THE ONLY ISSUE IS HUMAN CAUSE

Posted by: chaamjamal on: November 9, 2021

• In: Uncategorized
 
• Leave a Comment

THIS POST IS A PRESENTATION OF THE CASE THAT THE ONLY ISSUE IN THE CLIMATE CHANGE ALARM OF THE THEORY OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (AGW) IS HUMAN CAUSE AND NOT THE CLAIMED HARMFUL IMPACTS OF WARMING. THIS IS BECAUSE THE IMPACTS OF WARMING WOULD BE THE SAME REGARDLESS OF CAUSE – WHETHER NATURAL CLIMATE CHANGE OR HUMAN CAUSED. THE OVERWHELMING DEPENDENCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE ON HARMFUL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AS THE RATIONALE FOR CLIMATE ACTION IS NON-SENSICAL BECAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS, NO MATTER HOW HARMFUL, ARE A CREATION OF WARMING NO MATTER WHAT THE CAUSE.

THE NATURAL GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE CYCLES OF OF INTERGLACIALS ARE DESCRIBED IN RELATED POSTS FOR THE HOLOCENE AND THE EEMIAN INTERGLACIAL {LINKED BELOW}AND THERE WE FIND THAT INTERGLACIALS ARE NEVER AT CONSTANT TEMPERATURE SUCH THAT A WARMING TREND WOULD REQUIRE HUMAN CAUSE TO EXPLAIN.

INSTEAD WHAT WE SEE IN THE DATA IS THAT INTERGLACIAL TEMPERATURES ARE CONSTANTLY GOING THROUGH CHAOTIC ALTERNATING WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES ALWAYS AT CENTENNIAL TO MILLENNIAL TIME SCALES.

IN THIS HISTORY OF THE HOLOCENE, THE CURRENT WARMING CAN BE UNDERSTOOD AS THE NATURAL WARMING CYCLE THAT FOLLOWS THE NATURAL LITTLE ICE AGE COOLING CYCLE.

IT IS SIGNIFICANT THAT THE CURRENT WARMING CYCLE WAS NOT FORECAST FROM HUMAN ACTIVITY THAT COULD CAUSE SUCH A THING BUT WAS CLAIMED FOR HUMAN CAUSE AFTER THE FACT.

EEMIAN LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/21/eemian/

HOLOCENE LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/06/11/chaoticholocene/

HOLOCENE LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/10/05/a-quora-question-3/

HOLOCENE LINK#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/10/05/a-quora-question-3/

HOLOCENE LINK#4: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/12/human-cause-in-the-anthropocene/

THAT THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION HAPPENS TO FALL IN BETWEEN THESE TEMPERATURE CYCLES OF THE HOLOCENE CANNOT BE TAKEN AS EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE PARTICULARLY SO SINCE CLIMATE SCIENCE IS UNABLE TO RELATE THESE EVENTS IN TERMS OF TIMING.

CLIMATE SCIENCE CLAIMS A CRITICAL ROLE IN THEIR THEORY FOR “THE PRE-INDUSTRIAL YEAR” WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION STARTED GLOBAL WARMING BUT THEY DON’T KNOW WHEN THAT PRE-INDUSTRIAL YEAR WAS EXACTLY AS SHOWN BELOW. YET, THEY PROPOSE A CRITICAL AMOUNT OF WARMING THAT MUST NOT BE EXCEEDED AS MEASURED “SINCE THAT CRITICAL PRE INDUSTRIAL YEAR AND REFERRED TO AS “SINCE PRE-INDUSTRIAL”.

QUESTION: WHEN DID HUMAN CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING START?

ANSWER: CALLENDAR 1938: IT STARTED IN 1900, HANSEN1988, IT STARTED IN 1950, IPCC2001, IT STARTED IN 1750, IPCC 2015: IT STARTED IN 1850, NASA 2020: IT STARTED IN 1950.

ETCW: YET ANOTHER UNRESOLVED ISSUE IN THIS TIMING PROPOSITION IS THE ETCW MYSTERY IN CLIMATE SCIENCE WHERE “EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY WARMING” (ETCW) 1900 TO 1950 REMAINS UNEXPLAINED.

OTHER ISSUES: WEAKNESSES IN THE CAUSATION HYPOTHESIS INVOLVE ISSUES IN EQUILIBRIUM CLIMATE SENSITIVITY UNCERTAINTY AND THE TCRE MATHEMATICAL INCONSISTENCY DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENTS LINKED BELOW.

LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/10/the-climate-sensitivity-issue/

LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/05/06/tcre/

LINK#3: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/08/26/a-mathematical-inconsistency/

LINK#4: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/05/31/the-carbon-cycle-measurement-problem/

LINK#5: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/06/10/a-monte-carlo-simulation-of-the-carbon-cycle/

LINK#6: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/10/05/rising-atmospheric-co2/

LINK#7: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/18/climate-science-vs-statistics/

LINK#8: PRE INDUSTRIAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/10/05/a-quora-question-3/

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

WITH REGARD TO EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE, A PECULIAR CLAIM MADE BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IS THAT HUMAN CAUSE IS PROVEN BY THE SEVERITY OF THE WARMING THAT IS THE STRONGEST AND HOTTEST IN THE LAST 2,000 YEARS. THERE ARE TWO WEAKNESSES IN THIS CLAIM. THE FIRST IS THAT THE HOLOCENE IS ABOUT 9,000 YEARS OLD AND THE LIMITATION OF THE COMPARISON PERIOD TO 2,000 YEARS INVALIDATES THE ESSENCE OF THE CLAIM. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE INTENSITY OF THE WARMING DOES NOT PROVE HUMAN CAUSE. THROUGHOUT THE HOLOCENE WE HAVE ALTERNATING WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES AT MILLENNIAL AND CENTENNIAL TIME SCALES BUT THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT WITH SOME STRONGER AND HOTTER THAN OTHERS. THESE DIFFERENCES DO NOT IMPLY HUMAN CAUSE AS THEY ARE NATURAL AND THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE EXPECTATION THAT INTERGLACIAL TEMPERATURE CYCLES SHOULD BE OF EQUAL SEVERITY. THESE KINDS OF COMICAL INCONSISTENCIES IN CLIMATE SCIENCE CAN BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE WAY ACTIVISM CORRUPTS SCIENCE AS DESCRIBED IN A RELATED POST: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/02/03/hidden-hand/

THE NEED FOR FEARFUL CLIMATE IMPACTS TO PUSH THE CLIMATE ACTION PROPOSITION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ILLOGICAL AND WITHOUT SUBSTANCE IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE BECAUSE CLIMATE ACTION IS IRRELEVANT WITHOUT HUMAN CAUSE. THIS ODDITY OF THE CLIMATE MOVEMENT IS BEST UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF THEIR INABILITY TO PRESENT CONVINCING EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE. THIS SITUATION LEAVES THEM WITH ONLY THEIR FEAR APPEAL MOVEMENT FOR CLIMATE ACTION BASED ON THE HARM THAT CLIMATE IMPACTS CAN DO IF CLIMATE ACTION IS NOT TAKEN.

IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE FOR HUMAN CAUSE THE LOGICAL RESPONSE TO GLOBAL WARMING IS ADAPTATION AND GEOENGINEERING STRATEGIES. THE USE OF FEARFUL CLIMATE IMPACTS AND A FEAR APPEAL MOVEMENT TO PUSH CLIMATE ACTION OBSTRUCTS THE RATIONAL POLICY OF ADAPTTION AND GEOENGINEERING AND IN THAT RESPECT, THE CLIMATE MOVEMENT THAT IS PUSHING CLIMATE ACTION BY WAY OF FEAR APPEAL ACTIVISM IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.

BOTTOM LINE: NO DEMAND FOR CLIMATE ACTION CAN BE MADE WITHOUT CONVINCING EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE PARTICULARLY SO SINCE (#1) NATURAL GLOBAL WARMING IS NORMAL IN INTERGLACIALS, AND (#2) THE CLIMATE ACTION DEMANDED IS COSTLY.

RELATED POST ON CLIMATE ADAPTATION: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/10/13/climate-change-fear-appeal/

RELATED POST ON GEOENGINEERING: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/03/25/climate-fearology-vs-geoengineering/

CLIMATE ACTION ACTIVISM AS EXPLAINED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE

A LIST OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS USED CONSTANTLY AND REPEATEDLY BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IS PROVIDED ONLINE BY THE PEOPLE AT THE “BEFORE THE FLOOD” SITE: LINK: https://www.beforetheflood.com/explore/the-crisis/worst-impacts/ . A brief summary is provided below.

