Best Arguments on Climate?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby sketch1946 » Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:29 pm

Hi nickc,
yep, that is a good book, enormous amount of research, well written, plenty of references...

I lifted these quotes from pages 412ff (for those who might miss your link): :-)

"This is the daunting task that Velikovsky and those of us who support his approach and methods must face."

"The idea of recent cosmic catastrophes seems to have arrived at long last. The evidence of Comet Shoemaker-Levy's impacts on Jupiter is stunning evidence that has catapulted the concept upon the consciousness of modern science."

"Some astronomers now present the concept that the Ice Age and the extinction of the mega fauna came about as the result of cosmic catastrophes, and that the ancient world's myths give corroborating support for this thesis, as well as evidence of other cosmic upheavals and conflagrations."

"The evidence that may come out of such a debate would be invaluable to those of us who have been investigating these concepts for some years."

"Of course, Velikovsky will probably still be shunned while his thesis is presented in other garbs." :-)

"Velikovsky's numerous critics and others who will deny to their dying day the value of mythic evidence will be turning over in their graves if such a major debate over these events unfolds."

"But that is just what is beginning to happen."

"Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend explicitly shows that Velikovsky's revolutionary concepts are really no different from an historical-philosophical point of view than that of Copernicus.

". . . the experts declared the doctrine [of the motion of the Earth that Galileo upheld] to be ‘foolish and absurd in philosophy' or, to use the modern term, they declared it to be unscientific."

"This judgment was made without reference to the faith, or to church doctrine, but was based exclusively on the scientific situation of the time."

"It was shared by many outstanding scientists. Tycho Brahe having been one of them. . . ."

"Compared with those facts, theories, and standards, the idea of the motion of the earth was absurd as were Velikovsky's ideas when compared with the facts, theories, and standards of the fifties."

"A modern scientist . . . cannot cling to his own strict standard [of evidence] and at the same time praise Galileo for defending Copernicus."

"The fundamental arguments raised against Velikovsky's catastrophic theory from the very beginning have always been based on the conceptual systems of the scientists that excluded global poleshifts in recent times..."
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby moses » Mon Feb 27, 2017 10:16 pm

The time sequence is interesting. If we assume the Earth was in another orbit, we wonder whether Earth had ice at the poles then. Evidence suggests that at some stage there was no ice at the poles, or at least at the North Pole. Also the North Pole was in North America. And mammoths, etc, lived on Earth then, possibly even near the poles.

Then the Earth moved into a very elliptical orbit causing much deposition and then quick thawing of the ice. The mammoths survived this but an interaction with another planet produced a huge pole shift through the Earth from North America to where it is now, and huge floods which swept many mammoths into polar regions quick freezing and preserving them. This is the Younger Dryas.

The Earth orbit changed to where it is now and warming began. Later an interaction with Venus changed the year from 360 days to 365.25 days in 2350 BC. Another flood occured.

Now I am quite prepared to alter this.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby perpetual motion » Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:07 pm

http://www.grazian-archive.com/quantavo ... F_MARS.pdf

You guys have probably read this one, but I'll throw it in here again.
perpetual motion
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:04 pm

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby sketch1946 » Tue Feb 28, 2017 1:10 am

Hi perpetual motion,
Thanks, another great looking book, I have de Grazia's "The Velikovsky Affair" here, as well as another book about how V was shamefully treated by establishment academia from whom better behaviour would have been expected...

I don't even have time to read that one in the next week or so.. but it looks very meaty... all 618 pages, so far I've only read the chapter on "Heroic Scholars: Old and New" :-)

I was just reading a part from that book about the supposed nuclear winter like event of 535 AD, supposedly the result of a massive volcanic eruption and tsunami and world wide dust causing crop failures and famine in Europe and elsewhere... the events in the book describe the historical background and attribute it to the volcanic event.. but there is also evidence for an impact event:
disaster of 535 AD was it volcanic or impact event.jpg


There is likely evidence of a ***double cosmic impact in the lower Gulf of Carpentaria at this time in history, it seems quite probable that many disasters that have been attributed to volcanic events may have been marine impacts:
Notice the book describes how thousands of kilometres away in China, "***twice was heard the sound of thunder"

"....They did a compilation of impact cratering events and found that the record was woefully undersampled (Abbott and Isley, 2002. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 205, 53-62).
As a result, Dallas started to look for impact craters on the ocean floor. She found that Holocene age impact crater candidates could be located using a combination of bathymetry derived from satellite altimetry and the directions to the source of chevron dunes. Now, as part of the Holocene Impact Working Group, Dallas and colleagues focus on two goals: looking at the effect of submarine impacts on climate and determining if chevron dunes are megatsunami deposits.

