Trevor Noah on non-scientists denying global warming & the idiots who mislead or believe them.

For your enjoyment peace

Post Comment

Comments (82)

Here's Colbert's take on this same issue from his show last night;



cheers
Here's an interesting article:

The article maintains that carbon dioxide emitted from volcanoes DWARFS the amount of carbon dioxide that human technology releases.

Oh, but WAIT a minute!

THIS article maintains that the output of ALL OF THE VOLCANOES ON EARTH cannot match the levels of CO2 emitted by human technology!

What's so intriguing about this? Well, for one thing, you'll see this discussion argued back and forth, with no way to resolve the argument. What's funny, though, is both of the above articles were found....in the SAME PUBLICATION!!! rolling on the floor laughing

So, what does this tell us? Well, for one thing, that global warming is just a THEORY, and has not been proven. Even if CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the AMOUNT of such a gas is just as important as the gas itself. Consider also that 70% of the Earth is OCEAN, and that industry must find a home on the remaining 30% of the earth. Consider, still, that the solar system is a DYNAMIC system which is CONSTANTLY changing, especially the sun (whose energy emission ebbs and flows in an eleven year cycle), and undergoes intermittent, unpredictable change.

My point? There are FAR too many variables in the earth-sun system to DEFINITIVELY prove, one way or the other, the supposed cause of global warming.

And then, EVEN IF it is found that Man is the cause of global warming, how do you propose to stop it?!? Are YOU going to give up your laptop, your stereo, or your car? Will YOU be the first to turn in your charcoal and your lawn mower?? I think not. Frankly, I don't see ANYBODY doing much besides TALKING about global warming. So, maybe the Amish were right, all along!

But, hey--let's hear YOUR solution!!
X - I can understand your confusion. However, this is not a scientific journal. It is essentially a magazine.
Neither of the people had a Ph.D when they wrote the piece and they were written 2 years apart.

Global warming has been proven by developing a record based on worldwide temperatures.
You are totally wrong about that. It is not a theory. CO2 does have a role in it. Whatever the source of CO2,
it warms the earth several ways and thus, leads to the release of stored methane which has a greater influence towards global warming. Humans adding CO2 to whatever the amount produced by volcanoes exacerbates the situation.

This graph shows CO2 levels for the last 400,000 years;

Embedded image from another site


Please read what the NASA scientists state;

Huh. That graph seems to DISPROVE your assertion. Specifically, that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere varies PERIODICALLY, as a NATURALLY OCCURRING phenomenon might.

In order to definitively state that global warming is caused by modern technology, one would have to find a way to exclude ALL OTHER FACTORS which could cause variance in the atmosphere's temperature. Good luck with that!

So, even IF global warming WERE an actual phenomenon, how would YOU propose reversing it??? confused
Oh, wait. I missed that little sliver at the end of the graph.

So you assert that an increase from 260 parts per million (PPM) of CO2 to 380 PPM will cause catastrophic damage?

You DO realize that 380-260=120, and 120/1,000,000 (that's one hundred twenty parts PER MILLION) is the definition of miniscule?!?