 

HOLOCENE GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Posted by: chaamjamal on: January 5, 2022

• In: Uncategorized
 
• 3 Comments

WE ARE IN THE QUATERNARY ICE AGE WHERE 80% TO 90% OF THE TIME, THE EARTH IS IN A GLACIATED STATE WITH GLACIAL GROWTH IN THE GLACIATION PHASE AND GLACIAL RETREAT IN THE DEGLACIATION PHASE. WHAT WE FIND IN THE DATA IS THAT BOTH LEGS OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE EXHIBIT CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR AT CENTENNIAL AND MILLENNIAL TIME SCALES SUCH THAT ALTERNATING GLACIAL GROWTH AND GLACIAL DECLINE AT THESE TIME SCALES ARE SEEN IN BOTH LEGS OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GLACIATION AND DEGLACIATION IS THAT THERE IS A SLIGHT EDGE FOR COOLING AND ICE FORMATION IN THE GLACIATION PHASE AND A SLIGHT EDGE FOR WARMING AND ICE MELT IN THE DEGLACIATION PHASE.

AT THE END OF EACH DEGLACIATION PHASE THERE IS A BRIEF DEGLACIATED WARM PERIOD CALLED {INTERGLACIAL} THAT LASTS FOR ABOUT 10,000 TO 15,000 YEARS. WE ARE CURRENTLY IN ONE OF THESE INTERGLACIALS THAT IS CALLED THE HOLOCENE INTERGLACIAL THAT GOT STARTED ABOUT 11,000 YEARS AGO. A SIGNIFICANT FEATURE OF INTERGLACIALS IS THAT THE CHAOTIC TEMPERATURE CYCLES SEEN IN THE GLACIATION AND DEGLACIATION PHASES OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE IS ALSO FOUND IN INTERGLACIALS. THIS MEANS THAT INTERGLACIALS ARE NOT AT A CONSTANT FIXED TEMPERATURE BUT THAT THEY EXHIBIT CHAOTIC BACK AND FORTH WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES ALSO AT CENTENNIAL AND MILLENNIAL TIME SCALES.

AS FOR EXAMPLE, THE HISTORY OF THE HOLOCENE SHOWS THAT AS SOON AS THE LAST DEGLACIATION HAD APPARENTLY ENDED, A STRONG COOLING TREND INTERVENED AND DROVE DOWN THE TEMPERATURE IN GREENLAND BY 15C. THIS GLOBAL COOLING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE INTERGLACIAL LASTED FOR MORE THAN A THOUSAND YEARS. IT IS CALLED THE YOUNGER DRYAS.

FOLLOWING THE YOUNGER DRYAS, A STRONG WARMING TREND SET IN ALSO AT A THOUSAND YEAR TIME SCALE. IT TOOK THE GLOBAL CLIMATE TO A 4,000-YEAR WARM PERIOD THAT STARTED 9,000 YEARS AGO. IT TOOK THE CLIMATE TO A WARM PERIOD CALLED THE HOLOCENE CLIMATE OPTIMUM. THIS WARM PERIOD IS CREDITED WITH THE INVENTION OF AGRICULTURE AND THE CREATION OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION.

BUT THAT FINE GLOBAL WARMING WEATHER OF THE HOLOCENE CLIMATE OPTIMUM CAME TO AN END ABOUT 5,000 YEARS AGO.

THESE ALTERNATING WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES AT CENTENNIAL AND MILLENNIAL TIME SCALES CONTINUED THROUGH THE REST OF THE HOLOCENE BY WAY OF THE MINOAN WARM PERIOD, THE ROMAN WARM PERIOD, AND THE MEDIEVAL WARM PERIOD AND FINALLY FOLLOWING THE LITTLE ICE AGE COOLING PERIOD, WE ENTERED THE CURRENT WARM PERIOD THAT IS THOUGHT TO HAVE STARTED WHEN THE LITTLE ICE AGE ENDED ABOUT A THOUSAND YEARS AGO EXCEPT THAT THE DEMARCATION BETWEEN THE LITTLE ICE AGE AND THE CURRENT WARM PERIOD IS NOT WELL UNDERSTOOD AS DESCRIBED IN A RELATED POST: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/10/23/a-natural-recovery-from-the-lia/ .