"Of special interest is a candidate crater in the Gulf of Carpentaria, northern Australia, with an inferred age of AD 572±86 (Abbott et al., 2007). The craters [18km and 12km] have produced impact spherules of magnetite, impact glass, and probable shocked quartz. The date of AD 572±86 is, within error, the same as the age of the climate downturn at AD 536."
https://earth2class.org/site/?p=3152

"...Azimuths determined from the chevron dunes [some 70m above sea level] suggest an impact in the southeastern Gulf. Two elliptically-shaped gravity lows near Mornington Island (southeastern Gulf of Carpentaria), about 12 and 18 km in diameter, are candidate craters, and suggestive of two impacts occurring in rapid succession (e.g. an object that broke up as it approached the Earth). The bimodal size distribution of spherules is consistent with this idea...."
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009AGUFM.P43B1436A
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby dodeca » Mon Mar 06, 2017 6:25 am

It’s all a numbers game. A computer won’t lie, and R-Squared doesn’t have an agenda. Because it is obvious the IPCC models are fraudulently constructed, it would be almost impossible to build a worse climate model right there in the courtroom. All one would need to do is build a common sense climate model using satellite temperature data and ΔT=f (Δlog(CO2) combined with data for solar radiation, water vapor and El Nino’s and El Ninas. The judge and jury would be able to witness before their eyes the R-Squared going from insignificant to significant, and the “consensus” verdict for this “settled science” would be guilty of defrauding and deceiving the public.

https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/02 ... alarmists/
dodeca
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:32 pm

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby sketch1946 » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:43 pm

Hi dodeca,
In my lifetime, it's slowly becoming true, that climate has become a huge money-making scam..
where are the real climate scientists? The prominent figures seem to be very rich people, hoping to solve the world's problems by depopulation and so on...
The real urgency is for science to change direction, and seek truth...
The world needs technology to detect and divert cosmic impactors, implement clean sustainable environment policies based on real science, open and trustworthy new sources, policies to deal with future weather whether it turns hot ***or cold....

Here's a little gem of real believable corporate science:

"....making fertility management ubiquitously available ... is crucial to the future shape of human civilization," said Gore..."

""These extreme weather events which are now 100 times more common than 30 years ago are really waking people's awareness all over the world, and I think that is a game-changer," he [Al Gore] said."

"... [Bill Gates] made a pitch for birth control as a way to reduce excess population that generates pollution, which in turn creates unusual weather events."

http://www.cnbc.com/2014/01/24/contrace ... gates.html

(for those that don't know, Bill Gates is the guy who sold and resold some bits of computer code, 'Windows', and successfully got in between the world and the new technology of computers, even sold it with all rights, but no responsibility... ie he retained the ownership and just sold the right to use some code to make your computer work....)
We should listen to these guys if we're interested in business models, franchising, and monopolistic practices... but the science of climate?... nah... :-)

"Ten years after the release of Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth, none of the film's dire climate change predictions have come to pass. However, in the decade since the documentary was produced, its creator has raked in millions of dollars from the entire "global warming" scam, and is now poised to become "our first carbon billionaire."

"Of course this carbon regulation is posited upon saving the Earth based upon a “consensus within the scientific community that increasing the global temperature by more than 2oC will likely cause devastating and irreversible damage to the planet.” And where it comes to promulgating and capitalizing upon carbon-climate-crazed sociopolitical pressure, you would be hard-pressed to find two better authorities."

