WHAT WE FIND IN THESE POSTS IS THAT GLACIATION IS NOT A PERIOD OF PERSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE PERIOD OF COOLING AND ICE FORMATION AND DEGLACIATION IS NOT A PERSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE PERIOD OF WARMING AND ICE MELT BUT THAT BOTH LEGS OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE CONSIST OF BOTH OF THESE PROCESSES AT THE SAME MILLENNIAL TIME SCALE BUT WITH A CHAOTIC VARIABILITY BETWEEN 500 TO 1500 YEARS.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GLACIATION AND DEGLACIATION IS THAT THERE IS A SLIGHT EDGE FOR ICE FORMATION IN THE GLACIATION PHASE AND A SLIGHT EDGE FOR ICE MELT IN THE DEGLACIATION PHASE. BUT BOTH LEGS OF THE GLACIATION CYCLE EXHIBIT COOLING WITH ICE FORMATION AND WARMING WITH ICE MELT.
INTERGLACIALS
THE RELEVANT ASPECT OF THIS CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GLOBAL WARMING ALARM OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, IS THAT IT IS ALSO FOUND IN INTERGLACIALS WITH THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BEING THAT THERE IS NO BIAS. THIS MEANS THAT INTERGLACIALS ARE NOT AT SOME STEADY STATE FIXED TEMPERATURE SUCH THAT WARMING OR COOLING CYCLES IN INTERGLACIALS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION IN TERMS OF A CAUSE AND EFFECT HYPOTHESIS. THE ALTERNATING WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES OF INTERGLACIALS AT DIFFERENT TIME SCALES ARE BEST UNDERSTOOD AS THE CREATION OF THE CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR DESCRIBED ABOVE THAT CONTINUES INTO INTERGLACIALS AND THAT EVENTUALLY CAUSES A RETURN TO GLACIATION.
WHAT THIS IMPLIES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GLOBAL WARMING ALARM OF OUR TIME THAT IS CLAIMED TO BE HUMAN CAUSED BY WAY OF FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS IS THAT AN INTERGLACIAL WARMING PERIOD IS NOT AN ANOMALY THAT REQUIRES AN EXPLANATION IN TERMS OF HUMAN CAUSE, AND THAT A HUMAN CAUSE HYPOTHESIS FOR A SELECTED WARMING PERIOD SUFFERS FROM DATA SELECTION BIAS AS WELL AS AN UNSUPPORTED ASSUMPTION THAT THE WARMING PERIOD SELECTED IS NOT NATURAL BUT HUMAN CAUSED AND THAT THEREFORE IT MUST HAVE BEEN THE FOSSIL FUELS THAT DID IT BECAUSE OUR USE OF FOSSIL FUELS BEGAN ABOUT THE SAME TIME AS THIS WARMING CYCLE GOT STARTED. THIS REASONING SUFFERS FROM DATA SELECTION BIAS AND A THEORY THAT EXPLAINS ONLY ONE SELECTED WARMING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE WITH NO EXPLANATION FOR THE OTHER WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES IN THE SAME INTERGLACIAL.
IF CLIMATE SCIENCE UNDERSTANDS INTERGLACIAL TEMPERATURE CYCLES AS CAUSE AND EFFECT PHENOMENA, THEY SHOULD EXPLAIN ALL OF THEM AND NOT SELECT JUST ONE OF THEM TO EXPLAIN IN THAT WAY. THAT KIND OF SCIENCE CONTAINS A FATAL WEAKNESS CALLED DATA SELECTION BIAS.
AN INTERPRETATION OF THIS KIND OF BIAS IN RESEARCH IS THAT THE PROPOSED CAUSATION HYPOTHESIS DERIVES FROM ACTIVISM.
THE CLIMATE SCIENCE OF THE THEORY OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE BY WAY OF FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS IS FOUNDED ON THE THEORY OF CLIMATE SENSITIVITY. THIS THEORY HOLDS THAT SURFACE TEMPERATURE IS A LOGARITHMIC FUNCTION OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION SUCH THAT THERE IS A UNIVERSAL CONSTANT CALLED “EQUILIBRIUM CLIMATE SENSITIVITY” OR “ECS” THAT RELATES EACH DOUBLING OF ATMOSPHERIC CARBON DIOXIDE TO A FIXED AMOUNT OF WARMING.
