WHAT THE OCEAN PLASTICS MOVEMENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CLAIMS IS THIS According to a report from the United Nations Environment Programme, the estimated cost of ocean plastic pollution on fishing, tourism, and shipping is at least $13 billion annually. YET THESE EXPERTS ADMIT THAT THEY DO NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND THIS POLLUTION ISSUE. Of the 8.3 billion metric tons of plastic ever produced, approximately only 9 percent has been recycled and an estimated 60 percent has been discarded, with some ending up polluting our rivers and the ocean. The amount of plastic entering the ocean is projected to double in the next five years. The enormity of this problem has led The Pew Charitable Trusts to undertake a two-year initiative to identify the most effective strategies to address the marine plastic problem. Working with the global consulting firm SYSTEMIQ, we are conducting a global analysis that will quantify the ocean plastic pollution between 2016 and 2040 under different scenarios. We are also engaging with Duke University on a global plastics policy analysis that considers the responses to this issue by a range of governments around the world. Separately, Pew is working with a broad range of stakeholders to develop an evidence-based global roadmap for reducing marine plastic pollution. We expect to release that roadmap in mid-2020. CRITICAL COMMENTARY IT DOES NOT APPPEAR THAT THESE UNITED NATIONS "EXPERTS" HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN THE DATA BECAUSE WHAT WE FIND IN THE DATA IS THS: WHAT THE UN SAYS: Plastic pollution is also taking a toll on people and society. According to a report from the United Nations Environment Programme, the estimated cost of ocean plastic pollution on fishing, tourism, and shipping is at least $13 billion annually. And experts do not yet fully understand how all of this pollution is affecting—or will affect—human health. Of the 8.3 billion metric tons of plastic ever produced, approximately only 9 percent has been recycled and an estimated 60 percent has been discarded, with some ending up polluting our rivers and the ocean. The amount of plastic entering the ocean is projected to double in the next five years. The enormity of this problem has led The Pew Charitable Trusts to undertake a two-year initiative to identify the most effective strategies to address the marine plastic problem. Working with the global consulting firm SYSTEMIQ, we are conducting a global analysis that will quantify the ocean plastic pollution between 2016 and 2040 under different scenarios. We are also engaging with Duke University on a global plastics policy analysis that considers the responses to this issue by a range of governments around the world. Separately, Pew is working with a broad range of stakeholders to develop an evidence-based global roadmap for reducing marine plastic pollution. We expect to release that roadmap in mid-2020. WHAT THE DATA SAY In related posts we present the case that although the piles of trash on beaches seem rather large to our visionary judgement, the ocean is relatively MUCH MUCH LARGER and in that context and when the size of the ocean is included in the analysis, the assumed pollution problem does not appear to be as serious an issue as the visual judgement may imply. For example, we show in related post#1 linked below that even if {Every minute day and night, the equivalent of one garbage truck of plastic waste enters the oceans} {as claimed by ocean pollution activists}, the amount of plastic going into the ocean is 8,000,000 tonnes per year. This may seem like a huge amount of trash and it may lead to conclusions such as {By 2050, there will be more plastic than fish in the world’s oceans}. Yet, the weight of fish in the ocean is 2E9 tonnes and at 8 million tonnes per year it will take us 2E9/8E6 years or 250 years to break even with the fish without consideration of “the missing plastic” issue in plastic pollution research described in related post #1. Briefly, the missing plastic issue in ocean pollution research is that 99% of the plastic dumped into the ocean simply disappears and can’t be accounted for in the ocean pollution data. Therefore, it will take us 250 years to break even with the fish if we don’t take the missing plastic issue into consideration and 25,000 years to break even wth the fish if we do take the missing plastic issue into consideration. Another way to judge the scale of the ocean pollution issue is the weight of plastic we dump into it as a fraction of the water in the ocean. The weight of the water in the ocean is 1.4E18 tonnes. This rather large number implies that 1% of the ocean weighs 1.4E16 tonnes; and that means that at 8E6 tonnes per year it will take us 1,750 million years of continuous dumping at one garbage truckload per minute every minute of the day and