"Gore and Blood, the former chief of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM), co-founded London-based GIM in 2004. Between 2008 and 2011 the company had raised profits of nearly $218 million from institutions and wealthy investors. By 2008 Gore was able to put $35 million into hedge funds and private partnerships through the Capricorn Investment Group, a Palo Alto company founded by his Canadian billionaire buddy Jeffrey Skoll, the first president of EBay Inc. It was Skoll’s Participant Media that produced Gore’s feverishly frightening 2006 horror film, “An Inconvenient Truth”.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/ ... 8ab59032dc

In my opinion the latest irresponsible dire warnings about how global warming is causing the earth's axis to wobble is an example of the worst sort of extreme politicisation of science... shameless scaremongering to frighten uneducated and gullible, but probably well meaning people into recycling their garbage, and not driving their cars around too much, and to stop having children, a sort of global environmentalist resources and land grab...

dodeca wrote:the “consensus” verdict for this “settled science” would be guilty of defrauding and deceiving the public.


And in case you think it's not about money:

"...The Top UN Climate Change Official is optimistic that a new international treaty will be adopted at Paris Climate Change conference at the end of the year. However the official, Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of UNFCCC, warns that the fight against climate change is a process and that the necessary transformation of the world economy will not be decided at one conference or in one agreement...."

"...This is the first time in the history of mankind” she said “that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution..."

https://europa.eu/eyd2015/en/unric/post ... ures-cop21
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Re: Best Arguments on Climate?

Unread postby sketch1946 » Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:00 am

Non s[ci]ense: Doom! Disaster! People using too much water! are causing a large-scale loss of water from lakes and aquifers causing the world to become unstable! The world's axis is tipping over! It's been moving east by 75 degrees!

"the pole has been moving steadily eastward by about 75 degrees, heading toward the Prime Meridian that runs through Greenwich, England."

mmm At the north pole, 360 degrees of longitude could fit on a dinner plate... :-)

"...scientists have suspected that the massive amounts of melting taking place in glaciers around the world could significantly redistribute mass on Earth. That's particularly true when it comes to the huge ice sheets over Greenland and in the West Antarctic..."

"...A lot of mass also gets moved around [duh] due to large-scale loss of liquid water from the land..."
"...the rotational pole is shifting toward Europe because there has been a massive loss of water from lakes and aquifers in Eurasia, around the Caspian Sea, and in India. Warmer temperatures overall have led to more evaporation and less precipitation in many areas, and booming human populations have been sucking up groundwater from reservoirs and wells (watch Saudi Arabia get drained dry)...."

Presumably these people drink the water, or cook with it, or wash... does that seem like a global redistribution of mass?

"..melting ice and a pattern of continental water storage are combining to cause a dramatic shift in the direction of the pole.."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016 ... ater-loss/

A single dam in China is going to slow the rotation of the earth!
"Not sure how China’s Three Gorges Dam affects you? Consider this: It will literally slow the rotation of the planet..."
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/thre ... he-earth-4
Presumably the 1.3 million people displaced by the dam all walked simultaneously ***east.... :-)

This is just Science:
ie: studying Earth's rotational axis, scientifically, non sensationalist:

"The Earth's rotation is very complex. The pull of the Moon and the Sun and other planets on the Earth's equatorial bulge causes the precession of the Earth's rotation axis in space. The complex interplay of the orbits of the Sun and the Moon is associated with oscillations of shorter periods, the forced nutation (Munk and MacDonald 1960, pp. 6-7). The free nutation or 'Eulerian nutation' of the rotation axis, on the other hand, is what the Chandler wobble is referred to. There are also other irregularities in the Earth's rotation, such as secular polar shift, annual wobble and changes in the length of the day.

"The Earth's rotation is studied using the Liouville equation, which is a generalized Eulerian equation that allows particles in a rotating system to move amongst themselves....
A complete solution of this equation of motion is extremely difficult;

"...The Earth's total angular momentum can be derived by defining relative angular momenta for different parts of the Earth [such as Greenland or Antarctic Ice] such as the atmosphere, oceans. earthquakes, tectonic movements in the lithosphere and asthenosphere, outer core, and even meteorite impact that involve motion, and then summing them up together with that of the rest of the Earth as an elastic or viscoplastic body only in rotation."

"True polar wandering in geological history is expected to be small, because the deviation of the instantaneous figure axis from the principal axis in a single polar excitation can never be large, but it may accumulate episodically. Calculation does not show that the viscoplastic response to the Pleistocene deglaciation is able to excite a significant wobble that will accompany secular polar shift."

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi- ... lassic=YES

ie: the melting of the last Ice Age glaciers didn't cause the Earth to go into an uncontrollable wobble....
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Previous

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest