Logic

Apoc4lypse

Re: Logic
« Reply #25,  »
This is why I ask what good will come of a free energy device if we can't do something as simple as disarming ourselves to try and bring down violence and murder. If you think about all of whats wrong in the world, adding more energy won't solve the problem. The only thing that can solve it is better morals and understanding of each other.

If humanity doesn't change, then most of humanity is going to wind up in hell.

On top of that if you think about it there is a ton of this immorality being spread through energy consuming machines like the Television Radio Music Movies Video Games just to name a few of the big ones.

Depending on the type of energy device created, that stuff will spread far more rapidly further spreading the disease of immorality among everyone...

I mean don't get me wrong I don't want to see fossil fuels continuing to pollute everything, but if anything the fact that this happens has slowed the progress of immorality by simply tethering how fast information spreads by limiting the Energy availability required to spread the information.

More information isn't always a good thing because information doesn't equal wisdom or understanding.

Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #26,  »
There's a solution for that... open-source the plans for the device. Most people are too domesticated and useless to build one for themselves. The ones who are knowledgeable and skilled enough will build one for themselves.

Meanwhile, move to a state that lets small power producers sell back into the grid. Build the device (or multiple devices) and sell back into the grid to earn money. Use that money to build more devices to earn more money.

Thus the sheeple still pay for their power (limiting the damage they can do to themselves and others), while the intelligent and skilled free themselves to pursue more creative endeavors.

Power just magnifies and accelerates a person's life-course... down or up. Give the idiots enough power, and they'll end themselves. Their having to pay for it is the only thing saving them from themselves.

And the open-source route plays into that, as well... the greedy sheeple will build the device... and the money they'd save or earn by producing their own power would go toward destroying themselves.

It's win-win-win all 'round.

Enrg4life

Re: Logic
« Reply #27,  »
How to reign in our federal government

Matt Watts

Re: Logic
« Reply #28,  »Last edited
Quote from Enrg4life on March 6th, 06:59 PM
How to reign in our federal government
Be very careful there.  Look at the names supporting this effort.  They are not our friends; quite the contrary, they would be happy to smash the last vestiges of this flailing nation (for a paycheck of course).

The hacks in Washington D.C. are not our problem, the puppet masters that own them are.

Another simple one Enrg4life:  "Know thy enemy."

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #29,  »Last edited
Matt
Quote
It's just a matter of time before humans destroy themselves again--an endless "cycle".
Every civilization in history has destroyed itself in time and now we are seeing for ourselves how and why it happened... mystery solved. I think the smart ones who really understand this technology keep quiet for a reason. When they finally see the big picture, when they finally connect all the dots they realize in the end they may be just pissing in the wind. They understand the smart ones who know are already off planet and they may as well just sit back and enjoy the show. It is no wonder Tesla was so content just feeding pigeons in the park and it begs the question did he lose his mind?... no I think he found it.

We own our knowledge and understanding and we alone decide the choices we make.








Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #30,  »Last edited by Cycle
What's destroying this civilization is uneducated dolts believing stupid s h i t e. Nothing more, nothing less.

From flat earth; expanding earth; hollow earth; chem-trails; holocaust-denial; faked moon landing; sentient universe; holes in Antarctica leading to sub-ice alien and Nazi warrens; elites already being off-planet; 9/11 being caused by nukes buried under the WTC towers or 'particle-beam' weapons; anthropogenic CO2-induced global warming; Wal-Mart stores being converted to FEMA detention centers; CERN trying to open portals to alternate demon-filled dimensions; lizard people ruling the planet;  right on down to the biggest turd in the punch bowl... socialism and its 'kissing cousins', Marxism, Communism, Nazism and liberalism... all delusions, none of which have even a tangential relation to reality.

The world is chock-a-block full of stupid. Same as it ever was.

At least we don't still believe in burning people at the stake, though, amiright?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR2bHFLL9ss
"Burn her!"

Ah, hell... wir sind gefickt. :D

haxar

Re: Logic
« Reply #31,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on March 6th, 09:33 PM
The hacks in Washington D.C. are not our problem, the puppet masters that own them are.

Another simple one Enrg4life:  "Know thy enemy."
U.S. still in a national emergency: "Trading With The Enemy Act of 1917"

Coincides with another act that is still in effect: "The Federal Reserve Act of 1913"

No lawful money in circulation, also regarding the emergency: "House Joint Resolution 192 of 1933"

No lawful money [H.J.R. 192], until redeemed [Fed Act regarding Fed Notes] or issued via promissory note [UNCITRAL Convention of 1988].


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UYDqqwE3Lo

Overstand promissory notes and you win.

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #32,  »Last edited
Cycle
Quote
The world is chock-a-block full of stupid. Same as it ever was.
At least we don't still believe in burning people at the stake, though, amiright?
It's very hard to disagree and yes I do think that given the chance people would be burning other people at the stake for no other reason than they disagree.
Quote
The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (French: Psychologie des Foules; literally: Psychology of Crowds) is a book authored by Gustave Le Bon that was first published in 1895.[1][2]

In the book, Le Bon claims that there are several characteristics of crowd psychology: "impulsiveness, irritability, incapacity to reason, the absence of judgement of the critical spirit, the exaggeration of sentiments, and others..."[1] Le Bon claimed that "an individual immersed for some length of time in a crowd soon finds himself – either in consequence of magnetic influence given out by the crowd or from some other cause of which we are ignorant – in a special state, which much resembles the state of fascination in which the hypnotized individual finds himself in the hands of the hypnotizer."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crowd:_A_Study_of_the_Popular_Mind

In my opinion this book is a must read and basically describes all the reasons why mankind is screwed. It's like a checklist for failure and we just keep checking off the boxes one by one. Now increase the group to 20 billion people with limited resources and a collapsing environment and you have a recipe for disaster... welcome to the dark ages gentlemen.
Re: Logic
« Reply #33,  »Last edited
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crowd:_A_Study_of_the_Popular_Mind
Quote
On individuals and crowds:
by the mere fact that he forms part of an organised crowd, a man descends several rungs in the ladder of civilisation. Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian — that is, a creature acting by instinct. He possesses the spontaneity, the violence, the ferocity, and also the enthusiasm and heroism of primitive beings, whom he further tends to resemble by the facility with which he allows himself to be impressed by words and images — which would be entirely without action on each of the isolated individuals composing the crowd — and to be induced to commit acts contrary to his most obvious interests and his best-known habits. An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand amid other grains of sand, which the wind stirs up at will.
Quote
On religion, ideology, and fanaticism:
A person is not religious solely when he worships a divinity, but when he puts all the resources of his mind, the complete submission of his will, and the whole-souled ardour of fanaticism at the service of a cause or an individual who becomes the goal and guide of his thoughts and actions. Intolerance and fanaticism are the necessary accompaniments of the religious sentiment. They are inevitably displayed by those who believe themselves in the possession of the secret of earthly or eternal happiness. These two characteristics are to be found in all men grouped together when they are inspired by a conviction of any kind. The Jacobins of the Reign of Terror were at bottom as religious as the Catholics of the Inquisition, and their cruel ardour proceeded from the same source.
Quote
Impact of civilizing elites and barbarian crowds upon civilization:
Civilisations as yet have only been created and directed by a small intellectual aristocracy, never by crowds. Crowds are only powerful for destruction. Their rule is always tantamount to a barbarian phase. A civilisation involves fixed rules, discipline, a passing from the instinctive to the rational state, forethought for the future, an elevated degree of culture — all of them conditions that crowds, left to themselves, have invariably shown themselves incapable of realising. In consequence of the purely destructive nature of their power crowds act like those microbes which hasten the dissolution of enfeebled or dead bodies. When the structure of a civilisation is rotten, it is always the masses that bring about its downfall.
Full text free version: http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/445/pg445-images.html

Enrg4life

Re: Logic
« Reply #34,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on March 6th, 09:33 PM
Be very careful there.  Look at the names supporting this effort.  They are not our friends; quite the contrary, they would be happy to smash the last vestiges of this flailing nation (for a paycheck of course).

The hacks in Washington D.C. are not our problem, the puppet masters that own them are.}




Re: Logic
« Reply #35,  »
Its not the ones supporting the effort who I'm concerned about. The article  V of the US constitution is for the PEOPLE when the government is over stepping their bounds. Its the ones who are against this article V who I am concerned about. They are the puppet masters who got their asses kicked in the last election who are trying like hell to keep what they had in place before the last election its not just here in the US its extends far beyond our boarders. We have to take back some of the power that we have been losing little by little over the years. This country is here for the people not for the government and they need to be reminded of that.

Matt Watts

Re: Logic
« Reply #36,  »
Here's a reminder:



Assassin Nuke


Kind of like, "Walk softly and carry a big stick".

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #37,  »
Quote
by the mere fact that he forms part of an organised crowd, a man descends several rungs in the ladder of civilization. Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian — that is, a creature acting by instinct. Gustav Le Bon
I would submit something is broken and it appears to be following the same pattern as every other civilization which collapsed under it's own weight. It's funny some have accused me of being a socialist yet I do not swear allegiance to gods, not to my country or a flag, not to any form of government or corporation. They are just another form of social-ism or means of collective control in my opinion and I believe in individual freedom and independence from all agencies and beliefs above all else. If we really believed in freedom then why does everyone try so hard to force there beliefs on everyone else?.

I think the system we have created cannot be fixed because it never occurred to anyone that we might be the problem. We breed like a herd of locusts consuming everything in sight while clinging to each other for security then on disagreement tend to eat our own. As Le Bon implied it's pretty much barbaric any way you look at it.

Apoc4lypse

Re: Logic
« Reply #38,  »
Quote
If we really believed in freedom then why does everyone try so hard to force there beliefs on everyone else?.
My question exactly.

And this...
Quote
I think the system we have created cannot be fixed because it never occurred to anyone that we might be the problem. We breed like a herd of locusts consuming everything in sight while clinging to each other for security then on disagreement tend to eat our own.
I'm not really sure what the solution is...

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #39,  »Last edited
Apoc4lypse

The flavor of the day would seem to be just another barbaric form of mob rule under the guise of religion and nationalism in my opinion. It's like something straight out of a Monty Python movie or planet of the apes.
Quote
I'm not really sure what the solution is...
In my opinion the only rational choice is to opt out of the insanity because this barbaric populist movement seems to be growing. Nobody will be convincing anyone of anything because nobody is listening and it will most likely get worse. But hey, we had a good run and were still here so why not pull up a chair and enjoy the show... from a distance. I mean how often do you get to see an entire civilization implode upon itself?, this is a once in a lifetime event.


Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #40,  »Last edited by Cycle
Of course, you realize that doomsayers are never right. A civilization or two may fall because the people become deluded, but humanity will survive. A failing civilization represents nothing more than humanity moving forward as the deluded cull themselves. We come out the other end of it stronger.

Right now is the safest, most peaceful time in humanity's history... you've just drunk the libtard koolaid of alarmism. Stop doing that.

Meanwhile, in other news, a plot to assassinate the president was uncovered on 18 Feb 2018, one perpetrator was arrested on 19 Feb 2018 and all of the personnel in Trump's motorcade replaced... you'll note it's the Secret Service who has motorcade duty... making this a plot by government agents under direction from as-yet-unnamed government officials to subvert democracy. Investigations continue. Did any of you hear of this in the main-stream fake-news?

The liberal politicians are losing it. They've lost the narrative and they've lost control... no one believes their alarmist and obfuscatory undemocratic blather anymore, and many of them are very near to being exposed as career criminals. You'll note there were 18,510 sealed indictments issued since Trump took office, far exceeding the average 1077 per year.

And in other, other news, libtards have taken to licking dirty toilets and urinals with the words "F*ck Trump" scrawled on them, as a form of "protest"... proving yet again that liberalism is a mental illness.

Apoc4lypse

Re: Logic
« Reply #41,  »
Calling a political position a mental illness is a dangerous stance to take, just saying... what do we do with the mentally ill? Depending on how ill we claim them to be they end up locked up for a time until they "come to their senses."  Hitler locked up and executed millions of Jewish people simply because of their religion, their belief system... Just saying. The only difference here is we drug them up until they believe what we think is ok and then release them back into society hoping they can fit back in and believe what we want them to.

Once people start to classify an entire system of belief as something wrong or inappropriate is when bad things can happen if the dominoes are lined up just right...  i.e. Arrogant people controlling a country...

Stop calling them Libtards, its inappropriate, it doesn't really offend me personally it just makes me think... like why do we treat each other like complete crap when someone disagrees with us. I fall somewhere in between the two sides but I'd rather not claim my position because declaring where you stand in today's political climate is actually dangerous depending on where you are and who your with.

My definition of peaceful does not include everyone claiming this and that against the other anywhere from simply being angry about them due to their beliefs all the way up to becoming violent against an individual because of their beliefs. Not to mention the many wars and unstable countries that exist in this world right now...

Sure our country might technically be in a state of peace right now, but that's only because we have a society capable of controlling everyone with a police force and a military fully capable of enforcing it across the globe, without those in place, there would be chaos right now.

If that's what freedom has become then this is a sad time to be alive...

Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #42,  »Last edited by Cycle
You should know by now that I don't post something, nor do I subscribe to any particular train of thought, without corroborating evidence. See below.

It's not about me disagreeing with liberal ideology, it's about their liberal ideology demonstrably disagreeing with reality... and their tortured attempts at justifying their twisted ideology to assuage their cognitive dissonance when reality intrudes upon their carefully constructed house-of-cards world of hypocritical oikophobic racial and cultural self-hatred, combined with totalitarian enforcement of 'gender diversity' memes, their use of exclusion for the sake of 'inclusion' to the point they're now 'eating their own', and their intolerance of any views except their own in the name of 'tolerance', all topped with feigned 'outrage' for any point they think they can win by stomping their feet and yelling loudly enough. The mental gymnastics they go through to avoid admitting their views are at odds with reality leads to only one conclusion... they are, quite literally, insane.

Here's a study which originally ascribed psychotic traits to conservatives... and the libtards crowed noisily about it... until the researchers discovered they'd messed up the results of their data due to their data provider giving them an incomplete book of codes referencing the data. Upon fixing the problem, it was found that it's actually liberals who exhibit psychotic traits You'll note their conclusion... liberals being "uncooperative, hostile, troublesome, socially withdrawn, manipulative" (their words, not mine) is a product of a genetic defect:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221686525_Correlation_Not_Causation_The_Relationship_between_Personality_Traits_and_Political_Ideologies

More information on the study above:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/scientific-paper-finds-liberals-uncooperative-hostile-troublesome-socially-withdrawn

Here's another study linking genetics to liberalism:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101027161452.htm
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1017/S0022381610000617
"Liberals may owe their political outlook partly to their genetic make-up, according to new research from the University of California, San Diego, and Harvard University." The 7R variant of the dopamine receptor D4 gene (DRD4).

So take heart, libtards... with CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing, you too can be sane and normal. It's been around since 2015, so you really have no excuse for not having fixed yourselves already. Go on, get your genes edited and jump on the Sane Train! :rofl2:

Here's a book by a board-certified psychologist, stating that liberalism is a mental illness:

Rossiter, Lyle H., M.D., The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness

Here's another study showing that liberals exhibit far higher rates of depression, anxiety and language comprehension problems, and far lower rates of goal-oriented behavior:
http://neuropolitics.org/Anxiety-Depression-and-Goal-Seeking-in-Conservatives-Liberals-Moderates.htm

That's 3 studies and one book by a board-certified psychologist (contained therein are references to several more corroborating studies)... are you seeing the trend? Now, if you wish, you may counter with similar studies showing the opposite, but know this... to date, all studies attempting to prove the opposite have been debunked, whereas the studies above stand unchallenged.

Now let's look at some of their behavior:
– fearful / habitual denial of facts / accountability,
– self-hate and detachment from reality,
– violent / fearful projection against any / all threats to the false ego,
– rationalizing all forms of theft / violence in order to achieve transient goals of the moment.

Now look up the symptoms of schizophrenia. Draw your own conclusions... my conclusion is that liberalism is a mild form of schizophrenia of an apparently genetic origin.

In simpler terms, "libtards is crRAAaaazzZZyyyyy"! :rtard:

Here's a simple primer as demonstration of the unmitigated greed, gullibility, stupidity and insanity required to believe in Catastrophic Anthropogenic CO2-induced Global Warming (CAGW), which is the defining political cause of the liberals. The liberals support it, but t's not about the climate, it's about taking global control of all means of production and consumption... a power grab on an unprecedented scale by socialists (many of whom have outright admitted to this) and their "useful idiots":
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/climate-science-on-trial-the-smoking-gun-files

You'll note their underlying premise for CAGW is not just scientifically unsound, it's scientifically impossible. But there are and will continue to be those who "cling to their guns and Bible" of CAGW, in spite of that fact.

That is why libtards are called libtards.

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #43,  »Last edited
Cycle
Quote
Here's a simple primer as demonstration of the unmitigated greed, gullibility, stupidity and insanity required to believe in Catastrophic Anthropogenic CO2-induced Global Warming (CAGW), which is the defining political cause of the liberals. The liberals support it, but t's not about the climate, it's about taking global control of all means of production and consumption... a power grab on an unprecedented scale by socialists (many of whom have outright admitted to this) and their "useful idiots":
You seem to excel at the art of false narratives and finger pointing Cycle.

In fact even a child could understand the problems associated with CO2. First the fact CO2 is a greenhouse gas or insulator which traps heat and second atmospheric CO2 produces acid rain which we know is acidifying our water bodies. Then we have the irrefutable fact that a massive amount of hydrocarbons which were stored underground for millions of years are now being released into the atmosphere. What's next?... are you going to imply cause and effect are a Liberal plot?.

What I can tell you is that when we introduce FE to the world we are going to burn the fossil fuel industry to the ground and the world will be a better place...and there is nothing you can do about it, lol.

Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #44,  »Last edited by Cycle
Quote from onepower on March 10th, 07:18 AM
Cycle
You seem to excel at the art of false narratives and finger pointing Cycle.

In fact even a child could understand the problems associated with CO2. First the fact CO2 is a greenhouse gas or insulator which traps heat and second atmospheric CO2 produces acid rain which we know is acidifying our water bodies. Then we have the irrefutable fact that a massive amount of hydrocarbons which were stored underground for millions of years are now being released into the atmosphere. What's next?... are you going to imply cause and effect are a Liberal plot?.

What I can tell you is that when we introduce FE to the world we are going to burn the fossil fuel industry to the ground and the world will be a better place...and there is nothing you can do about it, lol.
Unfortunately for your anti-scientific rhetoric, CO2 doesn't absorb downwelling radiation, it is completely transparent to it. Nor does it absorb much upwelling radiation, it is very nearly completely transparent to it. So just how is it "trapping heat"?

Conversely, water vapor, O2 and O3 contribute much more to the absorption of upwelling radiation.

CO2 is 0.041% of the total atmosphere. Water vapor, with a much higher cross-section of absorption, can be upwards of 10%.

So if you subscribe to the Catastrophic Anthropogenic CO2-induced Global Warming blather, you must be orders of magnitude more frightened of dihydrogen oxide... you must ban it immediately. It is an imminent threat to all of humanity.

(You'll note the correlation between water and CO2 in the above analogy... both are essential for life to exist, neither are a pollutant.)

I'd suggest you look up blackbody absorption and emission cross-sections and take a look at the web page referenced above... but the brainwashed seldom want to fix themselves.

I'd also suggest you educate yourself about the ocean's buffering capabilities and its completely natural changes in pH over the course of a  day... the daily changes just due to tidal forces are much greater than the amount of change claimed by the CAGW idiots for all of humanity's history.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you've been lied to. Stop being gullible. Educate yourself. You're being libtardized.

Oh, by the by... perhaps you hadn't noticed that atmospheric CO2 concentration rate of increase has flattened out, while anthropogenic CO2 production rates continue to increase. You'll have a hard time explaining that with your fallacious CAGW theory. If you subscribed to reality, however, the change is easy to explain.

Global Mean Sea Level has fallen by 2.75 mm over the past two years, and global temperature has fallen by 0.6 C over the past 3 years, as well... at the same time that anthropogenic CO2 emission has continued to rise... I'll leave you to deal with your cognitive dissonance as reality intrudes upon the lies you were gullible enough to blindly accept without having done your own research to either prove or dispel them.

onepower

Re: Logic
« Reply #45,  »
Right.... and I own some ocean front property in Arizona. No matter, very soon fossil fuels are no longer going to be a problem and all this debate will be water under the bridge. I hope you don't have a vested interest or hold stocks in the fossil fuel industry... that would be unfortunate.

PeakPositive

Re: Logic
« Reply #46,  »
Quote from Cycle on March 10th, 08:44 AM
Unfortunately for your anti-scientific rhetoric, CO2 doesn't absorb downwelling radiation, it is completely transparent to it. Nor does it absorb much upwelling radiation, it is very nearly completely transparent to it. So just how is it "trapping heat"?

Conversely, water vapor, O2 and O3 contribute much more to the absorption of upwelling radiation.

CO2 is 0.041% of the total atmosphere. Water vapor, with a much higher cross-section of absorption, can be upwards of 10%.

So if you subscribe to the Catastrophic Anthropogenic CO2-induced Global Warming blather, you must be orders of magnitude more frightened of dihydrogen oxide... you must ban it immediately. It is an imminent threat to all of humanity.

(You'll note the correlation between water and CO2 in the above analogy... both are essential for life to exist, neither are a pollutant.)

I'd suggest you look up blackbody absorption and emission cross-sections and take a look at the web page referenced above... but the brainwashed seldom want to fix themselves.

I'd also suggest you educate yourself about the ocean's buffering capabilities and its completely natural changes in pH over the course of a  day... the daily changes just due to tidal forces is much greater than the amount of change claimed by the CAGW idiots for all of humanity's history.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you've been lied to. Stop being gullible. Educate yourself. You're being libtardized.

Oh, by the by... perhaps you hadn't noticed that atmospheric CO2 concentration rate of increase has flattened out, while anthropogenic CO2 production rates continue to increase. You'll have a hard time explaining that with your fallacious CAGW theory. If you subscribed to reality, however, the change is easy to explain.

Global Mean Sea Level has fallen by 2.75 mm over the past two years, and global temperature has fallen by 0.6 C over the past 3 years, as well... at the same time that anthropogenic CO2 emission has continued to rise... I'll leave you to deal with your cognitive dissonance as reality intrudes upon the lies you were gullible enough to blindly accept without having done your own research to either prove or dispel them.
Good stuff Cycle

I always enjoy reading your fact filled postings.

Living in the Midwest I would welcome a little bit of Global Warming,,,lol 

I’m more concerned about a new ice age then cow farts.

As for banning guns! to get on an Airplane, or enter a major Sporting event or other public events we have to go through scanners/metal detectors so why not schools?

Even the libtards at the Oscar’s had large armed patrols outside.

Instead of banning guns they should think about banning Facebook and Twitter,,,lol

It could be some libtards might even think A Farewell to Arms is a book about Venus De Milo.

Matt Watts

Re: Logic
« Reply #47,  »
 :rofl2:

 :-( but true.

Discovered today one of the security guards (now in prison) at my place of employment was snagged running guns for Lord only knows who.  Somehow he completely faked his employment application and background check.  There were several long evenings I spent at work, only him and me, with him supposedly being there to cover my ass in case something happens.  Not a comforting feeling at all.  Yeah, let's disarm the law abiding people while the criminals continue to do what criminals do.  After all, that's why we call them criminals--they don't follow the law and have no intentions of doing so.

Cycle

Re: Logic
« Reply #48,  »Last edited by Cycle
Quote from PeakPositive on March 10th, 12:17 PM
Good stuff Cycle

I always enjoy reading your fact filled postings.
Thank you. You'll notice that if you look back at data that hasn't been adjusted all to hell and back by climate zealots, you'll find that through the last 4 glaciation periods and their subsequent interglacials, global temperature never got over ~22 C (71.6 F).



Why? Well, this planet has a little something called the "11-Micron Infrared Atmospheric Window", where upwelling radiation has a nearly unhindered path to space... nothing much there to absorb it except for 03 (ozone). As such, when the planet heats up, it comes nearer and nearer to that window, chucking more and more heat out to space unobstructed. That's the upper 'thermostat'.

There is a lower 'thermostat', as well. For instance, CO2 can cause warming... at a temperature of ~ -81 C. That's its blackbody absorption spectrum. So if global temperature ever got down to ~ -81C, yeah, CO2 would cause a slight amount of warming (dependent upon its atmospheric concentration)... any temperature above that, and CO2 is nearly completely transparent to the radiation.

There is very little water vapor over Antarctica (removing it as a factor affecting temperature in that area, thus proportionally amplifying any observed effect from CO2), yet it cooled (and continues cooling) while CO2 levels rose... it is the perfect example of the failure of the CAGW crowd's claims... even with an average temperature of ~-55 C, temperature isn't low enough for CO2 to cause a warming effect, and consequently Antarctica has been cooling since 1999:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/08/nsidc-reports-that-antarctica-is-cooling-and-sea-ice-is-increasing/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/12/coldest-antarctic-june-ever-recorded/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/27/oops-warmists-just-lost-the-antarctic-peninsula-it-is-now-cooling/

Any ice loss in Antarctica isn't due to melting from warming (how does ice melt in sub-zero average temperatures?), it's due to the 91 volcanoes discovered beneath the ice shelf, calving, and ice sublimation on the inland ice due to extremely low humidity there. But even NASA admits Antarctica has been adding ice, not losing it. Even in the Antarctic Peninsula (where most alarmists go to get their pictures to 'support' their alarmist blather... you'll note it's outside the Antarctic circle), it's been cooling lately.

Further, any radiation CO2 does absorb has a longer mean free path length upward than it does downward, simply because the atmosphere is thicker the lower you go.

A CO2 molecule absorbs some radiation at its absorption spectrum. It re-emits radiation at a random angle. So approximately 50% of the time it'll re-emit that radiation upward, and 50% of the time, it'll re-emit it downward. The downwardly-traveling radiation will experience a higher concentration of CO2 simply because the air is thicker at lower altitudes, increasing the probability that the radiation will be re-absorbed by another CO2 molecule, with yet another 50/50 chance it'll be re-emitted upward. So heat at the wavelength which corresponds to the absorption spectrum of CO2 has a "one step downward, two steps upward" probability.

As such (and as that chart on this page shows), CO2 actually causes global cooling, and an increasing concentration would exacerbate that for this reason alone.


Study this chart carefully... note that it's for the Spectral Cooling Rate, so the positive numbers in the scale represent cooling, whereas the negative numbers represent warming. Note that CO2 only causes a very slight amount of warming at the tropopause.

Another reason that CO2 causes global cooling is that as CO2 is generated, oxygen content is reduced, thus reducing O2 and O3 content of the atmosphere, which has a much higher cross-section of absorption at or near the upwelling radiation wavelengths (and a much greater atmospheric concentration than CO2... ~20.95% oxygen vs. 0.041% CO2), as you can see from this graphic:


And all that isn't even taking into consideration that ~67% of global atmospheric heat transfer is via convection. Here's a study which takes that into account... and finds CO2 causes atmospheric cooling:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.306.3621&rep=rep1&type=pdf

And wouldn't you know it, in the lower and middle mesosphere, temperatures have fallen by between 5 and 10 degrees C during the past three decades. And the outermost part of the atmosphere, around 350 km high - the so-called thermosphere - has, as would be expected by cooling, contracted. This is why they're now predicting space junk will remain in orbit for as long as 25% longer than previously predicted... less atmospheric drag. They correctly attribute the thermospheric cooling to increased CO2 atmospheric concentration, but fail to realize that the CO2 convected upward from the troposphere, carrying heat with it... and the more CO2 there is, the more that'll happen, cooling the planet.

And for the final nail in the coffin of Catastrophic Anthropogenic CO2-induced Global Warming... as the effective partial pressure of atmospheric carbon dioxide (which depends on its density in the atmosphere) increases, its total emissivity decreases; this makes carbon dioxide act as a coolant to the atmosphere and thus the planet:


And CO2 can only emit what it absorbs.. and its absorptivity is exceedingly low (as outlined above):
http://www.biocab.org/ECO2.pdf
"The total absorptivity of carbon dioxide at its current concentration in the atmosphere is 0.0017."

In short, CO2 cannot cause global warming, since reflected or re-emitted heat cannot heat the source of that heat... heat flows from hotter to cooler, after all. As an example, one cannot bathe a perfect blackbody surface in one unit of heat flux, reflect 10% of the emitted heat from that surface back to the surface, and expect the surface to emit 1.1 units of heat. It will always emit a net of 1 unit of heat, for whatever units you want to use. Yet this is exactly what the CAGW proponents expect everyone to believe... that CO2 is somehow magically "creating" energy.

This is more aptly demonstrated by light... set up a spotlight shining light on a surface. Now set up a mirror diametrically opposed to the spotlight, reflecting the light reflecting off the surface back to the surface. Measure light intensity at the surface with a light meter... you'll find it doesn't increase from that intensity with just the spotlight and no mirror. Now replace the mirror with another spotlight and measure again... you'll find it does increase, for the simple fact that you've added more energy input with the spotlight, but not with the mirror.

Given that the sun has fallen into a quiescent phase (projected to last until at least 2053, unless it falls into a Solar Grand Minimum, which means it'll be quiescent out past 2200), the explanation for the 0.6 C fall in global temperature over the past 3 years, the weakening of the polar vortex, the warming of the Arctic, the sweeping of record cold and snow through more-southerly regions... it's all easily explained.

Especially given that it's happened before... three times in modern recorded human history. Once during the Little Ice Age, once starting around 1922 (low SSN for the end of Solar Cycle 15, most Arctic ice gone and freakishly cold ice storms further south), and once during the 1970s "Impending Ice Age" scare (it started in ~1962 with the most intense Nor'easter ever to hit the east coast (the 'Ash Wednesday Storm'); in 1962 researchers noted that cosmic rays were penetrating deep into the atmosphere to weather balloon altitudes; there were 227 days without sunspots in 1964's transition minima from SC19 to SC20; and in 1966 there were 3 Nor'easters in 6 days)..

"It's The Sun, Stupid."

This solar cycle (Solar Cycle 24) is the weakest in the past century... it was so weak its maximum was dubbed the "MiniMax"... and SC25 is projected to be even weaker. The F10.7 flux is already down to an average of ~68... the magnetic minimum is 64, it can't go any lower than that.

You'll note the transition minima from SC23 to SC24 gave 2008 the fourth highest number of days without sunspots in recorded history at 265 days, and 2009 the fifth highest number of days without sunspots at 262 days. So SC24 started out already weak.

The last solar cycle (SC23) was the end of a Solar Grand Maximum. SC23 peaked ~2003, peaking at F10.7 ~230... F10.7 less than ~100 denotes global cooling. F10.7 is now ~68.

I encourage those interested to study the Ewing-Donn Paradox for an explanation of Arctic warming and the recent cold snaps... this has been known about since 1958, and correctly attributed to global cooling in the past... the politicized nature of climate "science" today dictates that the CAGW retards attempt to attribute everything to global warming. They do so at the expense of their own credibility.

The Stefan-Boltzmann Law of Radiation and the Laws of Thermodynamics would be violated if CAGW were true. So the libtards are yet again 180 degrees out from reality. But they never let science, facts or truth get in the way of their fairy-tale science-denying alarmist blather before... and they seem to be hermetically clue-proof.
Re: Logic
« Reply #49,  »
The Ewing-Donn Paradox Explained:

The sun has entered a quiescent phase. This causes a weaker convective transfer of air to the Arctic, weakening the winds which normally contain the polar vortex (it’s the same reason the polar vortex strengthens in winter and weakens in summer), allowing the polar vortex to undulate further south, dumping record amounts of snow. The snow increases the albedo of those more-southerly regions. The sunless winter Arctic does not offset this increased albedo, thus global albedo rises. This is the amplification effect which tips the planet into glaciation events. It’s known as the Ewing-Donn Paradox.

The cold polar air is replaced by warmer air from further south, warming the Arctic. As the Arctic warms and the ice begins melting, it allows warmer water to wash through the Arctic, completely melting the ice and making the Arctic region warm enough to be livable. Archaeological evidence shows that people were living in the Arctic during the height of the last ice age, whereas further south there were miles-thick glaciers. They came across the Siberian land bridge, which opened after sea level had fallen sufficiently.

The warmer water in the Arctic increases evaporation, which causes increased snow in the more southerly regions (because the polar vortex is still weakened at this point).

The increase of sea water washing through the iceless Arctic causes that water to rapidly lose its heat to space before flowing back southward, causing a cooling of the entirety of the oceans.

Thus sea level falls for two reasons… deposition of snow on land and thermal contraction. Once sea level falls sufficiently that the undersea ridges ringing the Arctic are exposed, warm water can no longer flow freely through the Arctic. Being relatively shallow and thus having less heat content (and being sunless during winter months), it quickly refreezes.

The colder waters in the Arctic reduce evaporation and thus deposition of snow further south. At the same time, the rapid refreezing of the Arctic strengthens the polar vortex. This tips the glaciers in more southerly regions into melt-mode.

This happened at the end of the last ice age. Sea level rose, closing the Siberian land bridge. The Arctic became too cold to be livable, so the people living there were forced to move southward. Those are the people we now know as Native Americans. Many of them settled in Nevada’s Great Basin, which at the time was a giant lake due to glacial melt. The Great Basin continued increasing in depth until it reached Red Rock Pass in Idaho, where it overflowed into Snake River. As it flowed, it chewed away more than 300 feet of soil depth at Red Rock Pass, lowering the Great Basin lake by hundreds of feet rather quickly. Archaeological evidence shows the people living in the region then moved into the caves which had once been underwater by hundreds of feet.

We’ve seen the first hint of this sun-driven process in the leveling-out of the completely natural sea level rise recently (and the 2.75 mm drop over the past 2 years)… we’ve seen the second hint of this sun-driven process in the undulation of the polar vortex and the dumping of record amounts of snow in more southerly regions… and now we have a third indication.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13428
Recent pause in the growth rate of atmospheric CO2 due to enhanced terrestrial carbon uptake
“Our analysis suggests that enhanced carbon uptake is due to the combined effects of rising CO2 on photosynthesis (the CO2 fertilization effect) and, in the past decade, a slowdown in the rate of warming on global respiration.”

While they attribute the pause in the growth rate of atmospheric CO2 to terrestrial carbon uptake, the more likely cause is reduced CO2 respiration from the cooling oceans.

As the global cooling cycle progresses, we’ll see atmospheric CO2 concentration actually fall as the ocean uptakes that CO2… which the global warming tards will spin into a fairy tale about their CO2 tax and trade schemes working (despite anthropogenic CO2 emissions continuing to increase). We have much left to laugh at them about.

So we’ve got another pause… that of CO2 growth rate, despite anthropogenic CO2 emissions continuing to grow.

http://themasites.pbl.nl/publications/pbl-2017-summary-trends-in-global-co2-and-total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2983.pdf
“In 2016, total global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continued to increase slowly by about 0.5% (±1%), to about 49.3 gigatonnes in CO2 equivalent (Gt CO2 eq). Most of the emissions (about 72%) consist of CO2.”

The phenomena we're experiencing are all completely explainable by natural forces, all of which were properly attributed to global cooling in the past. What has changed? Climate "science" became politicized, so now those CAGW idiots try to blame everything on global warming... and ultimately, on you.

This is by design... so they can force through regulations to tax and control you, a global attempt at implementing a global socialist government. Many of them are so brash that they openly admit this.