night to get the amount of plastic pollution in the ocean up to 1% of the ocean by weight without consideration of the missing plastic issue. If the missing plastic issue is taken into considration, it will take us 175 billion years of continuous plastic dumping at one garbage truckload per minute every minute of the day and night to reach the goal where 1% of the ocean by weight is plastic. It appears that the humans have overestimated themselves but perhaps they have a right to do so given their technological advances and all the things they have built such as ships, factories, aircraft, spaceships, and things like the Empire State Building. Taking all that into account we find that the weight of the ocean is 1.4E21 kg or 1.4E18 tonnes. The 7.8E9 humans on earth with an average weight of 62.5 kg is 287E6 tonnes. The weight of all the things that humans have built is 1.1E12 tonnes. This means that the weight of the ocean is about billions of times the weight of all the humans on earth and millions of times the combined weight of all the humans and all the things that humans have built. That the ocean is threatened by humans is nonsensical in view of its immense size and complexity and the relative insignificance of humans and their technological and industrial civilization. What makes the ocean worrywartism even more ridiculous is that we don’t really know the ocean. We are now in the year 2021, just beginning to study the ocean at sufficient depth to make the kind of assessments about human impacts on the ocean that has been assumed by the egotistical humans. LINK TO SOURCE OF THIS ANALYSIS https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/03/02/the-ocean-plastics-problem/

ON THE OBSESSION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE WITH THE AMAZON RAIN FOREST TO THE POINT OF ITS DESIGNATION IN CLIMATE SCIENCE AS THE LUNGS OF THE EARTH. ... ... ... AMAZON RAIN FOREST LUNGS OF THE EARTH ... ... THE MATH IN TERMS OF FOREST AREA: ... ... THERE ARE 8.7E9 HECTARES OF LAND ON EARTH WHERE TREES CAN BE GROWN. BUT ONLY 5.5E9 HECTARES HAVE TREES. OF THAT 5.5E9 HECTARES, 5.26E8 HECTARES ARE IN THE AMAZON RAIN FOREST. THIS MEANS THAT THE AMAZON RAIN FOREST CONTAINS 9.56% OF THE WORLD’S FORESTS. AND THAT MEANS THAT NOT TAKING THE OCEAN INTO ACCOUNT THE LUNGS OF THE EARTH CARRIES OUT 9.56% OF THE WORLD’S PHOTOSYNTHESIS. BUT THE OCEAN CARRIES OUT 50% TO 80% OF THE WORLD’S PHOTOSYNTHESIS OR 65% ON AVERAGE. THEREFORE, THE AMAZON LUNGS OF THE EARTH CARRIES OUT 9.56% of 35% or 3.35% OF THE WORLD’S PHOTOSYNTHESIS. ... ... ... ... ... AND YET THIS CONTRIBUTION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS IS RECOGNIZED IN THE SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE AS THE LUNGS OF THE EARTH. SUCH IS THE SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE THAT MUST NOT BE QUESTIONED BECAUSE IT IS SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE. THE TRUTH OF CLIMATE SCIENCE DERIVES ONLY FROM THE ASSUMED POWER OF THE WORD SCIENCE. ... ... ... ...

THE TREE PLANTING FALLACY OF CLIMATE SCIENCE ... ... ... THE MATH IN TERMS OF LAND AREA ... ... THERE ARE 8.7E9 HECTARES OF LAND ON EARTH WHERE TREES CAN BE GROWN. OF THAT, 5.5E9 HECTARES ALREADY HAVE TREES. THIS MEANS THAT THE MAXIMUM PHOTOSYNTHESIS IMPACT OF HUMANS PLANTING TREES IS (8.7-5.5)/8.7 OR LESS THAN 37%. OF TOTAL LAND PHOTOSYNTHESIS . ... ... HOWEVER, 50% TO 80% OF THE WORLD’S PHOTOSYNTHESIS IS IN THE OCEAN. ... ... ON AVERAGE THE OCEAN PROVIDES 65% OF PHOTOSYNTHESIS AND LAND ONLY 35%. ... ... ... THEREFORE, THE MAXIMUM HUMAN IMPACT OF HUMANS PLANTING TREES IS TO INCREASE PHOTOSYNTHESIS BY 37% OF 35% OR ABOUT 13% AT MOST ... ... .. THIS MAXIMUM POSSIBLE IMPACT OF HUMANS PLANTING TREES IS WELL WITHIN THE UNCERTAINTY RANGE OF GLOBAL PHOTOSYNTHESIS ESTIMATIONS. ... ... .. THEREFORE NO MEASURABLE OR STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT PHOTOSYNTHESIS EFFECT IS POSSIBLE BY HUMANS PLANTING TREES. ... ...

THE NET ZERO FALLACY ... ... WHAT CLIMATE SCIENCE SAYS IS THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS CAUSED BY HUMANS BURNING FOSSIL FUELS. WHAT THEY WANT IN CLIMATE ACTION TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING IS FOR HUMANS TO STOP BURNING FOSSIL FUELS. ... ... THE PROPOSAL BY THOSE SAME SCIENTISTS, THAT HUMANS CAN CONTINUE TO BURN FOSSIL FUELS IF THE EMISSIONS ARE OFFSET BY CARBON CYCLE INTERVENTIONS IS FALSE.... ... ... ... ... DETAILS IN THESE LINKS TO RELATED POSTS ON WORDPRESS ... ... LINK#1: WHAT DOES NET ZERO MEAN? https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/02/25/net-zero/ ... ... ... LINK#2: THE FALLACY OF THE TREE PLANTING OFFSETS: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/20/the-power-of-trees/ ... ... ... LINK#3: THE FALLACY OF EMISSION OFFSETS IN THE CARBON CREDITS MARKET: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/09/30/cer/ ... ...

SCIENCE AND RELIGION: ... ... {SCIENCE}: EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE TONS OF EVIDENCE DOUBT WHAT YOU SEE: ... ... {RELIGION}: EVEN WITHOUT A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU CAN'T SEE: ... ... IF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS SCIENCE THEN CHALLENGING CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ALSO SCIENCE, A GOOD AND DESIREABLE THING BECAUSE THAT IS HOW SCIENCE ADVANCES. BUT IF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS RELIGION THEN CHALLENGING CLIMATE SCIENCE IS A BAD THING AND THE CHALLENGERS ARE HERETICAL CLIMATE DENIERS. ... ... YET WHAT WE SEE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE IS A CLOSE LINK AND SUPPORTIVE COOPERATION BETWEEN CLIMATE SCIENCE AND RELIGION. ... ... THE LAUDATO SI PRESENTS A SEMINAL INTEGRATION OF RELIGION AND CLIMATE CHANGE THE STRONG CONNECTION BETWEEN THEM BEING THAT HUMANITY IS NOT ALLOWED TO QUESTION OR CHALLENGE ANY OF THEIR CLAIMS AND HYPOTHESES. IN THIS SEMINAL INTEGRATION THE ENCYCLICAL ACCEPTS, AND PROMOTES AND DEMANDS BELIEF FROM THE RELIGIOUS SUCH THAT YOUR RELIGION IS INCOMPLETE WITHOUT THE CLIMATE CONNECTION. ... ... THIS CONNECTION BETWEEN RELIGION SCIENCE AND CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS EXTENDED BEYOND LAUDATO SI. YALE SCHOLAR MARY TUCKER AND HAS EXTENDED HER RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES TO CLIMATE ACTION FOR THE WORLD TO CONFRONT CLIMATE CHANGE SAYING THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE HEALTHY PEOPLE ON A SICK PLANET. 1.2 BILLION CATHOLICS HAVE JOINED IN AS THE RELIGION MOVEMENT FOR CLIMATE ACTION SAYING THAT THE ENCYCLICAL STANDS ON MILLENIA OF CATHOLIC TEACHINGS THAT BEGINS WITH GENESIS MEANING THAT CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS NOW BEEN INTEGRATED WITH GENESIS AND THAT MEANS THAT CLIMATE ACTIVISM WITH THINGS LIKE DROUGHTS, WILDFIRES, AND HURRICANES IS NOW AN EXTENSION OF GENESIS BECAUSE THEY ARE NO LONGER A DISTANT THREAT BECAUSE THEY ARE HERE AND NOW AND POOR COUNTRIES ARE HURTING THE MOST AND THAT MAKES IT THE DUTY OF EVERY ONE WHO BELIEVES TO JOIN THE FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE. THE LAUDATO SI HAS CONVINCED MANY DENIERS THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS A GRAVE CONCERN. AND SO WHAT WE SEE NOW IN RELIGION IS THAT IT INCLUDES AND MANDATES A GLOBAL CATHOLIC CLIMATE MOVEMENT. ... ... ... AND YET, ALL THIS IS BEING PRESENTED IN THE CONTEXT STATED AT THE TOP OF THIS POST WHICH IS ... ... {SCIENCE}: EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE TONS OF EVIDENCE DOUBT WHAT YOU SEE: ... ... {RELIGION}: EVEN WITHOUT A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU CAN'T SEE: ... ... BOTTOM LINE ... ... IF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS SCIENCE THEN CHALLENGING CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ALSO SCIENCE, A GOOD AND DESIREABLE THING BECAUSE THAT IS HOW SCIENCE ADVANCES. BUT IF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS RELIGION THEN CHALLENGING CLIMATE SCIENCE IS A BAD THING AND THE CHALLENGERS ARE HERETICAL CLIMATE DENIERS. ... ...