So, then, what's YOUR solution?!? Gonna give up your car? Your hair dryer? Your video games? How do YOU plan to save the planet?!?!?
I've known about the "Greenhouse Effect" for at least 50 years. Back then it was little more than a curiosity. It was believed it could eventually lead to a warming of the planet but nobody worried about it much because it was just an interesting theory.
The way it works is, visible light passes uninhibited through the atmosphere, strikes solid objects, cars, people, grass, pavement, buildings, trees, etc. these objects absorb that energy and convert it to infra red or heat energy. If you ever got a sunburn or got into a car that was parked out in the Sun in mid Summer you've experienced the effect of Solar heating. The problem comes from the fact that CO2 and other gases in the atmosphere, I believe Nitrogen if I remember correctly, don't readily allow the passage of the longer wavelengths, those toward the infra red end of the spectrum to pass freely through. Glass has the same properties BTW which is why greenhouses are made of glass hence the name "Greenhouse Effect". For years it was known that the earth it getting warmer but the big question has been, is mankind having an impact on the RATE that this is happening? Anything that increases the % of CO2 in the atmosphere will exacerbate (intensify) this effect. Mankind, by his actions in almost every facet of his life, converts Carbon and Oxygen to CO2 by burning oil, coal, wood, Natural gas, or anything else which is rich in Carbon. The very existence of 12 Billion people on the planet contribute to the production of CO2 by simply breathing. The question is not whether mankind is exaggerating the process but by how much. It is no longer a question of IF, the question has become, can he stop it or at least slow it down enough until he can stop it? It's either that or kiss the human race goodbye.
Thank you for correcting me, as I said, I wasn't sure about Nitrogen. Methane is the gas I was searching for.handshake
And BTW, if I were you I'd quit holding that Steven Colbert idiot up as a hero. That guy is a BUFFOON! thumbs down
OK, let me make it clearer to you. There are large stores of methane in solid permafrost,
that have been preserved for millions of years.
As first the outer layer of ice melts and then the permafrost melts, it releases the methane into the air.
The methane has an even stronger influence on global warming than the carbon dioxide.
Clear ?

As you pointed out Nitrogen is a very common component of air.
However, at certain levels it also can be dangerous.

Rather than giving up, or denying the data, changes that are most likely to improve the situation need to be effected, even if they are not politically popular. This is an issue far more important than politics.
Oh--methane stored in frozen glaciers, so that it already existed rather than produced by global warming.

I kinda think that a single volcano would be more of a risk!!

Just sayin'

Oh--don't bother making it simple for me; it sounds like my background in chemistry is a little stronger than YOURS!!
I think that the whole world gas to shut everything down at the same time, factories that has smoke coming out of large chimey's, all vehicles, any oil or gas products or machines, (between seasons), n of course, with a limit to everything, except aircract n all emergency vehicles. We should be in complete darkness, with the help of sunlight, for a short time period.

(Environmental) professor
X - it somewhat interesting that you say that, because there is a tectonic plate near Greenland.
As the ice melts on Greenland and flows into the sea, Greenland is less heavy.
It has caused frequent shifts and earthquakes in that area, which have released more pockets of methane.

The other thing, is that higher global temperatures also influence volcanic activity.
So again, more carbon dioxide is released.

Something drastic, like I suggested, needs to be done, or we may reach a point of no return.
Ignoring the problem just does more harm and it is more than simply additive.
Each has multiple facets that compound the effects. They are more like interrelated triggers.

Once again, all of this is part of a VERY LARGE system. It's hard to believe that this all occurred within ten or twenty years. Likewise, IF ANY of this were caused by a phenomenon such as you describe, it would take JUST AS LONG to reverse it (that is, OVER A CENTURY). That means NO internal combustion engines, NO artificial heating or cooling, NO fossil fuels, NO electricity...well, YOU get the drift!
I don't see that happening. Like I said, the world seems to run in cycles. This is just another example.



If global warming is indeed a fact, we passed the point of no return DECADES ago. I happen to believe there is more at work than carbon dioxide causing heat to be trapped in the atmosphere.
This from the lead researcher of the International Arctic Research Center...



@ 7:55 'til the end of the 2nd vid - Worst Poker Face Ever blues

She does science the old fashioned way - mukluks on the icecap & research vessel...
making and reporting actual observations rather than getting grants to do computer modeling.

Love her Russky accent smitten

cowboy


This is my point exactly. There are WAAAY to many factors, TOO MANY variables, to determine exactly what's going on.

It's also interesting that certain groups prefer to ignore evidence to the contrary of their
beliefs, but continue to harangue society with their own opinion.

What happens if the world proceeds to spend BILLIONS, nay, TRILLIONS of dollars in an effort to reduce CO2 (and thus global warming, by the perception of some), but the warming CONTINUES??
You can't save money, when you are dead.
Life is more important than $$$$.
Your final days you may come to finally learn this.
While you may be tempted to throw your hands up in the air and see it as hopeless,
I figure it's a lot smarter to at least TRY to reverse things.
You seem to be a lot more comfortable with the 6th mass extinction, which will wipe out
most of life, including humans.
I'd like to preserve life for future generations.
Perhaps that's the difference between me and conservatives.
They are more me me me without a care for anyone else. dunno
I don't call that "civilization". Indeed, quite the opposite.
Good luck with your last, most expensive, most futile hobby you'll ever attempt.