THE RESULT IS THAT THERE IS SOME CONFUSION IN CLIMATE SCIENCE ABOUT EXACTLY WHEN THE TRANSITION FROM THE LITTLE ICE AGE TO THE CURRENT WARMING CYCLE GOT STARTED. CURRENTLY THE BEST GUESS OFFERED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IS THAT IT HAPPENED AT SOME TIME BETWEEN 1850 AND 1950. NASA AND CLIMATE SCIENTIST JAMES HANSEN AKA THE FATHER OF CLIMATE CHANGE FAVOR 1950 WHILE THE IPCC HAS PROPOSED START DATES FROM 1750 TO 1850.

THE CONTRADICTION HERE IS THAT ALTHOUGH THE START DATE CONTAINS THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE AS THE ONLY EVIDENCE OF CAUSATION BY THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WHICH GOT GOING AT SOME POINT BETWEEN 1760 AND 1840, THE CONFUSED CLIMATE SCIENCE POSITION ON THE START DATE UNDOES THE CRITICAL CAUSATION CONNECTION TO THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.

SUMMARY

THE ESSENTIAL THEORY OF AGW {ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING} IS THAT IT IS HUMAN CAUSED BECAUSE IT FOLLOWED IN THE HEELS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. IN RESPONSE WE PROPOSE THAT:

(#1): THE CURRENT WARMING TREND IS ONE OF MANY SUCH WARMING TRENDS IN THE HOLOCENE THAT HAD OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.

(#2): THAT THE CURRENT WARMING TREND CAME IN THE HEELS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION DOES NOT PROVE CAUSATION.

(#3): ARGUMENT #2 ABOVE IS FURTHER STRENGTHENED IN VIEW OF THE EXTREME UNCERTAINTY IN CLIMATE SCIENCE ABOUT WHEN THIS ANTHROPOGENIC WARMING CYCLE ACTUALLY BEGAN. SOME START DATES PROPOSED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE PRECEDE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND SOME START DATES PROPOSED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE FOLLOW THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION BY AS MUCH AS A CENTURY.

CONCLUSION:

WE CONCLUDE FROM THE DATA AND ANALYSIS PRESENTD ABOVE THAT SINCE INTERGLACIALS ARE NOT AT A CONSTANT STEADY TEMPERATURE BUT GO THROUGH WHAT ARE OFTEN VIOLENT WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES AT MILLENNIAL AND CENTENNIAL TIME SCALES, AN INTERGLACIAL WARMING CYCLE CANNOT BE ASSUMED TO BE HUMAN CAUSED WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE OF CAUSATION. IT SHOULD BE NOTED IN THIS REGARD THAT THE COMICAL CLIMATE SCIENCE ACTIVISM IN REPEATED BUT FAILED FORECASTS OF THE COLLAPSE OF THE WEST ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET {WAIS} WITH CATASTROPHIC SEA LEVEL RISE WAS DRAWN FROM WHAT HAPPENED IN THE EEMAIN INTERGLACIAL THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. AND THAT COLLAPSE THAT NEVER HAPPENED IN THIS WARMING CYCLE DID, DID HAPPEN WAY BACK THEN BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REEVOLUTION. THE ARGUMENTS PRESENTED HERE IMPLY THAT CLIMATE SCIENCE MUST PRESENT SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE – MORE SIGNIFICANT THAT IT HAPPENS TO FOLLOW THE INDUSTRIAL FREVOLUTION. AS IT STANDS, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED ABOVE, WE CONCLUDE THAT WITHOUT HARD EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE THE CURRENT WARMING TRENDIS BEST UNDERSTOOD AS YET ANOTHER OF MANY WARMING CYCLES OF THE HOLOCENE.

THE NEED FOR AN EXTREME FORM OF FEAR APPEAL ACTIVISM BY CLIMATE SCIENCE TO SELL THEIR CLIMATE AGENDA IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR CONCLUSION ABOVE THAT THE EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE IS WEAK TO THE POINT OF NON-EXISTENT AND THAT THEREFORE IT REQUIRES FEAR APPEAL ACTIVISM TO SELL.

THE CLIMATE SCIENCE EMPHASIS ON AND OBSESSION WITH FEAR APPEAL TO SELL THEIR ANTI FOSSIL FUEL AGENDA IN TERMS OF A FEAR OF GLOBAL WARMING IS BEST UNDERSTOOD IN THIS CONTEXT.