THE NEW AND CREATIVE DESPERATION STRATEGIES OF THE CLIMATE MOVEMENT .... .... .... THE DALAI LAMA HAS A STARK WARNING FOR HUMANITY ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE .... .... NOW AGED 87, THE SPIRITUAL LEADER SPEAKS ABOUT THE CRITICAL THREAT OF GLOBAL WARMING .... .... HIS STARK WARNING IS THAT HE EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF ADDRESSING THE CLIMATE CRISIS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME DISCUSSING WAR ... ... THAT MEANS THAT WHAT HE SEES IN CLIMATE CHANGE IS SOMETHING LIKE THE DESTRUCTION CAUSED BY WORLD WARS ... ... AND THEREFORE WE MUST HEED HIS WARNING AND TAKE CLIMATE ACTION. ... ... CONCLUSION: .... .... THE NEED FOR RELIGION IS THE EVIDENCE OF DESPERATION IN THE CLIMATE CAMP.... .... ... ... SO MAYBE THE SCIENCE SCIENCE SCIENCE CLIMATE SCIENCE ISN'T SCIENCE AFTER ALL ... ... IT'S RELIGION

THE PROBLEM WITH WIND AND SOLAR #1: WIND TURBINE BLADES CAN’T BE RECYCLED SO THEY ARE BURIED UNDER DIRT BY BULLDOZERS. ... ... #2: WIND TURBINE BLADES ARE PILING UP IN LANDFILLS ... ... THERE ARE MILLIONS OF TOXIC WIND TURBINE BLADES AT LANDFILLS. AND THAT TOXIC MOUND IS RISING HIGHER AND HIGHER AND SPPREADING WIDER AND WIDER ... ... AND THEN THERE IS THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT OF RENEWABLES WIND FARMS ALTER NATURAL WIND PATTERNS AND THAT CAN IN TURN IMPACTS WEATHER PARTICULARLY SO IN CREATING DROUGHT CONDITIONS. A BASELINE PAPER IS BARRIE ETAL 2010. ... ... THE BARRIE ETAL ARGUMENT IS PRESENTED IN TERMS OF AN ENERGY BALANCE. THE ENERGY YOU TAKE REMOVES ENERGY FROM THE ATMOSPHERE. THAT IN TURN CAN IMPACT THE NORMAL OR NATURAL ATMOSPHERIC WIND PATTERNS AND WEATHER AND CLIMATE AS IN WARMING OR COOLING BECAUSE THE ATMOSPHERE DOES NOT HAVE THE ENERGY IT HAD BEFORE THE WIND TURBINES REMOVED SOME OF IT. THE CONCLUSION DRAWN BY BARRIE ETAL IS THAT IN THIS MECHANISM WINDFARMS CAN CAUSE, HORRIFIC ATMOSPHERIC PHENOMENA SUCH AS DROUGHT. ... ... SEE ALSO Mann, Jakob, and Jonas Teilmann. “Environmental impact of wind energy.” Environmental Research Letters 8.3 (2013): 035001. Abstract: One purpose of wind turbines is to provide pollution-free electric power at a reasonable price in an environmentally sound way. In this focus issue the latest research on the environmental impact of wind farms is presented. Offshore wind farms affect the marine fauna in both positive and negative ways. For example, some farms are safe havens for porpoises while other farms show fewer harbor porpoises even after ten years. Atmospheric computer experiments are carried out to investigate the possible impact and resource of future massive installations of wind turbines. The following questions are treated. What is the global capacity for energy production by the wind? Will the added turbulence and reduced wind speeds generated by massive wind farms to cool or heat the surface? Can wind farms affect precipitation? It is also shown through life-cycle analysis how wind energy can reduce the atmospheric emission of eight air pollutants. Finally, noise generation and its impact on humans are studied. Wang, Chien, and Ronald G. Prinn. “Potential climatic impacts and reliability of very large-scale wind farms.” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10.4 (2010): 2053-2061. Abstract. Meeting future world energy needs while addressing climate change requires large-scale deployment of low or zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emission technologies such as wind energy. The widespread availability of wind power has fueled substantial interest in this renewable energy source as one of the needed technologies. For very large-scale utilization of this resource, there are however potential environmental impacts, and also problems arising from its inherent intermittency, in addition to the present need to lower unit costs. To explore some of these issues, we use a three-dimensional climate model to simulate the potential climate effects associated with installation of wind-powered generators over vast areas of land or coastal ocean. Using wind turbines to meet 10% or more of global energy demand in 2100, could cause surface warming exceeding 1 °C over land installations. In contrast, surface cooling exceeding 1 °C is computed over ocean installations, but the validity of simulating the impacts of wind turbines by simply increasing the ocean surface drag needs further study. Significant warming or cooling remote from both the land and ocean installations, and alterations of the global distributions of rainfall and clouds also occur. These results are influenced by the competing effects of increases in roughness and decreases in wind speed on near-surface turbulent heat fluxes, the differing nature of land and ocean surface friction, and the dimensions of the installations parallel and perpendicular to the prevailing winds. These results are also dependent on the accuracy of the model used, and the realism of the methods applied to simulate wind turbines. Additional theory and new field observations will be required for their ultimate validation. Intermittency of wind power on daily, monthly and longer time scales as computed in these simulations and inferred from meteorological observations, poses a demand for one or more options to ensure reliability, including backup generation capacity, very long distance power transmission lines, and onsite energy storage, each with specific economic and/or technological challenges. Barrie, D. B., and D. B. Kirk-Davidoff. “Weather response to a large wind turbine array.” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10.2 (2010): 769-775. ABSTRACT: Electrical generation by wind turbines is increasing rapidly, and has been projected to satisfy 15% of world electric demand by 2030. The extensive installation of wind farms would alter surface roughness and significantly impact the atmospheric circulation due to the additional surface roughness forcing. This forcing could be changed deliberately by adjusting the attitude of the turbine blades with respect to the wind, which would enable the “management” of a large array of wind turbines. Using a General Circulation Model (GCM), we represent a continent-scale wind farm as a distributed array of surface roughness elements. Here we show that initial disturbances caused by a step change in roughness grow within four and a half days such that the flow is altered at synoptic scales. The growth rate of the induced perturbations is largest in regions of high atmospheric instability. For a roughness change imposed over North America, the induced perturbations involve substantial changes in the track and development of cyclones over the North Atlantic, and the magnitude of the perturbations rises above the level of forecast uncertainty. Broström, Göran. “On the influence of large wind farms on the upper ocean circulation.” Journal of Marine Systems 74.1-2 (2008): 585-591. ABSTRACT: Large wind farms exert a significant disturbance on the wind speed in the vicinity of the installation and in this study we outline the oceanic response to the wind wake from a large wind farm placed in the ocean. We find that the size of the wind wake is an important factor for the oceanic response to the wind farm. We show through simple analytical models and idealized numerical experiments that a wind speed of 5–10 m/s may generate upwelling/downwelling velocities exceeding 1 m/day if the characteristic width of the wind wake is of the same size or larger than the internal radius of deformation. The generated upwelling is sufficiently enough that the local ecosystem will most likely be strongly influenced by the presence of a wind farm. Abbasi, S. A., and Tasneem Abbasi. “Impact of wind-energy generation on climate: A rising spectre.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016): 1591-1598. ABSTRACT: Several theoretical studies have been reported in recent years which have indicated that large-scale wind farms can have an impact on local and regional meteorology, possibly on climate. Now evidence of it based on field observations has also begun to emerge. The present paper traces the evolution of this knowledge. It discusses the theoretical studies on the possibility of wind turbines effecting climate change, and summarizes the emerging confirmation of those predictions. The concluding part of the paper assesses the implications of these findings in the context of the world׳s past experience on global warming and its present thrust to meet substantial portions of its energy needs with renewables. Tang, Bijian, et al. “The observed impacts of wind farms on local vegetation growth in northern China.” Remote Sensing 9.4 (2017): 332. ABSTRACT: Wind farms (WFs) can affect the local climate, and local climate change may influence underlying vegetation. Some studies have shown that WFs affect certain aspects of the regional climate, such as temperature and rainfall. However, there is still no evidence to demonstrate whether WFs can affect local vegetation growth, a significant part of the overall assessment of WF effects. In this research, based on the moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) vegetation index, productivity and other remote-sensing data from 2003 to 2014, the effects of WFs in the Bashang area of Northern China on vegetation growth and productivity in the summer (June–August) were analyzed. The results showed that: (1) WFs had a significant inhibiting effect on vegetation growth, as demonstrated by decreases in the leaf area index (LAI), the enhanced vegetation index (EVI), and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) of approximately 14.5%, 14.8%, and 8.9%, respectively, in the 2003–2014 summers. There was also an inhibiting effect of 8.9% on summer gross primary production (GPP) and 4.0% on annual net primary production (NPP) coupled with WFs; and (2) the major impact factors might be the changes in temperature and soil moisture: WFs suppressed soil moisture and enhanced water stress in the study area. This research provides significant observational evidence that WFs can inhibit the growth and productivity of the underlying vegetation.

DOES CLIMATE ACTION WORK??? .... .... IN THIS POST WE PRESENT EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE THAT DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CLIMATE SCIENCE POSITION OF A CAUSATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND GLOBAL WARMING. THE RELEVANT TIME SCALE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ANNUAL. WHAT THE SCIENCE SAYS IS THAT ANNUAL EMISSIONS CAUSE ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION AND THAT ANNUAL CHANGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION CAUSE ANNUAL CHANGES IN GLOBAL MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE {GMST}. THE DATA PRESENTED HERE ARE AT A DECADAL TIME SCALE .... .... AIR TRAVEL: A SPECIFIC IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC WAS THE REDUCTION IN GLOBAL AIRLINE TRAFFIC FROM 39 MILLION FLIGHTS PER YEAR TO 16 MILLION FLIGHTS PER YEAR. THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING. ... ... CLIMATE ACTION AND RENEWABLE ENERGY: OVER THE DECADE 2009 TO 2019 MORE THAN $2.5 TRILLION WAS INVESTED IN RENEWABLE ENERGY WORLDWIDE. THIS IMPLEMENTATION WAS MOTIVATED BY THE CLIMATE SCIENCE CLAIM THAT INVESTMENT IN RENEWABLE ENERGY IS REQUIRED TO ATTENUATE GLOBAL WARMING. YET WHAT WE SEE IN THE DATA IS THAT THE INVESTMENT OF $2.5 TRILLION IN RENEWABLE ENERGY DIDN’T CHANGE THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING. THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.... ... ... GLOBAL RENEWABLE ENERGY CAPACITY: World Total Renewable Energy Capacity: 2010 to 2019 are: 2010=1,226,853, 2011=1,332,236, 2012= 1,445,233, 2013= 1,563,196, 2014= 1,692,680, 2015= 1,846,060, 2016=2,008,547, 2017=2,182,449, 2018=2,361,061, 2019=2,536,853 ... THERE WAS NO IMPACT ON THE RATE OF GLOBAL WARMING.... ... ... CONCLUSION: NO EVIDENCE IS FOUND THAT THE RATE OF WARMING IS RESPONSIVE TO CLIMATE ACTION. BUT SEE ALSO THE POSTSCRIPT BELOW ... ... ... POSTSCRIPT: Electricity production by source, World THE CHART ABOVE PROVIDED BY {OUR WORLD IN DATA} SHOWS THAT ALTHOUGH THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN RENEWABLE ENERGY 1985 TO 2020, THE SHARE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY IN 2020 IS STILL LESS THAN 15% AND THAT SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE SHARE OF RENEWABLES IN TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION MAY EXPLAIN WHY NO EFFECT IS VISIBLE ON THE RATE OF WARMING. WHAT THAT DATA ALSO SHOW IS THAT IT TOOK OVER 5 TRILLION DOLLARS TO CONVERT 15% OF THE WORLD’S ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLES. THIS MEANS THAT THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE HAS A PRICE TAG OF OVER 33 TRILLION DOLLARS, OR OVER $4,000 PER MAN WOMAN AND CHILD ON EARTH. $23 TRILION. THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORTS: LINK: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/climate/climate-change-economy.html , THAT THE COST OF NOT TAKING CLIMATE ACTION AND SUFFERING THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS IS THAT THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS WILL DEPRESS THE GLOBAL ECONOMY AND CAUSE A LOSS OF $23 TRILLION. COMPARING THE COST OF ACTION ($33 TRILLION) TO THE COST OF CLIMATE INACTION ($23 TRILLION), WE FIND A ($10 TRILLION ) ADVANTAGE FOR NO ACTION.

THIS POST IS A PRESENTATION OF SOURCES OF CARBON TRANSFERS FROM THE MANTLE TO THE SURFACE BY WAY OF SEEPAGE, HYDROTHERMAL VENTS, HYDROTHERMAL PLUMES, SUBMARINE AND VOLCANISM. ..... ..... THE CONTEXT OF THIS STUDY IS THE THEORY OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (AGW) WHERE FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS ARE ASSUMED TO BE THE SOLE SOURCE OF CARBON EXTERNAL TO THE CARBON CYCLE. ........ ........ A further argument in climate science for human cause is that the source of the carbon causing atmospheric CO2 to rise has to be fossil fuels because this carbon is devoid of the 14C and 13C isotopes. ........ ........ It is noted that this argument does not exclude geological carbon because that carbon is also devoid of 13C and 14C isotopes. ........ ........ It is not possible to distinguish fossil fuel carbon from geological carbon. ........ ........ It is proposed therefore that natural flows of CO2 to the atmosphere that may have been missed or underestimated in climate science must be reconsidered, specifically the known carbon flows from the mantle to the atmosphere.

THE NULL HYPOTHESIS ISSUE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE AND THE ROLE OF SUPERSTITION IN CLIMATE SCIENCE ---------- THIS POST IS A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS TESTING PROCEDURE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE. WE SHOW THAT CLIMATE SCIENCE CONTAINS A BIAS FOR THE TRUTH OF THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN AND THAT THEREFORE CLIMATE SCIENCE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE UNBIASED AND OBJECTIVE SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. ------------ SPECIFICALLY, IN OBJECTIVE UNBIASED SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY, THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN MUST BE THE ALTERNATE HYPOTHESIS AND ITS NEGATION THEN BECOMES THE NULL HYPOTHESIS. THE UNBIASED DATA COLLECTION MUST THEN PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE TO REJECT THE NULL IN ORDER TO ACCEPT THE TRUTH OF THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN. ------------ THE TRUTH OF THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN WHEN TAKEN AS THE NULL HYPOTHESIS CONTAINS A BIAS AND IT VIOLATES THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD SUCH THAT THE RESEARCH FINDINGS OF THIS METHODOLOGY CANNOT BE TAKEN AS THE PRODUCT OF OBJECTIVE AND UNBIASED SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. THE ODD LOGIC IN CLIMATE SCIENCE DESCRIBED AS “THE LESS WE KNOW THE SCARIER IT GETS” DERIVES FROM THIS STATISTICAL ERROR. THE TRUTH OF THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN STANDS AS TRUTH UNTIL PROVEN WRONG. -------------- THIS BIAS IS OFTEN ACKNOWLEDGED AND THEN DEFENDED WITH THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE. THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IS USED IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH WHERE THIS BIAS IN RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IS NEEDED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE AVOID THE GREATER HORROR OF BEING WRONG ABOUT THE DANGER OF THAT WHICH IS TO BE PROVEN DANGEROUS BECAUSE THE HORROR IS GREATER THAN THE COST OF BEING WRONG ABOUT THE HORROR. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE CALL FOR THE WORLD TO TAKE COSTLY CLIMATE ACTION CAN BE TRANSLATED AS {YOU MUST DO AS WE SAY JUST IN CASE WE ARE RIGHT}. THE COST OF AVOIDING THE HORROR THAT AWAITS US IF WE ARE RIGHT IS LESS THAN THE COST OF THE HORROR. ------------ THE BIAS IS FOUND IN THE CLIMATE SCIENCE LITERATURE. ---------------- THIS LOGIC IS THE NORM IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES WHERE IT IS REFERRED TO AS THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, A METHODOLOGY KNOWN TO FOR ITS CONFIRMATION BIAS.THIS PROCEDURE IS A KIND OF SUPERSTITION AS EXPLAINED IN THE DOCUMENT LINKED BELOW. ---------------- LINK TO THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/12/27/superstitious-humans/ THE LANGUAGE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE RESEARCH FINDINGS EXPOSES CONFIRMATION BIAS ---------------- EXAMPLE: FISHING FOR CLIMATE CALAMITY:CLIMATE CHANGE IS REDUCING THE NUMBER OF FISH IN THE OCEAN. THE SO CALLED FISH APOCALYPSE. EXAMPLE: THE DEARTH OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE ONLY ADDS TO THE ALARM: MEANING THAT THE LESS CLIMATE SCIENCE KNOWS THE MORE REASON THERE IS FOR THE HUMANS TO SPEND BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON CLIMATE ACTION. SUMMARY: THE INHERENT SUPERSTITIOUS NATURE OF HUMANS HAS BEEN USED IN THE CREATION OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND CLIMATE EMERGENCY OF OUR TIME IN WHICH FOSSIL FUELS, THE PRODUCERS OF FOSSIL FUELS, AND THE CAPITALIST ECONOMY THAT PROFITS FROM FOSSIL FUELS ARE THE WITCHES THAT NEED TO BE BURNED TO FULFILL ACTIVISM NEEDS AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS. CLIMATE SCIENCE MAY HAVE SOME SCIENCE IN IT BUT IT IS BEST UNDERSTOOD AS ANTI FOSSIL FUEL ACTIVISM IN WHICH EXXON AND CAPITALISM ARE THE WITCHES. BOTTOM LINE: CLIMAT SCIENCE IS RELIGION AND NOT SCIENCE

WHAT CLIMATE SCIENTISTS KNOW FOR SURE PART- 1: WHEN DID AGW HUMAN CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE START? Callendar 1938: It started in 1900 and warmed steadily from 1900 to 1938 with the warming driven by rising CO2 which in turn is attributable to fossil fuel emissions. Hansen 1988: It started in 1950 because in the 30-year period 1950-1980 there is a strong measurable warming rate with 99% probability for human cause. IPCC 2001: It started in 1750 when the Industrial Revolution kicked in and atmospheric CO2 began to rise. IPCC 2015: It started in 1850 by when sufficient fossil fuel carbon had entered the atmosphere for a measurable response of temperature to CO2. NASA 2020 [LINK] It started in 1950 because from then the relationship between CO2 and temperature we see in the climate models closely matches the observational data. Climate Scientist Peter Cox 2018: It started in the 1970s because it is since then that we see a measurable responsiveness of surface temperature to atmospheric CO2 concentration according to the theory of the greenhouse effect of CO2. PART-2: WHAT SCIENTISTS KNEW FOR SURE IN 2001: Fossil fuel emissions is causing atmospheric CO2 concentration to go up and that in turn is causing global mean temperature to go up. If we don’t take climate action to reduce and eliminate emissions, the temperature will continue to go up and when it warms 5C above pre-industrial, warming will become irreversible – meaning that it will no longer be possible to attenuate warming with climate action and that will make it impossible for us to save the planet. WHAT SCIENTISTS KNEW FOR SURE IN 2007 Fossil fuel emissions is causing atmospheric CO2 concentration to go up and that in turn is causing global mean temperature to go up. If we don’t take climate action to reduce and eliminate emissions, the temperature will continue to go up and when it warms 4C above pre-industrial, warming will become irreversible – meaning that it will no longer be possible to attenuate warming with climate action and that will make it impossible for us to save the planet. WHAT SCIENTISTS KNEW FOR SURE IN 2013 Fossil fuel emissions is causing atmospheric CO2 concentration to go up and that in turn is causing global mean temperature to go up. If we don’t take climate action to reduce and eliminate emissions, the temperature will continue to go up and when it warms 3C above pre-industrial, warming will become irreversible – meaning that it will no longer be possible to attenuate warming with climate action and that will make it impossible for us to save the planet. WHAT SCIENTISTS KNEW FOR SURE IN 2015 Fossil fuel emissions is causing atmospheric CO2 concentration to go up and that in turn is causing global mean temperature to go up. If we don’t take climate action to reduce and eliminate emissions, the temperature will continue to go up and when it warms 2C above pre-industrial, warming will become irreversible – meaning that it will no longer be possible to attenuate warming with climate action and that will make it impossible for us to save the planet. WHAT SCIENTISTS KNEW FOR SURE IN 2018 Fossil fuel emissions is causing atmospheric CO2 concentration to go up and that in turn is causing global mean temperature to go up. If we don’t take climate action to reduce and eliminate emissions, the temperature will continue to go up and when it warms 1.5C above pre-industrial, warming will become irreversible – meaning that it will no longer be possible to attenuate warming with climate action and that will make it impossible for us to save the planet. WHAT SCIENTISTS KNOW FOR SURE IN 2020: Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects, C. Deser, F. Lehner, K. B. Rodgers, T. Ault, T. L. Delworth, P. N. DiNezio, A. Fiore, C. Frankignoul, J. C. Fyfe, D. E. Horton, J. E. Kay, R. Knutti, N. S. Lovenduski, J. Marotzke, K. A. McKinnon, S. Minobe, J. Randerson, J. A. Screen, I. R. Simpson & M. Ting: Nature Climate Change (2020). Abstract: Internal variability in the climate system confounds assessment of human-induced climate change and imposes irreducible limits on the accuracy of climate change projections, especially at regional and decadal scales. A new collection of initial-condition large ensembles (LEs) generated with seven Earth system models under historical and future radiative forcing scenarios provides new insights into uncertainties due to internal variability versus model differences. These data enhance the assessment of climate change risks, including extreme events, and offer a powerful testbed for new methodologies aimed at separating forced signals from internal variability in the observational record. Opportunities and challenges confronting the design and dissemination of future LEs, including increased spatial resolution and model complexity alongside emerging Earth system applications, are discussed.

2021 HEAT DOME: CLIMATE CHANGE A new study suggests the deadly 2021 heat dome that hit B.C. and the U.S. Pacific Northwest was amplified by climate change and could become a once-in-10-year event if global temperatures aren’t kept below 2 C above the pre-industrial average. The study, which was published this month in the journal Nature Climate Change cites the interaction between factors, including climate change, atmospheric weather patterns and dry soils in the region as factors that allowed the heat wave to reach extreme levels. The heat dome, which hit western Canada and the U.S. at the end of June and beginning of July is believed to be responsible for more than 600 deaths, set national temperature records and preceded the fire that razed the community of Lytton to its foundations. /b> The world is rapidly barreling toward climate change tipping points. Floods, fires and heat waves are hitting with growing ferocity. There is, in Canada as elsewhere, a growing reality that adaptation is urgent and necessary. RESPONSE IN CLIMATE SCIENCE, REPEATED FAILED FORECASTS OF DOOM MEAN THAT THEY HAVE TO KEEP ON TRYING UNTIL THEY FIND SOMETHIING THAT WORKS. FAILED DOOMOLOGY FORECASTS OF THE PAST FAILED FORECAST#1: CLIMATE CHANGE WILL INTENSIFY ENSO: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/11/29/agw-el-nino/ FAILED FORECAST#2: REPEATED FORECASTS OF AN ICE FREE ARCTIC LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/11/18/the-ice-free-arctic-obsession-of-agw/ LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/01/15/icefreearcticinsanity/ LINK#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/12/01/arctic-sea-ice-its-all-quite-devastating/ FAILED FORECAST#3: REPEATED FORECASTS OF POLAR ICE MELT AND METERS OF SEA LEVEL RISE. LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/11/07/climate-change-threatens-polar-ice/ LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/09/24/a-failed-polar-ice-melt-obsession/ LINK#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/09/03/polar-ice-melt-fears-of-september-2020/ LINK#4: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/10/11/antarctica-ice-melt-sea-level-rise-2020/ FAILED FORECAST#4: THE ARCTIC HEAT WAVES OF GLOBAL WARMING ARE THE EVIDENCE THAT THE END IS NEAR. LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/07/19/agw-heat-wave-in-siberia/ LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/07/27/arctic2019fires/ LINK#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/09/30/arcticwarming/ LINK#4: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/10/28/arctic-warming-alarm-of-october-2020/ CONCLUSION: THE ESSENCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS A DOOMOLOGY THAT RELIES ON THE IDEA THAT FEAR APPEAL CAN BE USED TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE HUMANS