Maybe if we all hold our breath we can save the world!!
"Well all the research has kept loads of people traveling in cars boats and planes for work research etc. ha ha "

THAT, FedEx, is is probably the most accurate observation yet made on this blog cheers

cowboy
ha ha ha micle
I find it amazing, that people refuse to believe what we have strong evidence for, yet fully believe in what there is no evidence for.
I don't doubt you believe in Father Christmas as well . crazy crazy crazy
You should have more doubts in the validity of YOUR thoughts. laugh
Yes , it is a fault of mine that I accept science based policys and not policy based science .
e - policy should be BASED on the science. When it is, it is likely good policy. When instead, it ignores science, it is likely bad policy. How have YOUR policies aligned with science.
Yes, and big business gets away with horrible environmental atrocities. And don’t get me started on the breeders. We don’t need anymore multiplying.

“Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not every man's greed” Gandhi
I agree with you on that too. We need to stop giving tax breaks to those who have children and have higher taxes on those people who have more than 2 children. This is because they are the ones who are taxing the environment with overpopulation. This of course, can be adjusted in a feedback loop, depending upon how the population increases and/or decreases.
But at this time we need to put a halt on further population expansion.
What SCIENCE do you have that negates global warming ?
laugh What the moron-in-chief doesn't understand, is that the polar stream has been broken and flipped with our jetstream. This is caused by global warming. Global warming is a global thing, not necessarily a localized thing.
The USA is getting the polar stream and the artic is getting blasted with warm air, which is speeding the melting of ice, and thus the rising of sea levels and also the release of artic methane, which speeds more global warming and his beligerent stance against even recognizing global warming, let alone joining the rest of the civilized world in doing something about it, and his rolling back legislation to increase pollution levels has added to the problem.
It seems to me that one must UNDERSTAND the science, before one starts QUOTING the science. In other words, you've got some homework to do! professor

Solid methane, indeedrolling on the floor laughing
First human population growth increases need to be reversed through sane measures.
We need to stop giving tax breaks to those with kids and start taxing people who have kids more than those who don't, especially those couples with more than 2 kids. The parents of each additional kid over two should be heavily taxed as these extra kids are taxing the environment. This could be phased in, rather than all at once.


Jim, I have known you for a little while and we disagree on a lot of things. What you said above - made my jaw drop! I'm not going to comment - just a little more insight into that brain of yours. hmmm
kp - I understand your shock. But, these are becoming drastic times, even if most don't know, or realize it.
We really need to stop the overpopulation before it kills us all.

Embedded image from another site


It was OK back in biblical times. But people have been breeding like rats without caring what the impact is on the planet. If there were less people there would be less of a negative affect. Every year the population keeps rising higher. Do you really think that has no effects on pollution, waste, food & water shortages, diseases and global warming ?
Mid - Thanks for posting those links. Facts seem to make no difference to people who prefer to stick their head in the sand though. They just make statements that are wrong with no actual verifiable data to back them up.
IF you understood climatology science, you would understand that the situation is dire and getting more dire each year nothing substantial is done about it.
For a bright man Jimmmy you think alot , problem is you have been taught what to think instead of how to . scold
e - Quite the opposite. It is you who parrot what your party has brainwashed you to say, rather than looking at the actual data. It speaks much louder than us both, IF you would take the time & effort to understand it.
I am dated. We all are. And sooner than you might expect. While myself and others have shown evidence, you have failed to do so. All you have done is deny, so that you can somehow justify not making an effort.
Post Comment - Let others know what you think about this Blog.

About this Blog

by JimNastics
created Nov 2018
2,570 Views
Last Viewed: 13 hrs ago
Last Commented: Dec 2018
JimNastics has 1,965 other Blogs

Like this Blog?

Do you like this Blog? Why not let the Author know. Click the button to like the Blog. And your like will be added. Likes are anonymous.

Feeling Creative?