HOWEVER, WHAT WE SEE IN THE IMAGES ABOVE AND IN THE DETAILS DESCRIBED IN A RELATED POST ON ECS UNCERTAINTY: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/10/the-climate-sensitivity-issue/IS THAT, THOUGH THE THE THEORY OF ECS IS FOUNDED ON KNOWN ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE AND THE KNOWN PROPERTIES OF CARBON DIOXIDE AND THOUGH IT IS DEFENSIBLE IN TERMS OF THIS THEORY, ITS PRACTICAL APPLICATION TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CURRENT GLOBAL WARMING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE INTERGLACIAL OR ITS INTERPRETATION IN TERMS OF THE THEORY OF GLOBAL WARMING PROPOSED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IS NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF LARGE UNCERTAINTIES IN OBSERVED EMPIRICAL VALUES OF THE ESSENTIAL AND CRITICAL ECS PARAMETER.
IF WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE VALUE OF THE ECS IS WE DON’T KNOW HOW GLOBAL WARMING WORKS AND BOTH THE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY OF CLIMATE SCIENCE AND THE CLIMATE ACTION ACTIVISM OF CLIMATE SCIENCE THAT CLAIM CREDIBILITY BECAUSE THEY ARE SCIENCE, ARE LEFT WITH A SCIENCE THAT HAS NO EMPIRICAL SUPPORT.
PROFESSOR DAMON MATHEWS, CLIMATE SCIENTIST, CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY
THESE WEAKNESSES IN THE FOUNDATIONAL THEORY OF ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING MOTIVATED CLIMATE SCIENCE TO ABANDON THIS THEORETICAL BASIS OF THE ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING HYPOTHESIS WHEN CLIMATE SCIENTIST, PROFESSOR DAMON MATTHEWS AND OTHERS, DISCOVERED A STRONG AND NEARLY PERFECT CORRELATION BETWEEN WARMING AND CUMULATIVE FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS.
ALTHOUGH THIS RELATIONSHIP HAS NO THEORETICAL BASIS, THE DISCOVERY OF THE STRONG CORRELATION RESCUED CLIMATE SCIENCE FROM THEIR ECS FAILURE AND PROVIDED THEM WITH THE NEEDED CAUSATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMISSIONS AND WARMING FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS CAUSE WARMING AND FOR THE DEMAND THAT THE NEEDED CLIMATE ACTION IS FOR HUMANS TO STOP BURNING FOSSIL FUELS.
DETAILS OF THIS DRAMATIC EVENT IN CLIMATE SCIENCE, THAT RESCUED THE SCIENCE MIDWAY IN THEIR MOVEMENT TO END THE BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS, ARE PROVIDED IN A RELATED POST: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/05/06/consensus-science/
THIS NEAR PERFECT CORRELATION IS CALLED THE {TRANSIENT CLIMATE RESPONSE TO CUMULATIVE EMISSIONS} OR TCRE FOR SHORT. IT DERIVES ONLY FROM THE DISCOVERY OF A STRONG AND ALMOST PERFECT CORRELATION BETWEEN THE CHANGE IN GMST (WARMING) AND CUMULATIVE FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS. A USEFUL AND MUCH NEEDED APPLICATION OF THIS NEW CORREATION WAS QUICKLY DISCOVERED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE IN TERMS OF “CARBON BUDGET” ESTIMATIONS. A CARBON BUDGET IS THE AMOUNT OF EMISSIONS THAT CORRESPOND TO A GIVEN AMOUNT OF WARMING. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO THEORETICAL BASIS FOR THIS OBSERVED CORRELATION, AND IN RELATED POSTS WE SHOW THAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO INTERPRET THIS OBSERVED CORRELATION IN TERMS OF THE PHENOMENA OF NATURE THAT IT APPARENTLY REPRESENTS BECAUSE OF ITS MANY STATISTICAL ANOMALIES AND WEAKNESSES. {LINKS BELOW}
#1: YOUTUBE VIDEOS: CORRELATION BETWEEN CUMULATIVE VALUES OF RANDOM NUMBERS THAT FOLLOW CERTAIN SIGN PATTERNS
THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT THE FAUX “CORRELATION” IS A CREATION OF A SIGN PATTERN WHERE EMISSIONS ARE ALWAYS POSITIVE BY DEFINITION, AND IN A PERIOD OF WARMING, THE AMOUNT OF WARMING EACH YEAR IS MOSTLY POSITIVE ALTHOUGH NOT ALWAYS SO. AND THAT NOT EVERY YEAR IS A WARMING YEAR THUS SET THE TRAP FOR THE IMMEDIATE APPLICATION OF THIS NEW CORRELATION IN CLIMATE SCIENCE IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTING WHAT IS CALLED THE “CARBON BUDGET”.
