[Stoves] In praise of kerosene
Kevin
kchisholm at ca.inter.net
Sat May 11 12:16:32 CDT 2013
Dear Jock
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan P Gill
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Cc: Jonathan P Gill ; Kevin
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] In praise of kerosene
Kevin,
It was indeed bad word smithing to have started with the term "Global Warming". "Global Climate Disruption" is much more accurate,
# It is far worse than mere "wordsmithing." The IPCC is guilty of ignorance and misdirection. Firstly, consider the concept of GW, as follows: If the Northern hemisphere warmed by 10 C and the southern Hemisphere cooled by 10 C, there would be absolutely no "Global Warming." However, the consequences to climate and daily weather would be absolutely disastrous. Choosing the concept of "Global Warming" was fatally flawed. Secondly, the IPPC was structured to study ONLY anthropogenic effects. Naturally, within this context, they can find that Man's Activities are the largest contributor to GW and Climate Change, because they are not considering the contributions from Nature!
and, I would expect, inevitable at this late stage.
# OK.... if we assume they are inevatible, then we should be diverting our efforts to a coping strategy, rather than a preventive strategy. This would be a totally different strategy from that being proposed by the IPCC.
The models are only imperfect, not wrong.
# I would suggest that they are fatally flawed, as a consequence of ignoring the influence of Mother Nature on GW and CC.
Models can only be as good as the imperfections of our human knowledge, which can never be perfect, so forget that argument. I doubt very much that you claim perfect knowledge, so what are the imperfections in your knowledge preventing you from seeing?
# The IPCC Models are fatally flawed because they ignore "The Elephant in the Room. " "Mother Nature" is the "elephant in the GW/CC Room" and they have chosen to ignore Her. That is not "lack of knowledge", or "imperfection in knowledge". That is a fatal philosophical flaw.
As my friend Errol Morris likes to say "believing is seeing".
# I see "climate change" locally. I believe in climate change here. I see the US Drought Monitor http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/ and believe there is climate change and GW happening elsewhere. However, I am a "dis-believer" and a "Denier" that "Man alone is responsible for CC and GW. Give Mother Nature some credit!! :-)
You are basically willfully reading the science incorrectly.
# What "Science"??? The IPCC gives "True Science" a bad name.
The models are imperfect but not "wrong" per se.
# They are wrong per se, in that they ignore Mother nature and ASSUME that Anthropogenic Activity is the major driver.
If you read the items I forwarded to the list, you might get a better understanding of the heat going into the ocean, that, while imperfectly understood, is not a good thing.
# I don't know if it is "a bad thing" or a "good thing." I do agree that it will be "a different thing."
If you wait for the "perfect model" then your grandchildren will surely have very unkind words to say about you.
# The present " imperfect model" is very imperfect, in that it chooses to ignore the inputs of Mother Nature. Money and effort directed at preventing Climate Change will thus be mis-directed. Our Grand Children will certainly not thank us for mis-directing money and effort into solving the wrong problems. If anything, they will laugh at us for ignoring Mother Nature's Influence.
Even the British Royals have recently had some strong words to say about climate change deniers such as you appear to be. This will be just as true for the many "stovers" who are also climate change deniers.
# You pick a poor example for an Authority on Climate Change.
At some deep meta level, the problem for many is that Climate Disruption is the ultimate nail in the coffin of unearned white male privilege. Which may also help explain why it is white males in the USA who go on gun violence sprees, not others. IE, this is about a whole lot more than CO2 in the atmosphere. It is about clinging a way of life with a fatal internal contradiction: "modern" industrialism powered by fossil carbon. As Hansen says, this is a truly Faustian bargain.
# Atmospheric CO2 is now at its highest recent levels and yet reported GW Temperatures are not rising. Now, any sensible person would realize that ocean water absorbs heat. Do you know if the IPCC includes ocean warming in their Global Temperature indicator, or was it technically flawed by measuring only Global Air temperatures?
Cling if you must. I do not envy you trying to explain this to your grandchildren.
# You are giving the IPCC far more credit than is scientifically justifiable by their flawed mandate.
# I would kindly ask that this discussion be transferred to the biochar-policy list, where "Climate Change Threads" are considered to be acceptable. Climate Change Discussions on teh Stoves List is a distraction from the stated purpose of the stoves List. I have taken the liberty of sending a copy of this posting to biochar-policy at yahoogroups.com and will respond, if necessary, only on that list.
Best wishes,
Kevin
Regards,
Jock
On May 11, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Kevin <kchisholm at ca.inter.net> wrote:
Dear Jock
The IPCC told us that "Global Warming" was the problem. They predicted how much the air temperature would rise, and they were wrong. Their models were wrong. Now they are telling us about the dangers of "Climate Change", and not global warming. The fundamental problem is that their models have been shown to be faulty.
"Consensus" is a "Political Process to get agreement." "Consensus Science" is thus "Political Science", and not "Real Science."
I like this quote from the referenced article:
" “The climate may be heating up less in response to greenhouse-gas emissions than was once thought,” read the article’s tagline. “But that does not mean the problem is going away.” "
# With their models having been proved to be faulty, how do they know there is a problem?
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: Jock Gill
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] In praise of kerosene
Steve,
Actually you have that wrong. The oceans are warming up significantly, a very bad thing. It true that land temperatures have not warmed as much as was expected. However this only buys a few extra years before climate disruption becomes severe.
All thesis well explained here: http://nyti.ms/15sfbrd
Regards,
Jock
Jock Gill
P.O. Box 3
Peacham, VT 05862
Cell: (617) 449-8111
:> Extract CO2 from the atmosphere! <:
Sent from my iPad
On May 11, 2013, at 7:56 AM, Steve Taylor <steve at thetaylorfamily.org.uk> wrote:
Do you imagine that the higher and higher the concentration, the worse it gets ? Even the IPCC acknowledges that isn't the case. 15 years of rapidly rising CO2 concentrations, and zero change in global temperature, acknowledged by many, including the UK Met Office.
On 11 May 2013 12:43, Paul Olivier <paul.olivier at esrla.com> wrote:
Are you serious?
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Steve Taylor <steve at thetaylorfamily.org.uk> wrote:
Please read this - just in from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/science/earth/carbon-dioxide-level-passes-long-feared-milestone.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130511&_r=0
Or. 0.04%
Since we are all in favour of burning bio-mass, shouldn't we prefer a higher level of CO2, which would significantly promote plant growth, and encourage the growth of the stuff we want to burn ?
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
--
Paul A. Olivier PhD
26/5 Phu Dong Thien Vuong
Dalat
Vietnam
Louisiana telephone: 1-337-447-4124 (rings Vietnam)
Mobile: 090-694-1573 (in Vietnam)
Skype address: Xpolivier
http://www.esrla.com/
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130511/28853e98/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list