 

CLIMATE DISINFORMATION

Posted by: chaamjamal on: October 28, 2021

• In: Uncategorized
 
• Leave a Comment

THIS POST IS A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE CLIMATE DISINFORMATION PROBE BY CONGRESS

PART-1: THE CASE FOR A CLIMATE DISINFORMATION PROBE:

Oil Executives to Face Congress on Climate Disinformation. The heads of Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron and BP will testify Thursday in the first congressional inquiry into industry efforts to hinder action on climate change.

As in the tobacco hearings of the 1990s that exposed the lies pf tobacco companies about the health dangers of smoking and paved the way for tough nicotine regulations, executives of Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP and Shell are set to appear before a congressional committee Thursday to address accusations that the industry spent millions of dollars to wage a decades-long disinformation campaign to cast doubt on the science of climate change and to derail action to reduce emissions from burning fossil fuels.

This is the first time that oil executives will be pressed to answer questions, under oath, about whether their companies misled the public about the reality of climate change by obscuring the SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS that the burning of fossil fuels is raising Earth’s temperature and sea levels with devastating consequences worldwide including intensifying storms, worsening drought and deadlier wildfires.

BIG OIL WILL HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ON THEIR CLIMATE DISINFORMATION.

There is an ongoing climate crisis and tons of news about the climate crisis. Oil companies have denied lying to the public about climate change, and have said the industry is now taking bold steps to rein in emissions.

Shell oil has admitted that meeting the demand for reliable energy must simultaneously address climate change and that it is a huge undertaking and one of the defining challenges of our time.

Exxon’s position is that it has long acknowledged that climate change is real and poses serious risks.The company’s statements about climate science have been factual aqnd transparent and consistent with the broader mainstream scientific community and it evolved as the science evolved although back in the year 2000, Exxon’s position was that scientists have been unable to confirm that the burning of oil, gas and coal caused climate change.

Yet, in 1950, the IPCC had confirmed that the planet had warmed by 0.5C over the previous century because of fossil fuel-driven greenhouse gases. The American Petroleum Institute has taken a position in favor of climate change policies.

SO THEREFORE, THE STATED POSITION OF EXXON ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS DISINFORMATION BECAUSE IT CONTRADICTS THE 1950 IPCC REPORT.

PART-2: THE CASE FOR SCIENCE

The essence of the case presented above is that the climate science position on climate change is correct and that therefore any deviance from the climate science position on climate change is an evil and unscientific enterprise of the profit motivation of the oil industry that threatens human welfare in the USA as well as globally and that therefore the US govenrment must intervene on the side of climate science in this issue.

This argument is fatally flawed.

(1): First, it is not a governmental function to resolve scientitic disagreements.

(2): Secondly, if the government can and must intervene into this science discourse it must do so without taking a position on the issue before it carries out its investigation.

(3): That there is a role of the government to determine that the the climate science position is information and that the oil industry position is disinformation and to resolve the disinformation of the fossil fuel industry is based on the assumption that the government has determined that the climate science position on climate change is information and that the fossil fuel industry position on climate change is disinformation.

(4): This position of the government is illogical and indefensible if the issue is science.

(5): Yet another aspect of a role for the government of the USA is that climate change is a global issue with no role for nation states. This is why the UN is running the show and why we have COPs. The tobacco issue was a national issue that was resolved by national policies . These two issues are not comparable and nothing about either contains implications for the other.

(6): If the government has a role in resolving the climate issue it should address the points of disagreement and not use the tobacco issue as a blanket rationale to conclude that therefore the climate science position is correct and the oil industry position is wrong.

(7): For example, what is the government’s position on the climate sensitivity (ECS) uncertainty issue : LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/10/the-climate-sensitivity-issue/

(8): And what is the government positon on the use of the TCRE instead of ECS and the statistical errors in the construction of the TCRE parameter? LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/18/climate-science-vs-statistics/ ????

(9): The government also needs to explain the observation in the data that warming cycles of 100 to 1000 years are common in interglacials: Interglacials such as the Holocene that we are in, are never at constant temperature but consist entirely of chaotic and alternating warming and cooling cycles LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/11/09/the-issue-is-human-cause/ .

(10): If climate science can explain these temperature departures as cause and effect phenomena and the creation of changes in atmospheric composition, they should explain all of them in that way and not pick just one of them to explain. That kind of science suffers from a science fallacy called “DATA SELECTION BIAS”.

CONCLUSION

If the government wants to intervene in the climate change issue it must address the issues in the science instead of simply citing tobacco. The tobacco argument is nonsensical. It says in essence that since the tobacco industry was wrong in the tobacco issue therefore, the fossil fuel industry must be wrong in the climate issue. This logic is flawed. If the government wants a role in the climate science it must address the science issues at hand.

THE PROPOSITION THAT SINCE TOBACCO SCIENTISTS WERE RIGHT THEREFORE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS MUST ALSO BE RIGHT IS NOT SCIENCE.

 

Climate Change And Ozone Depletion

Table of Contents

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. 

RELIGION & CLIMATE CHANGE: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/10/21/climate-change-and-religion/   

 

 THE AMAZING POWER OF MONEY 

A FARMER IN A NEARBY VILLAGE IN THAILAND AND HIS FAMILY LIVED A TYPICAL VILLAGE LIFESTYLE OF GETTING BY ON THE POVERTY SIDE OF NEITHER RICH NOR POOR. THEIR ONLY INCOME WAS THAT THE FATHER OWNED SOME LAND WHICH HE LEASED OUT TO FARMERS AND THEORETICALLY, IT WAS THAT LEASE INCOME THAT SUSTAINED THE FAMILY AND GOT THEM THEIR RICE AND QUALITY OF LIFE SO TO SPEAK. HOWEVER, WHEN THE FATHER DIED A NEW AND MORBID PICTURE EMERGED. IT TURNS OUT THAT THE FATHER DID NOT USE ALL OF THE INCOME FROM HIS LAND LEASE TO RAISE HIS FAMILY. IT TURNS OUT THAT THE RELATIVE POVERTY IN WHICH THE FAMILY WAS RAISED DERIVES FROM THE FATHER'S OBSESSION WITH BUYING LAND AS A WAY OF INCREASING THE WEALTH OF THE FAMILY - CONSUMPTION BE DAMNED. APPARENTLY WEALTH IS MEASURED NOT BY YOUR LIFESTYLE AND QUALITY OF LIFE BUT HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE IN THE BANK. SO MOST OF THE INCOME FROM HIS LAND LEASES WENT NOT TO FEEDING AND CLOTHING AND EDUCATING HIS CHILDREN AND NOT TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE BUT TO BUYING MORE LAND AND INCREASING THE FUTURE WEALTH OF THE FAMILY - QUALITY OF LIFE BE DAMNED. IT WAS ONLY AFTER THE FATHER DIED THAT THEY DISCOVERED THIS INCREDIBLE LAND WEALTH OF WHAT HAD APPEARED TO BE A POOR VILLAGE FARMING FAMILY. SO NOW THE FATHER IS DEAD AND THE NEXT GENERATION IS THEREFORE EXTREMELY WEALTHY ON PAPER BUT THEY CONTINUE TO HAVE THE LIFESTYLE OF THEIR OLD POVERTY CONDITION THAT WAS CREATED BY ALL THIS INVESTMENT IN LAND AT THE EXPENSE OF CONSUMPTION AND LIFESTYLE. SO WHAT ARE THEY DOING WITH ALL THIS LAND? EACH OF THE FOUR CHILDREN THE FATHER LEFT BEHIND NOW OWNS LARGE SUBSTANTIAL PIECES OF RICH AGRICULTURAL LAND AND TAKEN TOGETHER THEY COULD BE THE LARGEST LAND OWNERS IN THE VILLAGE. BUT NO INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE AND NONE IS CONTEMPLATED FOR USING THE LAND TO GENERATE INCOME. INSTEAD, THE TOTAL MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND ON PAPER SERVES AS THE MEASURE AND SATISFACTION OF THEIR WEALTH AND THAT SATISFACTION OVERRIDES THE IDEA THAT CONSUMPTION CREATES THE QUALITY OF LIFE. HERE IN RURAL THAILAND IT IS APPPARENTLY  BETTER TO LIVE IN UTTER POVERTY BUT WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE MONEY IN THE BANK. THE SATISFACTION OF MONEY IS NOT WHAT YOU CAN BUY BUT HOW MUCH OF IT YOU HAVE. AND IN THAT EQUATION, CONSUMPTION IS BAD BECAUSE BUYING THINGS REDUCES YOUR TOTAL BANK BALANCE.