WHAT CLIMATE SCIENTISTS QUICKLY DISCOVERED IN THE CARBON BUDGET APPLICATION OF THE TCRE AND WHAT APPEARED TO THEM TO BE A MYSTERY IS THE SO CALLED “REMAINING CARBON BUDGET ANOMALY”. BRIEFLY, THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT IF YOU USE UP A PART OF YOUR CARBON BUDGET, THE REMAINING CARBON BUDGET CANNOT BE COMPUTED BY SUBTRACTION BUT MUST BE RECOMPUTED WITH THE TCRE RECOMPUTED FOR THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE CARBON BUDGET PERIOD. THIS APPEARS TO CLIMATE SCIENCE TO BE AN UNRESOLVED MYSTERY ALTHOUGH THE ISSUE IS SIMPLY THAT THOUGH ANNUAL WARMINGS ARE MOSTLY POSITIVE THEY ARE NOT ALWAYS SO AND THERE ARE RANDOM YEARS WHERE IT MAY HAVE COOLED. FOR THIS REASON, THE FRACTION OF POSITIVE WARMING YEARS IN THE FULL SPAN OF THE BUDGET PERIOD IS UNLIKELY TO EQUAL THE FRACTION OF WARMING YEARS IN A SELECTED PORTION OF THE FULL SPAN BUDGET PERIOD. WHAT CLIMATE SCIENCE THINKS IS A MYSTERY IS THE CLUE THAT THE TCRE IS A SPURIOUS CORRELATION THAT HAS NO INTERPRETATION IN THE REAL WORLD. IT SHOULD ALSO BE MENTIONED THAT A TIME SERIES OF THE CUMULATIVE VALUES OF ANOTHER TIME SERIES HAS NEITHER TIME SCALE NOR DEGREES OF FREEDOM AND THAT THEREFORE, THE CORRELATION BETWEEN CUMULATIVE VALUES HAS NO INTERPRETATION IN THE REAL WORLD.
AN EVEN MORE EGREGIOUS MATHEMATICAL ERROR IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION OF THE TCRE IS ITS MATHEMATICAL INCONSISTENCY. BRIEFLY, IN THE THEORY OF CLIMATE CHANGE, GMST IS A LOGARITHMIC FUNCTION OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATION BUT IN THE TCRE, GMST IS A LINEAR FUNCTION OF ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION BECAUSE ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION IS A CREATION OF CUMULATIVE EMISSIONS. RELATED POST LINKED BELOW:
WE CONCLUDE THAT WHAT THE TCRE TELLS US ABOUT CLIMATE SCIENCE IS THAT THEIR NEED FOR SCIENCE IS NOT TO DISCOVER HOW THINGS WORK BUT TO VALIDATE WHAT THEY HAVE ALREADY DECIDED ABOUT HOW THINGS WORK.
