0:00 Clips from my previous climate change videos
0:38 “The Great Global Warming Swindle”written and directed by Martin Durkin
0:50 “Proof that Global warming is a hoax” on YouTube
0:54 “Global Warming” on YouTube
1:03 Jay Lehr interviewed on “The Ice Age cometh” — Lou Dobbs, CNN
1:07 Tim Ball, “The Great Global Warming Swindle”
1:10 John Coleman — Global warming, the other side
1:14 Christopher Monckton, speech for Free Market Institute at St Paul Oct 2009
2:03 “On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground” — S Arrhenius, Philosophical Magazine 1896 (First calculation of energy absorbed and re-radiated by CO2)
2:04 “The artificial production of carbon dioxide and its influence on temperature” — G. S. Callendar, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 1938 (Shows wavelengths at which CO2 absorbs radiation)
2:17 “The Great Global Warming Swindle”written and directed by Martin Durkin
4:03 Christopher Monckton testimony at Congressional hearings on climate change
4:51 “Proof that Global warming is a hoax” on YouTube
6:10 Arrhenius and Callendar papers from 2:03
6:30 John Shimkus at Congressional hearings on climate change
7:22 Sen. James Inhofe
8:06 Dennis Kucinich
8:30 Chad Myers on Lou Dobbs, CNN
8:34 Jay Lehr interviewed on “The Ice Age cometh” — Lou Dobbs, CNN
9:24 “Charlton Heston on Global Climate Change” — on YouTube
9:56 Phanerozoic CO2 levels after Berner and Royer
10:15 Map is from “Cretaceous climate-ocean dynamics: future directions for IODP” — Colorado, July 2002 Source for sea level 50m-70m higher than today: “The Phanerozoic Record of Global Sea-Level Change”, Miller et al 2005.
11:16 “Debating whether global warming is a threat or just media hype” by Mark Putnam helium.com
11:41 “Creationist Seminar — Beginnings #1” — Eric Hovind
11:50 “Where did God come from?” — Ken Ham
11:58 “The O’Reilly Factor” — Bill O’Reilly interviews Richard Dawkins
12:55 “Michael Coren and Tim Ball - Straight Talk On Climate Change”
15:14 Penn and Teller’s “Bullshit!”
Two other comments I anticipate I’ll get:
1) “You didn’t understand what [insert name here] meant.”
Yes, that’s entirely possible. In the absence of facts and figures, a feelie argument is usually vague and ambiguous, often hinting at some elusive point that’s never explained. When I read a scientific paper, on the other hand, I understand exactly what it’s saying. The hypothesis is laid out, the methodology explained, the observations and calculations clearly shown, and the conclusion spelled out. That’s the difference.
2) “The idea that CO2 is a trace gas is not a ‘feeling’. It can be shown that it has no effect on climate.” My response: Yes, but the ‘feeling’ is that because CO2 is a trace gas then it follows that it has no effect on climate. If this is correct, please cite a study that has some facts and figures to support it, otherwise it remains just a ‘feeling.’ If you have a source with some other evidence that CO2 has no effect on climate, then I have probably covered it in a previous video.
New research places tighter constraints on when contiguous permafrost begins to melt in large amounts. The news is grim.
Published on Dec 19, 2012
Videographer Peter Sinclair captures the views of eight scientists representing some of the nation’s leading research institutions in a concise video newly produced for The Yale Forum.
And in the “regardless of what happens in the Middle East, humanity is screwed” department…
A report by the UN says global attempts to curb emissions of CO2 are falling well short of what is needed to stem dangerous climate change.
The UN’s Environment Programme says greenhouse gases are 14% above where they need to be in 2020 for temperature rises this century to remain below 2C.
The authors say this target is still technically achievable.
But the opportunity is likely to be lost without swift action by governments, they argue.
The UNEP report follows on from a new analysis by the World Meteorological Organisation that says the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reached a record high in 2011. It suggests that CO2 has now reached concentrations of 390.9 parts per million, or 140% of the pre-industrial levels of 280ppm.
The impact of these gases has been significant, says the WMO, causing a 30% increase of the warming effect on the climate between 1990 and 2011.
In 2010 (the latest year for which we had data) New York City added 54 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (equivalent) to the atmosphere, but that number means little to most people because few of us have a sense of scale for atmospheric pollution.
Carbon Visuals (carbonvisuals.com) and the Environmental Defense Fund wanted to make those emissions feel a bit more real - the total emissions and the rate of emission. Designed to engage the ‘person on the street’, this version is exploratory and still work in progress.
NYC carbon footprint:
54,349,650 million tons a year = 148,903 tons a day = 6,204 tons an hour = 1.72 tons a second
At standard pressure and 59 °F a metric ton of carbon dioxide gas would fill a sphere 33 feet across (density of CO₂ = 1.87 kg/m³: bit.ly If this is how New York’s emissions actually emerged we would see one of these spheres emerge every 0.58 seconds.
Emissions in 2010 were 12% less than 2005 emissions. The City of New York is on track to reduce emissions by 30% by 2017 - an ambitious target.
For a set of stills from this movie, see: flickr.com
For more information see:
Already, China is restricting supply so that REEs will be completely consumed domestically.
Heavy REEs are key to high-tech manufacturing… Obama barely scratched the surface on their importance. There are plenty of heavy REE in US not just waiting to be mined, but sitting in tailing ponds and waste streams.
A petition has been launched: http://wh.gov/5OX
And I’m willing to ship a free DVD to anyone keen on propagating this information. Email me email@example.com I’ll fire one off from Kunaki to you.
The DVD contains THORIUM REMIX 2011 & a series of lectures:
- fluoride chemistry
- cancer-fighting medial isotopes
- thorium regulation
- politics that killed Th-MSR research
- thorium wasted in tailing ponds (along with heavy REEs)
- China’s REE monopoly
THORIUM REMIX 2011 gives an overview of how THORIUM can be consumed in a Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (to end energy dependence), WHY solar/wind don’t cut it, and why EVEN IF YOU LOVE RENEWABLES you’re sort of stuck mining for heavy REE anyway… if you want to build the solar/wind components domestically!
I mean no matter how I cut this… worried about CO2 or not… loving renewables or not… wanting to reduce radioactive waste or not… partitioning heavy REE and thorium out of tailing ponds and putting those assets to use is a BIG WIN for everyone. (Except China.)
I’m working on a sequel. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gordonmcdowell/thorium-remix-2012-feature-film-to-propagate-hard
…but by the time the sequel is completed, China will be in a far stronger manufacturing position due to continued leveraging of their heavy REE monopoly, AND will have further overtaken US in Thorium Molten-Salt Research. If you want to address this NOW, the only means I can see is me mailing out DVDs, and people who care mailing them to representatives with cover letters.
If you’re willing to ping a congressman about this, I’m happy to ship a free DVD to you. Very happy to do so.
Note: Thorium Molten-Salt Reactor can be expressed Th-MSR. Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor expressed LFTR. LFTR is a specific design category of Th-MSR reactors. Th-MSR is a design category within Gen4 reactors. Thorium consumed in a solid fuel reactor (such as India is pursing) is not an improvement over today’s reactors. India pursues (solid fuel) Thorium (reactors) because they lack Uranium resources. China is pursuing Th-MSR, the technology generally recommended by thorium advocates.