILING? Temperatures did go up tho the SO2 acted as aerosols reflecting some sunlight away, It caused the biggest by far extinction in geological history. You may be able to understand this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event It really DOES seem as tho the composition of the atmosphere, especially that of key component CO2, controls climate. thanks Frank, a really good illustration of this. Oh, now we are back to wikipedia isn't it....  It DOES seem, really, doesn't it....

Wikipedia is perfectly good for you in your present state of gross or total ignorance of climate science.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 9:31pm:

What does this mean? Quote: 2.8 % or 4% of 0.3 - 0.4%

Co2

Linus wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 9:36pm:

A drop or two of funnel-web spider venom is enough to kill you Frank. The carbon may seem minute to you but that doesn't speak to its impact. As JM explained, the nitrogen and oxygen in our atmosphere is transparent to IR radiation from the Earth's surface. It's the carbon that traps it. As atmospheric carbon rises, so does the temperature, all other things being equal..

Bollocks.

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 9:41pm:

Linus wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 9:36pm: A drop or two of funnel-web spider venom is enough to kill you Frank. The carbon may seem minute to you but that doesn't speak to its impact. As JM explained, the nitrogen and oxygen in our atmosphere is transparent to IR radiation from the Earth's surface. It's the carbon that traps it. As atmospheric carbon rises, so does the temperature, all other things being equal.. Bollocks.

It's been known to science since Arrhenius. You're ignoricng 160 years of scientific research based on what Frank?

Known before Arrhenius—John Tyndall and Eunice Foote in the 1850s.

Nitrogen, Oxygen and Argon make up the bulk of the atmosphere, true. But they do not absorb, are transparent as Linus said, to the infrared emitted by the surface.

The tiny fractions, including the fluctuating amount of water vapor, the inexorably rising CO2 and methane or CH4, do absorb, hang on for a while, the IR, the heat, emitted by the surface. Ozone, O3, is a naturally produced greenhouse gas.

Why some molecules absorb IR and the majority do not is best explained with quantum mechanics. You will notice they tend to be molecules with three or more atoms. Nitrogen and oxygen and argon in the atmosphere do not have three atoms.

ALL the CO2 contributes to absorbing IR, not just the anthropogenic part. Without CO2 Earth would be an iceball, frozen, goldilocks zone from the sun or not.


So Plimer’s or any other silly denier’s comment about “CO2 is a trace gas” are irrelevant. It is the MAIN gas absorbing the IR emitted by the surface

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 9:41pm:

Linus wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 9:36pm: A drop or two of funnel-web spider venom is enough to kill you Frank. The carbon may seem minute to you but that doesn't speak to its impact. As JM explained, the nitrogen and oxygen in our atmosphere is transparent to IR radiation from the Earth's surface. It's the carbon that traps it. As atmospheric carbon rises, so does the temperature, all other things being equal.. Bollocks.

Did you not mention the increase in CO2 200m years ago? The planet got HOT and 80% of life DIED, known as the Permian-Triassic Extermination. Gave rise the the dinosaurs—the amphibians largely wiped out.

No, I just came in on the last couple of pages in respect of the dispute Frank was having with atmospheric carbon circa 1880.

And, yes, I forgot about Tyndall. Tyndall investigated how different gases in the atmosphere interacted with infrared radiation. He discovered that certain gases, such as CO2 and water vapor, have the ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation, thus playing a role in trapping heat in the atmosphere. Tyndall's work laid the foundation for understanding the greenhouse effect and how certain gases contribute to warming the planet.

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 9:40pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 9:31pm: What does this mean? Quote: 2.8 % or 4% of 0.3 - 0.4% Co2

No such thing as Cobalt2.

Linus wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 10:19pm:

No, I just came in on the last couple of pages in respect of the dispute Frank was having with atmospheric carbon circa 1880. And, yes, I forgot about Tyndall. Tyndall investigated how different gases in the atmosphere interacted with infrared radiation. He discovered that certain gases, such as CO2 and water vapor, have the ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation, thus playing a role in trapping heat in the atmosphere. Tyndall's work laid the foundation for understanding the greenhouse effect and how certain gases contribute to warming the planet.

I was talking to Frank there  :)

I missed it, I was focused on the circa 1880 dispute.

Yeah, what is the point, Frank won’t understand anyway.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29^th, 2023 at 10:48pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 9:40pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 29th, 2023 at 9:31pm: What does this mean? Quote: 2.8 % or 4% of 0.3 - 0.4% Co2 No such thing as Cobalt2.

Oh? You think it was a reference to Cobalt 2, do you, juvenile?
Really?

Of course not, you are just playing silly old buggers.


You forgot to show us the source of your 1880 Co2 level data. How was it measured and where?

Co is the chemical symbol for cobalt, Franky boy, Co2 makes no sense.

You will need to read the papers, the half dozen or so papers Linus and myself cited for you. One went to the original paper.

There is no "climate crisis"


The iron fist in the green glove
Net Zero is an authoritarian assault on our liberty and our living standards.

What is the aim of all this tightening of the screws on energy use? Of the possible future criminalisation of us thieves of heat and light? To help Britain reach its Net Zero targets, of course. Like other Western nations, we’re committed to achieving Net Zero emissions by 2050. And if that means strongarming the little folk into reducing their energy use, so be it. Let’s be clear about what the new bill’s provision for the creation of crimes really represents: the state threatening to punish anyone who refuses to convert to the religion of Net Zero and to sacrifice their energy to the jealous god of environmentalism.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/09/06/the-iron-fist-in-the-green-glove/

YOU don’t have a clue about this, Sore End.

Jovial Monk wrote on Sep 7^th, 2023 at 8:15pm:

YOU don’t have a clue about this, Sore End.

That is so compelling, Greta!

I started educating you in climate science—and you ran away.

Since you know nothing of climate science your opinion on matters climate is uninformed and so irrelevant. 3/10.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F5ziEQ7WYAA2EFt?.jpg