“Hellscape” is the most appropriate word to describe the surface of Venus, the second planet from the sun. At 900 degrees Fahrenheit, it’s the hottest planet in the solar system, thanks to an atmosphere that’s almost entirely made up of carbon dioxide. Clouds made of highly corrosive sulfuric acid are draped over a volcanic landscape of razor-sharp lava flows. Most crushingly, the pressure on the surface of Venus is about 92 times the pressure you’d feel at sea level on Earth. “It’s really almost entertainingly, comically horrible, like some sort of cosmic deity had a really, really grumpy day and just went ‘Nope, I’m gonna ruin this planet,’” Robin George Andrews, a science journalist and volcanologist, says. Andrews compares it to being in a pressure cooker a mile underwater. “If you stood on the surface, you would be pancaked and you would melt,” he says. Your eyes would explode due to the pressure — “which would be gross,” he adds. Yet as Andrews relays in his new book, Super Volcanoes: What They Reveal about Earth and the Worlds Beyond, some scientists suspect Venus was once much like Earth, with a liquid water ocean like the ones that support life on our planet. For Andrews, the question of what happened to ruin Venus is captivating and even existential. “Venus and Earth are planetary siblings,” he says. “They were made at the same time and made of the same stuff, yet Venus is apocalyptic and awful in every possible way. Earth is a paradise. So why do we have a paradise next to a paradise lost?” Scientists know something on Venus triggered truly catastrophic levels of climate change, causing surface temperatures to shoot up hundreds of degrees. But they don’t know exactly what. I spoke to Andrews for an episode of Unexplainable, Vox’s science podcast about unanswered questions, about what could have triggered Venus’s apocalypse and why we should care about it. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity. The podcast episode also features a discussion with Sara Seager, an MIT planetary scientist and an expert on exoplanets, or planets outside our solar system, who raises the tantalizing question: What if, despite the cataclysm, something is still alive on Venus? The origins of Venus could tell us a lot about our place in the universe.
WHAT DO I KNOW THAT WOULD CAUSE ME, A RETICENT MID-WESTERN SCIENTIST, TO GET MYSELF ARRESTED IN FRONT OF THE WHITE HOUSE? AND WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOU KNEW WHAT I KNOW. LET’S START WITH HOW I GOT TO THIS POINT. I WAS LUCKY TO GROW UP AT A TIME WHEN IT WAS NOT DIFFICULT FOR THE CHILD OF A TENANT FARMER TO MAKE HIS WAY TO TH STATE UNIVERSITY AND I WAS REALLY LUCKY TO GO TO THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA WHERE I COULD STUDY UNDER PROFESSOR JAMES VAN ALLEN WHO BUILT INSTRUMENTS FOR THE FIRST AMERICAN SATELLITE. PROFESOR VAN ALLEN TOLD ME ABOUT OBSERVATIONS OF VENUS. THAT THERE WAS INTENSE MICROWAVE RADIATION. DID IT MEAN THAT VENUS HAD AN IONOSPHERE? OR WAS VENUS EXREMELY HOT? THE RIGHT ANSWER, CONFIRME BY THE SOVIET VENERA SPACECRAFT, WAS THAT VENUS WAS VERY HOT, 900F, AND IT WAS KEPT HOT BY A THICK CARBON DIOXIDE ATMOSPHERE. I WAS FORTUNATE TO JOIN NASA WHERE I SUCCESSFULLY PROPOSED AN EXPERIMENT TO FLY TO VENUS. OUR INSTRUMENTS TOOK THIS IMAGE OF THE VEIL OF VENUS WHICH TURNED OUT TO BE A SMOG OF SULFURIC ACID.
PART-3: CRITICAL COMMENTARY
ITEM#1:THE TWO PLANETS ARE NOT COMPARABLE SUCH THAT CLIMATE CONDITIONS ON EARTH CAN BE UNDERSTOOD NOT FROM CONDITIONS ON EARTH BUT FROM CONDITIONS IN VENUS. FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE TWO ATMOSPHERES ARE NOT COMPARABLE BECAUSE THE VENUS ATMOSPHERE IS PRETTY MUCH 100% CO2 AND IS 100 TIMES MORE DENSE THAN THE ATMOSPHERE ON EARTH WHEREAS THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE IS MOSTLY NITROGEN WITH SOME OXYGEN AND MINUTE PORTIONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE MEASURED IN PARTS PER MILLION. ALSO THE EARTH IS MOSTLY OCEAN WITH SMALL PARTS OF IT COVERED BY LAND WHEREAS VENUS HAS NO OCEAN. AND BESIDES THERE IS A LARGE DIFFERENCE IN SPIN RATE. THE NEED TO COMPARE THESE VERY DIFFERENT PLANETS AS A WAY OF PRESENTING A CASE AGAINST THE COMBUSTION OF FOSSIL FUELS ON EARTH HAS NO RATIONAL INTERPRETATION EXCEPT FOR THE DESPERATION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE FOR THEIR ACTIVISM AGAINST FOSSIL FUELS.
ITEM#2: THE OBSESSION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE WITH ATMOSPHERIC CO2 AS THE ONLY POSSIBLE DRIVER OF INTERGLACIAL GLOBAL WARMING CYCLES REQUIRES THAT THEY MUST PROVIDE A CARBON DIOXIDE ARGUMENT FOR THE PRIOR FOUR GLOBAL WARMING CYCLES OF THE HOLOCENE AS WELL AS THE HORRIFIC GLOBAL WARMING CYCLES OF THE EEMIAN ONE OF WHICH HAD CAUSED THE WEST ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET {WAIS} TO DISINTEGRATE. CLIMATE SCIENCE NOT ONLY ACKLNOWLEDGES THAT EVENT IN THE EEMIAN BUT HAS USED IT AS A BASIS FOR REPEATED FAILED FORECASTS OF A SIMILAR DISINTEGRATION OF THE WAIS IN THE HOLOCENE. {FOOTNOTE: GLOBAL WARMING WITHOUT FOSSIL FUELS CAUSED A DISINTEGRATION OF THE WAIS BUT GLOBAL WARMING WITH FOSSIL FUELS FAILED TO REPEAT THAT PERFORMANCE}.
NO SUCH ARGUMENT HAS BEEN PRESENTED BY CLIMATE SCIENCE AND NO CO2 THEORY HAS BEEN PROPOSED TO EXPLAIN THE MANY WARMING AND COOLING CYCLES AT 100 TO 1000 YEAR TIME SCALES THAT ARE FOUND IN BOTH OF THESE TWO INTERGLACIALS. EVEN IN THE CURRENT WARMING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE THAT HAPPENS TO COME AFTER THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, CLIMATE SCIENCE CLAIMS THAT THE OBSERVED RISE IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2 IS CAUSED BY FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND IT IS THIS RISE THAT CAUSES WARMING. HOWEVER, NO EVIDENCE IS PROVIDED FOR THE ASSUMED RESPONSIVENESS OF ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION TO FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS AND THE ESSENTIAL CLIMATE SENSITIVITY PARAMETER NEEDED TO RELATE WARMING TO RISING ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONTAINS LARGE UNCERTAINTIES AS EXPLAINED IN A RELATED POST ON THIS SITE: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/05/18/climate-science-vs-statistics/
CONCLUSION
THE DESPERATION VENUS ARGUMENT FOR HUMAN CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING ON EARTH IS BEST UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF THE FAILURE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE TO PRESENT EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE THEORY THAT FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS CAUSE ATMOSPHERIC CO2 TO RISE AND RISING ATMOSPHERIC CO2 IN TURN CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING AND THEREFORE THE CURRENT WARMING CYCLE OF THE HOLOCENE MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AS HUMAN CAUSED AND IT CAN THEREFORE BE HUMAN CONTROLLED. WE SHOW IN RELATED POSTS ON THIS SITE THAT THIS ARGUMENT HAS NO EMPIRICAL VALIDITY.
Dec 14, 2021: Archaeology: How the study’s future involves helping to understand climate change. ARCHAEOLOGY may be recognised for helping to solve mysteries of the past – but did you know it’s now informing us about how humans could navigate the challenge of climate change? Britain’s Pompeii: Archaeologists excavate Bronze Age settlement. Tutankhamen’s tomb, Machu Picchu and China’s terracotta warriors are all examples of remnants from the past that archaeologists have helped to uncover. The study has existed for more than a century, and now looks poised to turn its attention from the past to the future, and help to contribute to discussions on climate change. For the first time, physical evidence of a Roman crucifixion in Britain was unearthed last week, by researchers who were investigating land due to be built on by a housing development. A ‘once in a lifetime’ discovery of a Bronze Age Axe was also made, in November. The study is evolving in more than one way. In fact, one of the key developments it’s making is in relation to climate change – but how is this possible? Here is how archaeology will help us to understand climate change. He explained how archaeology is capable of these changes because it’s a “contemporary subject”. Archaeologist Neil Redfern says “If you think about archaeology, we normally study stuff that’s been lost or deliberately thrown away or has suffered some catastrophe. We study the process of loss. Well actually that makes us understand why things fail. Today, archaeologists use a range of technology to assist ongoing excavations. So, it gives us a really good set of questions to start posing to society today about what the impact of climate change is going to be and what the impact of societal changes are going to be. What we do is we try to use evidence of the totality of human existence to understand how we’ve survived to this moment in time.”He explained that we can use evidence of how humans lived in the past – that was discovered by archaeologists – to understand how we could be impacted by climate change and potentially move through it. As technology continues to advance and assume a leading role in archaeology, Mr Redfern believes that humans will always be needed to provide real value to discoveries. He said: “Technology has had a profound impact on archaeological thoughts and processes. That is not slowing down but the beauty of it is you will always need a human to translate that. “It’s the human who scribes the value to objects. Whatever you do, it will always come back to what relevance that has to us as human beings.”
Ancient shipwreck ‘frozen in time’ leaves archaeologists stunned: ‘Doors eerily open’ ‘Very special’ Isle of Man treasure hoard solves 1,100-year-old Viking mystery Ancient Greece treasure trove stunned researchers: ‘Nothing like it found in a century’ Some of the most significant archaeological finds to have ever been made have come from the British Isles. In 2009, 4,500 fragments of war gear and religious objects were discovered that were later found to date back to the seventh century.The haul was dubbed the Staffordshire Hoard and in total amounted to 4kg of gold and 1.5kg of silver. In 2001, a metal detectorist discovered what would become known as the Ringlemere Cup. At more than 3,500 years old the artefact helped to shed light on what it would have been like to live in that point of history and is now on show at the British Museum.
PART-2: CRITICAL COMMENTARY: ABSTRACT: THAT ARCHAEOLOGISTS DISCOVERED ANCIENT CLIMATE CHANGE BEFORE HUMANS STARTED BURNING FOSSIL FUELS IS NOT MORE REASON TO TAKE CLIMATE ACTION; IT IS LESS REASON TO TAKE CLIMATE ACTION; BECAUSE NOW WE KNOW THAT THESE THINGS HAPPEN NATURALLY ANYWAY INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION OR NO INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.
IN RELATED POSTS WE ARGUE THAT THE CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUE OF OUR TIME IS NOT THAT CLIMATE CHANGE CAN HAVE HARMFUL IMPACTS BUT THE USE OF THOSE IMPACTS TO PUSH AN ANTI FOSSIL FUEL AGENDA AT GREAT COST TO SOCIETY AND THAT THE WEAKER THE EVIDENCE OF HUMAN CAUSE THE GREATER THE FEAR APPEAL ACTIVISM NEEDS TO BE.
RELATED POSTS#1: THE HARMFUL IMPACTS OF HOLOCENE CLIMATE CHANGE EVENTS OF THE PAST ARE DESCRIBED.
RELATED POST#2: THE CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUE OF OUR TIME IS NOT WHETHER CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS CAN BE HARMFUL. THE ESSENCE OF THE CLIMATE MOVEMENT IS NOT THAT IT IS WARMING NOR THAT THE WARMING CAN HAVE HARMFUL IMPACTS, THE ESSENCE OF THE MOVEMENT IS THE HUMAN CAUSE HYPOTHESIS THAT SERVES AS THE BASIS FOR THE DEMAND FOR THE COSTLY CLIMATE ACTION OF MOVING THE WORLD’S ENERGY INFRASTRUCURE FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLES.
THAT ARCHAEOLOGISTS DISCOVERED ANCIENT CLIMATE THAT HAPPENED BEFORE HUMANS STARTED BURNING FOSSIL FUELS IS NOT MORE REASON TO TAKE CLIMATE ACTION; IT IS LESS REASON TO TAKE CLIMATE ACTION; BECAUSE NOW WE KNOW THAT THESE THINGS HAPPEN NATURALLY ANYWAY INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION OR NO INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.
THE INTENT HERE IS OF COURSE, OH LOOK HOW HORRIFIC THE CLIMATE IMPACTS CAN BE AND SO YOU SHOULD HEED WHAT WE SAY AND TAKE CLIMATE ACTION.
EXCEPT THAT WITHOUT HUMAN CAUSE THERE IS NO RATIONALE FOR CLIMATE ACTION.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/70215609/688_Venus.0.jpeg)
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23052306/venus_current_and_ancient_1440.jpeg)
