A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Global Warming
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 май 2024
- Steven F. Hayward, Pepperdine University
This lecture is part of Hillsdale College's 2014 CCA series. To learn more about Hillsdale College and the CCA programs, visit www.hillsdale.edu/outreach/cca
I remember when my mom called me one day, laughing because a global warming conference was cancelled because of a snowstorm. She thought that was so funny.
Paul Baker, -- I remember, about 10-15 years ago, I was having a conversation with a radical left global warming activist about the record snow falls and record low temperatures in the North Eastern part of the US. He said, believe it or not, it is due to global warming. I looked at him with furrowed brows, tilted head and mouth open, signifying, Are you crazy? He read my look correctly, saying, No, no, it is true, it's because of global warming. I knew in that moment that this person had been completely indoctrinated and brainwashed and no matter what evidence
was presented to possibly change his mind, he was stuck in his "Belief."
@@garyviehe9365 Yeah. It's a religion to them. You know, back in the late 1970s some alarmists were declaring there was a coming global ice age. So my response is that by the judicious use of fossil fuels, we averted the global ice age, increased food production to feed the growing world population, and lifted more people out of poverty than any other time in history. Now, the global warming alarmists want to ban CO2, an essential gas that all plant life must have to survive, and in turn produce O2 for humans and animals to breathe. Once they succeed in destroying plant life, what are they going to eat?
Obviously, she doesn't understand the difference between getting warmer and being warm, then.
That is funny 😂😂😂
@@bobcat8439 Yes, it is funny that some people can't understand the difference between getting warmer and being warm, isn't it? Also somewhat sad, really.
I'm dumb as a bucket of rocks and I understood every word that guy said what a treat I can't believe RUclips actually got all the spelling and words right for a change
I’m loving this introduction! It’s June of 2022 and I laughed when I thought of the Climate Czar John Kerry as a Climatista and Climate change compared to Prohibition! Great analogy! Sadly right now these Climatistas have shut down all of the Energy independence America had accomplished! These are radical people!
I am particularly influenced by the fact that "big money" is still investig big time in waterfront property. Also the London tidl floodgates have not needed upgrading. Lies all lies to coapse our world economy prior to noo werld odor grate reeset. Misspelled or the fartcheckers.
In my in opinion, all of the money spent on so called global warming could have been spent for better causes. It looks like we are still wasting a lot of tax payer's money on global warming.
Now they just 'correct' the data. So much easier to fake the data than explain a pause or a decline in temperature.
Wanting to save the planet is “radical” lmao. Ok what next, you’re gonna call them communists as well? Cry harder!
Methane gas is the best laugh-- diaper the cow poop and recycle. Mask people to lower carbon emissions, tree Canopys are important carbon absorbers as well as oxygen exhalers. Mother Nature is ramping up her fight. She will force the aggressive plants and tree rebellions, fueling pests evolution.Wuhan mosquitos , tics, borer beetles and their larvae.
There are two famous Queensland climatologists, Indigo Jones who died in 1954, and Lennox Walker who died in 2000. They were able to make accurate long range forecasts by studying sun spots. They were more accurate than computer models.
stan deyo?
When computers run the world, one ransomware will end many worlds when un-plugged including power grid. California is teaching the lesson , you're out of land to use. Hhydracells are advancing but calculate in multi use as a by -product is clean drinkable water.
Seems as a back-up generator this could be more beneficial and useful. The technology is evolving through factory uses. Hyundai NEXO is a car, not sure the safety of driving a nuclear engine but the Californians again as a lease will volunteer to be the guinea pig. You do have to plug the car in. Once the "reaction" starts if mis-used the safety feature is an engine auto-shut-off. So there may be a need for the old fashioned gas generator to back-up the back-up(cheaper after the hydracells in residential marketplace) Wood & Coal will not be replaced but a 3d back-up to cook food too. Well it all requires human intelligence now and in future.
Not long term predictions.
@@ulrikeinerehrhorngutt-niel1687 Long term predictions? Just a few billion years, from now, the sun will start to get low on it's hydrogen fuel. Then it will begin to collapse, under it's own gravity. It will begin to heat back up, and it's chemistry/physics, will change, and it will expand, into a Red Giant Star. It will engulf the near planets. Better get me a really good rocket, and a few centuries of food and fuel.
Yes, Jones & Walker, helped thousands of contented farmers when and if to to plant seasonal crops, thus avoiding losses!
Their study of sunspot activity, over years, correlated to weather patterns on Earth, roughly in a 7 year cycle.
Today's supine journalists never mention this.
Nov.22, 2022, the temp. in mid Western WA has averaged 20°- 12°C , pretty cool for summer no?
Professor Steven Hayward!!! I took both of his Constitutional Law classes at CU!!! By far my favorite professor, favorite teacher period.
It's now 2023. Is there any updates to Professor Haywards 2014 presentation.??
@@jayoder98would the point be any different? Not in most reasonable expectation!
No wonder then that he knows too of the natural law. I admire him and I support his stand against the claim of climate alarmist that the anthropogenic use by man of fossil fuels as the cause of global warming narrative. I hope and pray he could still help not only America but also the world on this matter, the truth about climate.
@@josecruzjr.5863 Congrats on saying the lowest IQ thing on youtube. We dont vote on the laws of physics little because it wouldnt stop anything from happening. CO2 warms air. Thats a FACT whether you believe it or not is irrelevant... Its still going to happen. Just because you dont understand Arrhenius law of mixed gases (which prove that CO2 warms air) that doesnt mean its not going to happen... Wake up, ignorance is not an excuse
In the 70's the climate alarmists said that NYC was going to be mowed down by a glacier. I bought a parka and boots. Still waiting.
You mean the alleged panic in the 70s because scientists were all warning of global cooling. A standard lying denier claim. The truth is somewhat different
ruclips.net/video/EU_AtHkB4Ms/видео.html
www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/01/the_myth_of_the_global_cooling_consensus.html
journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-007-5757-8_24
journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Joan Peters Keep it close this winter, get your moneys worth.
Joan Peters even if you’re right, so what?
For one thing, who are climate alarmists?
What did the scientists say directly?
Even if they got a prediction wrong, does that mean they are always wrong?
Climate science is invalidated forever?
I could listen to this gentleman each and every day.
Likewise! Steven Hayward is brilliant.
I only recently heard of him, he has most certainly expanded my mind, if you know of any similar I would be very grateful if you would inform me of them please sir.
@@daveslater9141 You're either staisi or you're loving this lol.
Well, Good OLD John Kerry told the the world how to fix it. Fill his pockets full $$$$$$$ Money, Money, Money.. and then MORE $$&$
This is so refreshing to hear. I am sick of the Al Gore's and Gretta's in the world who tell us not to think because they have already done the thinking for us.
You mean our wannabe overlords.
''A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Global Warming'' somebody took glacier ice core samples
Oops ...we were kidding, it was just a joke. ha ...ha'
"My personal favorite.. solar variation" Really? Apologia Science curriculum specifically SAYS this. It says that the solar flares heat the ionosphere which creates CLOUDS, reflecting heat back to the earth. But we went through a Solar Minimum for 10 years starting in 2009, during which time the earth would have drastically cooled except for chemtral clouds which prevented cooling. But the next Solar Cycle started back up. So warming will continue
Just a friendly offer because you seem to be struggling.
? Al Gore and that little girl are not scientists, but they are more "interesting" than all of the peer reviewed science journal essays since 1965. Find a way to make science data analysis interesting to the public?? please do, that would be a miracle. the early 70's publications about possible global cooling was based explicitly upon the context that there was a lot of pollution in the air which cools the earth, and that we seemed utterly incapable of slowing air pollution, therefore we might be causing a warming that overcomes the global warming that we were learning about, explicitly since 1896. but nope, in 1972 some dudes published peer reviewed research that humanity will not be able to cool enough via pollutions that will overcome the warming that we are causing on earth. from 1965 through 1980 there were 7 peer reviewed science journal publications that proposed that the earth will be cooling, the main thesis being that we are polluting the air and we cant stop ourselves, which cools the air. and 44 essays propose that people are rapidly warming the earth from burning buried, sequestered, fossil fuels .
This is excellent! AND it reminds me of a College dissertation. The average person will not listen to this. BUT, we do need more of this . Facts, Science, Logic...........NOT POLITICS!!
Yeah, except he's dead wrong about the pause lasting about 18-20 years. It was actually two pauses with 0.3 degrees global warming in between. Apparently he can't read graphs. And he yes they can be attributed to eruptions as well as solar cycles, though he brushes that off with ridicule.
Also, global warming simply resumed since his lecture.
"No politics" -- Are you kidding me? He most definitely is political about it himself.
@@MrMezmerized Crazy how people don’t take the time to look up the fact that the sun hasn’t been getting warmer lately and can’t be attributed to the warmer climate
@@MrMezmerized Our changes in temperature don't even exceed background "noise" for the last 12k years. There is no man-made global warming. The climate constantly changes and that's all we're seeing.
@@brianjacob8728 - prove you're not lying ,
liar.
"The vast majority of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century have been due to human activities. A new Tel Aviv University study has uncovered the earliest known geological indications of humanmade climate change from 11,500 years ago. Within a core sample retrieved from the Dead Sea, researchers discovered basin-wide erosion rates dramatically incompatible with known tectonic and climatic regimes of the period recorded."
@@shiitakestick learn to do research.
What I’ve found most interesting about global warming is, the more money thrown at it the hotter it gets.
Until the CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the average temperature falls as it currently proves to be and human caused global warming is proven to be the fraud it is. Look to the sun for what causes global average temps to rise and fall. Prepare for shorter growing seasons, crop failure and colder temps going forward... NASA has recently started looking at cycles of solar sun spots as an indicator of global average temperature prediction. Blessings friend :o)
Well said!
The planets is either getting warmer or colder. What ist cannot do is stay constant. That is impossible.
You are idiots for having opinions firmly based on falsehood .
.
Ten year spans may well have
a slight down trend - but in the longer run the trend is up since 1970s - 80s and at a steeper angle than ever on earth !
Pepperdine Hillsdale wise ass ignoramus pompous jerk .
"CO2 highest since 1st life on earth" - completely wrong.
There's an old saying regarding this topic.
The difference between "climate" and "weather" is this:
Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get.
"An SDS radical once wrote 'The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.'
In other words, the cause -- whether inner city youth or women, or literally any cause -- is never the REAL cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause, which is the accumulation of POWER to make the Revolution."
-- David Horowitz
Yep 👍
I think I may be in love with this guy. He’s really witty, and the way he mocks the sudo-intellectual, “don’t contradict me I am a god, and will get you blackballed” liberal talking heads, is giving me The Feels! I’m self-educated about the subject, but have always believed that Earth has greater seasons, than the four yearly seasons we are familiar with/the Earth uses built in, environmental, self regulation mechanisms to self correct when things get too hot. Like say, how it spews volcanic ash into the air.... which starts a cycle. I’m not saying it won’t be a violent, somewhat destructive action, or that it will be pleasant, but I think we are being ego centric to say WE are causing it, and that WE will be the beings to fix it. Should we make efforts to care for our environment? YES, but are we the cause and solution for environmental variance? Unlikely.
pseudo
Sue-do
I have thought the same about the longer seasons. I think human involvement into anything is usually a case of making things worse but logically it does make sense that we have to take care of our environment. But will it help the natural deterioration that everything goes through? No. Everything has a beginning and an end except for one and that is God. He is in control. He knows what is going on. The secular is just making us paranoid and so fearful that no one can enjoy what God gave us. What is good is to obey His commandment. Love each other. When you do that you take care of your surroundings. It is all encompassing.
su su su sudio! Just say the word!
I wonder what we are all thinking now that World Economic Forum is proving all theorist right that this is an organized attack on Farmers and agriculturist.
To an Englishman; 12:50 "we're still confident that we want to keep playing with our knobs" has an entirely different, yet still very fitting meaning to that intended by Steven.
🤣🤣🤣 love it. I totally missed that one until I saw your comment🤣🤣🤣
I'm an American, and I about laughed myself silly when I heard that comment.
Can we say double entendra?
Depends on what kind of Knob you're talkin about playing with
Hearing his inflection, I think that he intended the double entendre 😉
@@Green.Country.Agroforestry Oh, for sure.
For a five year old lecture, this is still brilliant!
When I was a student in 1963 we were told to expect another ice age. We were also told that if the U.S. continued using oil at the same rate we would be out of oil in 25 years. 25 years later was 1988. In 1961 we had a police officer come to class to talk about gun safety. In 1963 we were told that if we owned a gun it would most likely get used against us in we tried to use it in self protection. We also taught about Nebraska man which was nothing more than a pig's tooth.
Don't forget the population bomb whereby most of the world was doomed to be starving by the '90s if government mandated population controls weren't put in place.
I just read an article from a General that claimed oil is not a fossil fuel but is abiotic oil. He gives a history of how the US government termed oil a fossil fuel to indicates its scarcity thus using it to make more money.
@@paulrevere2379 I remember that.
@@teaves8251 Until creation scientists showed that the quantities of flood sourced (fossil) coal and oil was much more vast than earlier estimates.
Natural gas is something else I don't know enough about.
@@geraldpolmateer3255
And 60 Minutes just had the author the Population Bomb on, couple of weeks ago, still making apocalyptic predictions in his 90s. And CBS treated him like a sage.
In 1989 I'd finished working on the UK doc. Can Polar Bears Tread Water? It was packed with many calamities predicted also for 20 years ago, none of which are even close to being true.
I was also told at the time by another client of mine (astronomer) that it was nonsense. I had worked with that client for many years and back then was more convinced of his arguments than the crazy (by which I mean mystical and superstitious) director I had been working with on the documentary. The doc, went on to win some notable awards. But of course it was still nonsense.
I regret my role in creating the "useful" graphics that helped propagate anti-industrialist propaganda. Over the years the majority of the docs I worked on to one extent or another had a "left-wing" bias, such is the state of the media industry. I focused on children's programming, but that to started to have an agenda. So in 2009 I quite the whole thing. I despise the narrative indicative in that industry.
I gradually questioned my own received wisdom of leftist politics because of the contradictions all around me, and towards the end as I affirmed and challenged the views of my peers, they became hostile. So in a sense I didn't quit entirely of my own volition. The values I was surrounded by just finally became intolerable.
On the subject of climate change I recommend looking into Alex Epstein - he's doing tremendous work. And look up Professor Christopher Essex to name but on other.
I still have the skills for narrative and composition, timing, editing, so perhaps RUclips or some other platform may provide a useful place to find material I can happily work on in the future.
Tell that to the people who are watching the Greenland glaciers melt at record pace.
@@bruzote climates change, it doesn't mean people are causing it or that money can fix it.
@@bruzote If you believe that the glaciers are melting on Greenland because of human involvement, then tell me why and how the great "Ice Age" began melting 10,000 years ago when there was no humans involved. No cars, busses, trucks, airplanes, coal burning, cow farts, industrial manufacturing, etc. Do you not realize if the "Ice Age" had not started to melt 10,000 years ago, that today the northern half of the US and all of Canada would still be under thousands of feet of ice?
@@bruzote I suggest you look into what an actual geologist has observed regarding glacial activity. Such a man would be Tony Heller right here on RUclips.
@@bruzote just read your comment.now dec 2022.if you check out the latest about Greenland !the glaciers in certain areas have greatly increased!
"Boulder: Berkley with snow." Very clever.
The rest of Colorado can't stand Boulderites. 🙄
My respect, thanks and gratitude to Hillsdale College for the courses they have put together and specifically those to promote, defend and protect the American Constitution!
Defend and protect a 200 year old document instead of updating it to the times we all live in, the way it was originally imagined it would be, yea that's what's needed. You can believe the idea was we would have evolved by now, but we still have morons talking about inferior races and there's no such thing as climate change as we watch the oceans rise and forest burn out of control.
@@rogerdestre9980No one is thinking you folks have the answer
s. You don't scaŕe anyone any moŕe. Your targets and prophesies never comè true ànd your determination will have us in dark caves freezing.
@@rogerdestre9980 That 250 year òld document has made us the longest survivìng republic in these times and has kept you free to sprèad tales. We have had 27 amèndmènts. Bring yours to the table. You can't use tĥe ŵoŕd 'free'.
@@rogerdestre9980There aŕe inferior people taĺking about impossiblè thìñgs. Tĥey may seem like morons, but don't tell them to their face.
@@rogerdestre9980 I assume you desire some new updated form of Constitution?
One that allows the Oligarchs even more control of Citizens lives?
Climanistas are arrogant & condescending, but they ignore EVERYTHING that contradicts them, and instead of bringing actual evidence they resort to emotions & condescension.
Bring up everyone of their proclaimed milestones and the fact that it was a failed prediction and they just resort to emotions again.
4:37 "even if catastrophic human caused climate change turned out to be true, environmentalists are the last people we would want to put in charge of dealing with the problem." This is absolutely true, solar panels and wind turbines cost massive amounts of fossil fuels to produce, the metals from them need to be mined and then extracted from the ore, all of which produces massive amounts of carbon dioxide and are terrible for the environment. Electric cars still produce more carbon dioxide than regular cars because their power is produced by fossil fuels and 50% of the electricity is lost in the transfer through the power lines. If you really want to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, build more nuclear power plants. That is something that environmentalists will fight against with insane fury, and that is why although I care about the environment, I cannot call myself an environmentalist.
are you really saying that electric cars produce more carbon dioxide than gasoline? You know it takes the same amount of electricity to drive 20 miles in an electric car as it does to refine one gallon of gasoline. Where did you get these numbers from? Try Googling it. 50% of the electricity is lost in the transmission lines? Do you believe that the fossil fuel company put lead in the gasoline to make people stupid? I don't but this illustrates the problem with people's using false information to try to make their point.
The problem with nuclear power plants is that occassionally things happen to the planet that are catastrophic but out of our control. We've survived this in the past but when you add nuclear fallout to the equation we would be fucked. I'd be much more comfortable to stick with coal and plant more trees than going nuclear. Especially if we can clean up the particulate matter emitted from coal power.
And I used to like electric cars until I found out how radioactive the mine sites were for the heavy metals that go in to the batteries. Very unfriendly to the environment and the local population. I like biodiesel.
Wind farms kill thousands of birds, mostly raptors (which are fewer in number) a year as they generate a few percent of unreliable and expensive energy in the U.S. At a recent TED Talk it was revealed that to generate enough unreliable energy by wind or solar to satisfy the needs of UK citizens, fully half the UK would have to be covered with wind or solar farms. Consider, U.S. citizens use twice the electricity as their UK counterparts. That is a lot of wind farms if you wish to power the U.S. by wind or solar. That is also a lot of dead birds.
I agree with Nuclear with a caveat. China has been building Thorium Reactors. Thorium has a very short half life, whereas Uranium has a half life of hundreds of years. So, if accidents occur, like Chernobyl or Fukishima, the result is contamination for a long, long time. In these uncertain times, the possibility of government failure, National collapse or whatever has grown. A neglected Nuclear power station would soon go dangerous....But a Thorium Reactor would cause damage but its half life would ensure a drop of radiation very quickly. There are over 400 NR's around the world. If they failed, bye bye any return to anything resembling life for us. Plant life and certain animals would be ok. But not us...
As a past resident of both Madison and Boulder, I full heartedly endorse Dr Petersen’s opening comments.
Dr. Hayward, not Peterson, but yeah.
I watched this while waiting for my wife shopping. It was so enlightening that we watched it together last night. Just great! Thankj you.
I just watched the video “Dan Britt: Orbits and Ice Ages: The History of Climate” and I don’t feel guilt for driving my Ford Ranger and possibly delaying the next ice age.
You are informed, that cold water will suck up a lot of CO2, not to mention those high arctic temps will be low enough to precipitate it out of the atmosphere at altitude, the warm orbits are ending.
We need to worry about the next couple of hundred years someone else can worry about the next ice age in tens of thousands of years.
Weather is not climate.
There is extreme weather somewhere on Earth all the time.
Yes, its funny how the climate alarmists don't know that and continue to say things like "look how hot this summer was, how can anyone deny global warming?" I do understand that skeptics sometimes jokingly say the same thing, like, "Look at this snow, so much for global warming." But the fact that both sides fall back on this argument that confuses weather and climate, really shows that neither side has a monopoly on science and the issue is far from decided.
@@jaycampbell6402 - The issue was decided when CO2 absorption and emission spectra were measured along with O2 and N2. That was many decades ago. Right then it was realized CO2 would warm Earth's atmosphere if added to it.
@@bruzote No it's not. It's been determined that the absorption spectrum of CO2 is almost full, so adding more would do bupkis.
Also, it's been found that more hest escapes into space than previously hoped/presumed.
And, there always has been.
Jay Campbell it’s not the same thing. We’re talking about hot summers as measured by average temps in the whole hemisphere, not just in one location.
Regardless, neither example of a lay person making anecdotal arguments has any bearing on the actual science, which is unequivocal.
Yes, one side does have a monopoly on the science. The earth is warming and it’s at least partly due to human activity.
I was born in Evansville IN, and the two hottest years,that are still on record, were 1936 and 1939.
We couldn't begin to take that kind of heat nowadays could we? National emergencies would be called.
Except they aren't the hottest on record. And cherry picking two years make no sense when it's all about trends. Unless you want to distract from those because they don't fit the narrative of course.
@@MrMezmerized So, Mr.M, what are the "hottest (years) on record" for Evansville, IN. I'm only asking because you say they (1936&1939)are not. Please inform me and bring me up to date. It has been 15yrs since I last checked those records.
@@garyviehe9365 I don't know about your town specifically. Not do I really care because it is irrelevant with regards to global multi-decade trends.
@@MrMezmerized
You don't care about facts because they doesn't fit your preferred narrative. Got it 👍
Great lecture. As a farmer I like CO2. I also like cheap diesel fuel, and nitrogen fertilizer sourced from oil and gas wells. Over the long run through regenerative notill farming with use of cover crops I can get some what away from fertilizers but I won't be farming anything without diesel fuel. The world will starve out without diesel fuel. CO2 is vital for plant growth. I seen reports that at one point atmospheric CO2 was as high as 2500 ppm currently its at 400 ppm. At what point does the CO2 level drop to a point where it is noticeably detrimental to plant growth. After watching what has happened over the past two years I am more convinced that the ruling class is planning on pricing common people out of existence and the only carbon they want to get rid of is really you and me. None of the ruling class live under what they are trying to force on the rest of us. As my teacher said to me, "If you're not living it you're not believing it".
thank you for farming that’s awesome, i’ve heard it’s not very profitable. yes the CO2 used to be MUCH higher and plants and animals thrived. sea creatures thrived also. 4-5 years ago i learned that climate change and plastic pollution were issues. i went home and talked to my dad about it and he said no and made me watch a bunch of videos about climate change. so since that day i’ve been saying the same thing, climate is NOT the issue. overfishing, deforestation, plastic pollution, and pollution of land, air and sea. there are several reasons i believe they’re pawning it off as climate change and the big one is to protect business from shelling out money and making consumers buy new products. EVs, windmills and solar panels aren’t good for the environment. EVs can result in more CO2 emissions, if you put a box around a running EV it won’t produce CO2 but production, mining/drilling, and where the energy to power the car comes from do emit CO2. windmills and solar panels use batteries and cannot produce enough energy. solar panels require certain materials which can’t be found everywhere on earth. windmills kill lots of birds & you have to clear land. solar farms require deforestation too. it’s just bs. coral bleaching has nothing to do with pH or temperature. pollution kills coral which is and has been studied and shown.
diesel is used for soooooo many things too. there’s no way we’d live even close to the quality of life we have now without it.
This is just an excuse to further control the people as the elite ignore for themselves what they expect from the people.
God denying leftists wring their hands about climate change. God promised the stability of the climate a long time ago. It is not something for us to worry about. We are to be concerned about saving souls not the planet. Here's His promise - "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease." Gen. 8:22.
So true. I have a great deal of respect for farmers as my some of my relatives were or are still farmers. What you state are all correct. We have history and experiments to prove it. We know that the oxygen and CO2 levels were much higher in the past and so were temperatures. Plants, animals and insects were all huge. This is all about culling the population so people are easier to control.
As a human being I like living in a clean environment where you don’t pump your CO2 and dump your fertilizers and gasoline into my environment.
Equating climate change to Prohibition is brilliant. Thank you Hillsdale!
Hi, I've been following "global cooling" since about 1965, as the "modern ice age" was considered approaching, as numerous glaciers were moving south, across northern Europe. The elderly gentleman who asked one of the last questions, mentioned the fact "the 30's recorded the actual height of the warming trend", and this was used sternly by Scientists, to counter political claims, in 67, as the cooling stopped, the new model chosen, and politics ramped up it's efforts to gain control of "climate".
At that point in time, I was ten, was fully on top of quantum mechanics, in my personal studies, watching science in all its facets, hoping to be a nuclear physicist. I'd been following half a dozen aspects of "solar cycles", not only sun spots, but several other aspects, including flares, mass emissions, and coronal defining of amount of energy change emission, and the notion one of the least "gases" of our atmosphere, could produce a "greenhouse effect", appeared contrary to all science logic.
We, on earth, transmit energy by radiation, by conduction, and by energetic mass, moving. The earth emits energy from the whole, through its atmosphere, almost exclusively by radiation, since there is no mass of matter to which it could transfer energy by other means. Unless the CO2 actually alters the frequency average of the radiated energy, it can't have an effect on our global temperature, our surface temperature is some 85 degrees F, on average, some four hundred degrees warmer than "space", we radiate every frequency of electromagnetic radiation, light, from infrared, to X-rays, on the basis of thermodynamics, we receive almost all our "climate energy" from the sun, and we expend most of it by radiation, and the main controlling factor is the "energy state differential", basically, the difference in temperature.
Our planet changes its average temperature constantly, based mostly on incoming energy, if it increases for a time, by ten percent, it will increase our planet's temperature, but it's an enormous volume of mass, so it would take years to substantially increase our temperature, relative to "less than a degree above zero, Kelvin", and yet such an increase only comes with "the life cycle of the star, the Sun", for all the time life has been present, the average temperature of earth has remained relatively stable, changing with "solar aging", and by that, we should expect climate change to continue, both up and down, until it's last down as our sun turns to a "red giant", but life will be gone by then.
The comment was made about the significance of "Greenland". We landed to B-17's on Greenland, in 43 or 44, one failing, the other partnering, and both landed safely. The crews were rescued, and in the late sixties, it was decided to retrieve those two bombers, for historical sake. They lay beneath fifty feet of hard pack ice, it was necessary to dig a hole all the way down, hollow out a "hanger" to work on the one aircraft, and clean, restore the other, but both were lifted out by crane, and flown back the the U.S.
That's fifty feet of ice pack in "Greenland", in two decades, when "Greenland" was ice free, as Europe was "discovering the Americas".
The science of ice measurement is highly controversial, because not all scientists measure all the ice. Many only measure icebergs, "calving" off, while ignoring the other side of the south pole, as it builds up at a higher rate than the ice loss.
There is also the fact, now on public record, water levels have not risen, but climatologists have altered data from the thirties and before, moving "the goal" because they can't make the oceans actually rise, to meet their predictions. We know almost everything, about a few minor things, but in truth, the main thing science has provided is an endless series of questions, man will spend all his time on earth, answering, one at a time, often incorrectly.
I just watched a lecture about "the understanding of human consciousness", about an hour and a half, showing we truly don't have even the beginnings of an understanding, nor even a means of postulating an "entry point", "we presume" everything we suggest we know about thought, memory, every aspect of data accumulation, and don't even have the beginning, the starting point to explore the very notion of "thought".
To begin "science", we, People, had to come to some natural rational standards we could be certain of, and it took thousands of years to arrive at a coherent set, with many competing sets, still vying for attention. All our standards are based on our experience inside the influence of a "sphere of rock and earth and water", with a smidge of experience nearer the "edge of earth's influence", landing on the moon.
I'm 61, at ten, I knew of dozens of solar aspects of energy projection directly impacting our solar system, not merely earth. Today, I know a substantially larger volume of facts about the same, suggesting far more controlling factor than we understood fifty years ago, and we still "make our best guess" as to how much of a factor humans are, on earth, other than our possession thermonuclear weapons, and our ability to wipe ourselves out.
Entomologists would tell one, "if we could in a moment, wipe out all earth's ants at once, all vertebrate life would be dead within a year", as ants are the single most important factor we know of, in food propagation, and the health of plant life. We, people, aren't a tenth the mass of ants on earth. If we left, no one would miss us.
Semper Fidelis,
John McClain
Vanceboro, NC
Nice to know I am not alone...we live on planet stupid where ego is king. It depresses me deeply to watch the climate scam gaining in acceptance and popularity.
@@carl8823 That's what I just told them.
Semper Fi! ! Agreed Fully! Are you SgtMaj. McClain (Retired) of VMO-2 in the 90's perhaps?
@@tomroot6013 Tom, I wish I were. I retired a Gunny, with multiple sclerosis, at 20, after fighting it some five years. Thanks for the touching bases, we loose far too many brothers, by distance and time.
Semper Fi, my brother.
John
@@johnmcclain3887 Retired Gunny here, as well! Hang Tough, and that MS, won't stand a chance! Having served in Desert Storm, I agree! I have gone to way too many Funerals of Fellow Warriors who left us way too soon! I have my Issues, as well! But we cannot ever quit! OoohRaaah! SFMF!
He's charming. "How DARE he!"
😂🤣😂
As Socrates once noted, Sophists are often artful in their lying. And charming.
Hello from the future in Florida.....it is 7 years later...no dangerous global warming and the ocean is still in the exact same spot it was 40 years ago.
I went to the University of Colorado Boulder engineering. This place is a riot! The liberals hang out in coffee shops and ridicule any disbelievers. Imagine a rural boy who ran a lumber mill in the summer. I look at huge trees in terms of board feet lumber. Cows are great as they provide us with rib eyes. I worked in water well frac-ing one summer. So you can imagine how fun my school was.
I cut some huge ponderosa down in high school. About 300 year old trees. During lunch, one old logger went thru the growth rings. We saw the ring when the constitution was signed and the civil war and Perl harbor. But there were erratic groupings of rings going back to the founding of this country.
These showed us periods of drought and periods of heavy moisture. They also showed periods of warm and cold.
They appear to be groupings following a semi periodic pattern thru the years. In some areas they confirm climate change. In many others, they deny climate change.
So who do we believe? The climate experts or the trees?
The 30's had 8 of the 10 hottest yrs in the last 100 yrs . Remember the dust bowl?
Yes man made much like the out of control wild fires that exist because the silly People In cali drained all the lagoons.
@UCuKG5_i4BjYZye_iJHyrM-A "19 of the warmest 20 years" Huh? Are you making a comment about all of world history, all of US history, or just a comment about the last 20 years. Please provide data and source.
@@juuh771I am employed managing the forest fuel in an area where fire is likely. The overburden materials are diverse and make perfect humus if composted properly. Forests and brushlands improve under management. We need millions employed in this type of activity. A properly managed forest is very unlikely to burn.
That event was driven by the total destruction of the central USA through plowing and clearing and killing millions of animals. The prairies had very deep humus for a while, which was exploited totally until it was exhausted. Something similar happened in the Sahara, and in most other places. 'Anthropomorphic climate change' is what is called. We should be very grateful that people are waking up to the possibility that much good can be done to make the planet better, but first you have to understand the problem, and then take some responsibility. Denying climate change is completely irrational, especially in the light of the mass extinctions that we are experiencing right at the moment. (Or maybe the thousands of reports of mass fish, whale, dolphin, bird, and forest deaths, supported by photographic evidence, are all photo shop.)
@@kenbellchambers4577 I agree with you that more people are needed in the forestry service. That is indeed one way to help cut down the amount of forest fires. It is however only one part of it. Forest fires are a natural part of the environment sadly. But the degree at which they went from occurring naturally to the massive uptick in sheer amount can be directly linked to the draining of the lagoons. Mind you I'm speaking about California specifically here, not the world as a whole.
As in the well know movie, The Wizard of OZ, "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."
I believe you're referring to two men - the Koch brothers - and the millions they funnel into campaigns against climate change.
@@two_owls like George Soros?
Water IS the most significant greenhouse gas (even NASA admits that). Clouds block 30-80% of solar output that will then not be available to heat the Earth and then be reradiated as heat and absorbed by greenhouse gases so it can be reradiated back to the Earth. Clouds have always been the great barometer because they reduce temps when they rise and fail to block as much when temps drop.
I’ve always thought that the climate hoaxers knew that water vapor was the number one greenhouse gas but who could they set up and torture with shaming, restrictions, monitory penalties and even incarceration? Nobody! Mother Nature is solely responsible. So…..what to do? Well, they looked at the second place greenhouse gas, CO2. Now there’s a target rich field! There are endless sources to name as being responsible. They could target the entire petroleum industry for ridicule and monetary ruin and shame the entire population into spending enormous sums of money to try and chase their whimsical wishes! Yeah, CO2 was their Trojan Horse.
*For years now people like Algore have been making dire predictions about what’s going to happen. Can someone point to one prediction that’s actually happened?
*What we need to do is round up all these whining “Chicken Little’s”, send them to places like China and India to preach their fire and brimstone sermons and forbid them coming back here until they’ve succeeded in shaming those countries into cutting their emissions as much as the US has to date!
Wow, RUclips put a text below this video that absolutely is 100% wrong. It’s time to allow those who act as publishers calling themselves platforms to explain themselves in court.
The "hockey stick" was just a bump in the road. Taxes and poverty under government control never works to help anything but the ones in power.
It's worth pointing out, that if you listen to the average actual climatologist, they are much more reserved and rational sounding than the average report of what they said, by a news agency or politician.
They're reserved and yet they readily admit climate change is real and global warming is an important part of that process...
@@two_owls "Climate change" is just the latest term for global warming. Yes, the climate changes but "climate change" the story told by media is not real. You have to separate the two. Remember the story also includes economics and not just climate.
@@two_owls, when is "Climate Stasis" reflected in the geological record?
Absolutely. That's why you hear people claiming that there have been ridiculous predictions such as that the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets would melt by the year 2012, predictions that have never been and would never be made in any peer reviewed scientific paper.
They understand that there is nothing they can do to make your lazy ass look at the evidence. It's not their job
Notice, the GOAL is always future, 20 years in the never-never, not year, so Algore is totally correct when he says the EPA proposal is "symbolic" ...the purpose is not to reduce emissons so much as to enforce compliance...compliance is the goal.
Always a promise, never a reality.
God Bless Hillsdale College. You guys bring truth.
I love reading the comments.
God Bless🙏🎁🙏🎁😊🎁🙏🎁
This is not up to date. It's 8 years old. I've only begun watching this video. But long story short: Global avgerage temperature has increased quite a bit again in recent years after the increase paused for a few years.
@@InfoSopher Yes, that's the truth. Very few here are seriously searching for the truth. They're looking for something to confirm their biases. One being the hope that the rest of the climate science community must be wrong. Why? Because they cannot explain what's causing the warming the past 60 years if it isn't primarily GHG emissions.
But, But Obama said this was the greatest crisis we face right now.And that taxing the working class heavily will somehow stop it.
Obama the comunizing underlerned.
Strider Mccleod: See? He finished his term and the problem appears to be fixed! Must have been the taxes. Just think of what can be done when taxes get raised on the working class again.
If you gave them all the money in the world, they have no ideas other than going back to the middle ages in energy consumption, or eliminating 3/4s of the world's population, of how to do anything about it -- if it was even a real problem to begin with.
Strider Mccleod Western Europe has done a lot of it already, I'm pretty much middle class, have a decent size house, but affording to own a car isn't within my reach realistically. Quite literally taxes and insurance would be 1/10 of my wages, never mind gas, inspections and repairs etc.
This whole climate change paranoia is really disgusting - another way to add tax. Why are we so helpless? And they pay billions for "research" to generate consensus on that tax
I enjoyed an intelligent and enlightening speech.
Thank you Hillsdale!
Too bad he's wrong about crucial aspects.... and since 2014 and the solar minimum back then, global warming simple resumed again.
paid for by big oil
@@MrMezmerized
Except he's not wrong. Your apocalyptic false prophets are the ones who keep having to change their predictions.
Very informative whilst quite humorous in it's presentation. Thank you.
This video is 8 years old. Google global average temperature and you'll find that it has risen a lot again since then.
8 years later, we were all still here, and storms are actually less damaging this year, and we've still not broken 1930 and 1950's heat wave records. They are still saying in ten more years!!...
Hayward has ties to many conservative think tanks. He has been a senior fellow in environmental studies at at the Pacific Research Institute (PRI), and Weyerhaeuser Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). He is also a director of the Donors Capital Fund (DCF), a group that works with DonorsTrust to give hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to numerous groups questioning mainstream climate science. Hayward is a board member of the Institute for Energy Research (IER). [2], [3], [20]
The American Enterprise Institute and Pacific Research Institute are both heavily funded by oil billionaires Koch Industries, and Richard Mellon Scaife.
So what!!!? The facts he states are still FACTS. Your comment is typical of communazifasciocialists - ad hominem (attacking the person rather than disputing the facts presented).
Good for him however I have already verified some of his information by reading the policy papers he is citing.
The East Anglia internal e-mails mails can be accessed on line.
Do your own research instead of discrediting his policy expertise.
Hayward is getting paid for spewing crap:
“I’ll give you three words Satellite temperature record”😂 ???
Is that his argument?
What satellite?
What temperature record?
in the late 90s my roommate delivered a load of wood flooring to a huge house being built at lake Tahoe, he said it had exotic hardwoods from all over the world in it . the ( cabin) was about 6 to 8 thousand square feet he said,......it was being built for Al Gore. do as I say, not as I do.
And your about the 5th person I've read in here making the claim that they personally, or a close friend of theirs, has firsthand knowledge of Gore's "exorbitant" energy-wasting lifestyle. Bullshit.
What is your friend's name? As far as I can tell from internet searches Al Gore does not have a cabin/house on Lake Tahoe. Correct me if I am wrong.
@Bestoink Dooley "Your starving grandkids" - Fearmongering nonsense. As if humans have no ability to find solutions to new challenges. Always beware the guy injecting fear into the discussion.
Typical whataboutism. Even if it were true, this has nothing to do with whether global warming is real and a threat. It is unfathomable to me that the global warming deniers seem to have this idea that as long as there remains even a 1% chance that global warming is not real, we better not do anything about it, because that could hurt the economy, and we better not investigate it, because reasons. Why can't we agree that if there is a chance that global warming IS real, the potential consequences are so severe that we should at least do everything we can to research it and make sure. Unfortunately, many if not most of these people are not only not scientists, they lack a basic understanding of how science works and therefore presume political motives in every scientific study.
@@1963spitfire You don't believe Gore owns any property in his name do you? I imagine all his holdings are in the name of an LLC or a trust. Do you have any evidence that Al Gore exist? Can you find any public record on him?
This is enlightening and enjoyed his sense of humor. Solar creates the use of batteries which they tell us you have to not put batteries in the trash but they don’t tell you what to do with.
yeah.
I ate organic fruits & vegetables for a year and switched back because the only difference is price. Organic's much more expensive. You get the same nutrients if not more, from non-organic foods.
Support this view and love the manipulation of percentages, like in the case where it is said that on average 21% of all road deaths is caused by drunken driving. What can we learn from this? Stay out of the way of sober drivers!
The day I stopped hearing the term "global warming" and started hearing "climate change," I started laughing and I haven't stopped since. The Klimate Karnival is high comedy, and Algore is the ringmaster.
Debbie, -- As Mr Steven said, They, the climate activist, say, When it gets hotter it's global warming, and when it gets cooler it's climate change.
Is this the same Algore that was caught at an airport with vials of blood in his briefcase?
idiot children
They keep slipping " Kliiimate Change" onto into Hollywood movie now, expecting ' gravitas'. Pah!
@@hudsonstraight8628 - Anyone can see you geniuses are deeply concerned with the environment by your choice of proof :
some word lingo in the media by a politician. To heck with science , and reality for that matter
They think that a group of people is easier to get what you want them to do if we are all scared of something.
those words couldnt be more timely than right now!!
The news is the sky is falling, the sky...
So what, btw best answer ever!!! The difference between surface temperature and satellite data can be accounted for by asphalt, concrete, glass, and steel. My 2 year old knows asphalt is hotter in the sun than grass. I guess the climate scientists don't understand that, 😂
Yes. I've said this for years. With over 55,000miles of Blacktop n concrete,,,. Then add roofs...mayb we R adding to warming. But. Not. By cars, planes, airballons n Cow farts!! Better we fix our goverment liars n get back to our Republic as designed....
@kcotte59 We just need to use white, heat-reflective materials on all roofs in warm climes. It would eliminate urban heat island effect. It would save people 15% to 25% directly with less air conditioning. These 'cool roofs' would last about 2x as long saving people a LOT of money.
Amellia Mendel the urban heat island effect is well understood and accounted for by climate models. Turns out the climate scientists actually know what they’re doing
They just assume we’re all stupid enough to believe their bs!
@@theevermind I've installed a PAC on my roof, a Planetary Air Conditioner. The unwanted heat is ejected directly into space by drastically changing the roof's albedo. The problem with a roof painted white (which does work) is that it becomes earth colored as dust and pollen settles upon it.(*) Imagine the white painted roofs in New York after a couple of years. By taking it a step farther, and actually installing mirrors, one can easily clean the glass surface a couple of times over the spring and summer and maintain efficiency, and allow for dust to accumulate in the winter when one would rather absorb environmental heat.
(*) The problem is amplified because the surfaces are so cold that dew continues to form hours after the rest of the roof is dry, and the moist surface traps any dust blowing across the roof. The dust is then glued to the surface when the dew point rises above the condensing temperature of the surface.
While listening to Mr. Hayward..the thought occured to me that someone in the USFG of WDC likely said the reduction of Fossil Fuel and subsequent CO2 release projections necessary to "Save the Planet" are symbolic..."Shoot for the Moon so to speak". We load "conservation of energy" on peoples backs until they are right on the edge. I think about two engineering firms I worked for over the years in my carrier who by necessity to compete started using computer technology...Auto Cad etc. but they would not keep up with necessary upgrades and replacement of the computers in order to "Conserve" capital. A hobbled computer will drive a man insane. Conservation of resources in these respects is destructive in many ways. Energy production and technology must be state of the art or we slip into insanity...progress or fail.
You know. There's an irrefutable law of physics. You can not create, nor destroy energy!!! You can ONLY, transform it. The greenies, completely ignore that law. 👻💥🗽
The transition from oil to hydroelectric power via vertical water displacement
does not have to be with abrupt interruptions of oil markets if we start today to build the infrastructure that will produce negotiation leverage
I saw someone, maybe Micheal S Coffman, called it stoplight syndrome.
The call themselves green, being too yellow, to admit they're really red.
He claimed that of near 13,000 environmental papers, over half didn't mention anthropomorphic climate change, and unless it contained the clear statement "man does not cause climate change", it was counted as supportive, while the over-half were ignored.
He also claimed the hockey-stick graph was designed so that, no matter the data entered, the result is the same curve.
What happens to photosynthesis at the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels the climatistas espouse?
The supreme court just ruled the EPA has no authority to enforce the clean air act.
Even more important is the question *_"what is the ideal level of CO2 in the atmosphere to sustain life on earth?"_* I firmly believe these climate activists are ignorant of the fact that CO2 is integral to photosynthesis, without which our planet would be a desolate, lifeless wasteland like every other planet in the universe.
Have you ever talked to any climate activists? They understand CO2 quite well.
We need to understand that nature has a balance and CO2 is part of that balance.
If we keep increasing the amount of it in our atmosphere the way we are there are other factors which do not have a good effect on plant life.
Inversely if we took in a very high percentage of oxygen in our lungs the effect would not be good either.
I believe in the basic chemical and physical laws of solids, liquids and gases and how life is effected by them
By the way, climatologists believe in that too.
This guy speaking hasn’t got a clue😂. He just doesn’t want us to hurt the economy of his supporters.
Love seeing the TRUTH that comes from Hillsdale
Love calling anything from Hillsdale "truth", I'd guess.
At least it makes your life a lot easier.
They didn’t even mention all the cooling properties that mass irrigation has had.
Q: is Carbon Dioxide heavier then air? If it is, it won't 'flote' rise up and get to the Ozone Layer....
In the western side of Maryland where I am the only weather change I’ve seen is we don’t use snow fences anymore. Winter storms are more wet and very little drifting snow.
I love how the global warming alarmists try to say the sun has little effect on climate despite it being the sole reason this planet is habitable. The data we have says the suns cycle of fluctuation of its magnetic field matches the fluctuation of the temperature on earth for the last 10000 years. But it is not a factor hey.
Yeah its great isn't it ,love it ..you idiot
Read about Milutin Milenkovic in Wikipedia. His "Canon of Earth's Insolation" is a collection of his previous work that calculated the long term climate changes that resulted in the waxing and waning of the Ice Ages based on the varying axial tilt, axial precession and orbital eccentricity and the resulting variation of the sun's energy that reached the Earth. His calculations proved to be predictive over the last 700,000 years.
@@grogershoward2376
Had my mind blown recently,
check out:
planetary orbital harmonics effects on tidal distributions of solar composition
planetary orbital positioning effects on planetary auroral coupling
Sol system movement through milky way effects on cosmic ray flux
There are soooooo many extraterrestrial cycles that affect our climate, it's insane.
It is funny how they dont want to acknowledge that
Agreed, any calculations that do not control for the PRIMARY INPUT of solar radiation are invalid.
It's interesting that almost 5 years after this video was uploaded, Antarctic ice has grown significantly, but the Climate alarmists have refused to acknowledge that fact.
No, it has been addressed. The land ice is melting into the sea where it refreezes. The overall total ice mass is going down. Perhaps if you read the facts?
www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-intermediate.htm
@@alistairthomson8710 Lol! and at one time the poles were covered in jungle.
Alistair, land ice is increasing also. Most notably in Greenland. This is important because the Ice Sheets in Greenland were a point of major concern, and also an ice mass that was very easy to make accurate observations of. This increase has been occurring over the last two years as of this post. During this time Iceland is also recording increased glacial ice mass.
@@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms; one would think that evidence that life on earth is not about to end because of the actions of mankind, and we are going to live to a ripe old age in relative comfort, would make people happy. But the people in Al Gore's cult only appear to receive this good news with anger and sadness. If I was told I might not have cancer, as once thought, I wouldn't curse the lab technician and tell him he doesn't know what he is talking about. I simply don't understand these people. Good news only pisses them off.
@@alistairthomson8710 The day skepticalscience.com actually says something true, that actually coincides with the data, will be a day of rejoicing and reckoning. A day of putting the GW enthusiasts to shame and derision. A day when the poor of the world can begin to breath again that perhaps - just perhaps - there is a way out of their extreme poverty trap.
Great presentation citing many sources and without personal bias or the emotion that seems to be prevalent with most AGW advocates.
By about 90 seconds in, the personal bias was so thick and gooey you could cut it with a knife.
Mr Hayward missed an opportunity in presenting the 57 explanations for the pause. He could have mentioned that that is one from each state.
Its so refreshing to hear such a high level administrator do comedy.
So much cognitive dissonance going on in your minds.
Comedy about something so serious is extremely unwise to have on Hillsdale Property.
Stephen knows nothing about global warming. Abd it's a shame
@@jeffraemilia Climate change is the biggest hoax ever played on mankind period
@@jeffraemilia
Lol! Are you more educated on the topic than he is? I suspect you didn't even watch this video.
Climate change is somewhat like the Y2K bug.
Anne Mouse
Somewhat? It is except that the conspiracy will not end until the fascist deep state ends. It it's the means to their total control and usurpation of the constitution
Except that the elites weren’t banking on Y2K being used to enslave larger portions of the global population. It’s not enough for the super wealthy to be happy as members of the jet set, whom get what they want by bribing our lawmakers and bureaucrats...but further they can only “feel” more powerful by taking more of your rights and prosperity. (Relativism...it’s a human flaw). But, believe it or not, in private circles, Elites actually talk about population control. Just take a look around...free speech being shutdown all around us... artifacts of our history being removed all around us. Middle East poked continually like a hornets nest, stirring up mass refugee overruns into western societies. Simply : Climate Change is a propaganda weapon added into the “Globalists” war chest. Most of the people posting hear innately know this, just like they know the MSM has become a mass propaganda weapon of the Globalist ...most of what they push is crap, or completely false.
We knew Y2K was coming and prepared for it by adding two century digits to dates, and the crisis was averted. It didn't take broad public understanding to make this happen, just a lot of programmers. The increased frequency of floods and fires is an indication of climate change. Not something you can deny. The campaign of disinformation is well funded and for many it's just easier to ignore it. When insurance companies stop insuring property in coastal and flood-prone areas, and banks will no longer finance mortgages, real estate values will slide down and banks will fail. It's quite logical and predictable. The guy making this speech is paid to mislead the public.
Climate change is like an onion, the more you peel, the more you cry
Yes, but reality is an effective timely insecticide for the Y2K bug, while climate change hysteria can only be extinguished over much longer periods if time. Long enough for politicians and globalists to seduce the masses into believing that dismantling the industrialized world by cutting off its most abundant energy supplies and the economys
If we are reducing carbon emissions or energy independence can we use Edison generators and dynamos power plants and vehicles now ?
"Why is that news?"
Silence from the old hippy
“There is a cult of
ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of
anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our
political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means
that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Issac Asimov
And getting better and better thanks to Biden:
We have come to know less and less of more and more.
Or perhaps rather :
more a more of less and less
Thanks a lot
Biden and Schumer & Pellllosi
I am 72. When I was in high school, I remember reading a 32 point headline in the Philadelphia Inquirer "HEAD SOUTH WITH ALL DUE SPEED, NEW ICE AGE COMING". In the article, it said the new ice age would be here in 10,000 years.
@kcotte59 Sorry, you are thinking of the Enquirer, not the Philadelphia Inquirer
The Philadelphia Inquirer is a morning daily newspaper that serves the Philadelphia metropolitan area of the United States. The newspaper was founded by John R. Walker and John Norvell in June 1829 as The Pennsylvania Inquirer and is the third-oldest surviving daily newspaper in the United States.
It is still being published.
There is an Ice Age coming but from data and very good scientists i heard it more around 80,000 years. But nonetheless it's coming for sure.
@@bruitation Lol don't use the guardian for anything...
I'm 72 also. It infuriates me that my 8 yr. old granddaughter is as anxious and afraid as I was until I found it was all fake ....and can't talk her out of it!
The current Solar Minimum is proving to the Alarmists that the Sun is truly the major driver of heat, not co2
You are correct.the sun is driving the release of co2 from our oceans.and thats a fact.
What Solar Minimum is that . Cycle 24 has less out put but the temperature is rising
heat drives co2 not the other way round
@@johnholmes912 correct, the Ice core samples proved this.
@@grantmyers7593 If I recall correctly from my glaciology class, I think there was on average around a 400 or so year gap between temperature and CO2 level global averages. There is a clear and direct linear correlation between average global temperature and average atmospheric global CO2 levels throughout hundreds of thousands of ice core records, but If I recall correctly, temperature rises before CO2 levels.
The authoritarian climate movement is "...a comic misadventure..."
With Greta being it’s chief comedian. I wish there was an ‘angry looking’ Greta emoji😆
Its no accident, its corporate profit pumping on a scale never before imagined.
Cloud cover increases the temperature in the airspace due to.the trapping of radiant cooling. Carl Sagan was the loudest person explaining Green house effect
.
Are the temperature trends (e.g., "no warming") claimed in this presentation still holding? Or is there in fact now hard evidence for warming?
Not yet
Great question. Why is it so hard to find out the truth either way on these matters?
The last time I talked negatively about "global warming" I was turned on and called a "climate change denier" The propaganda has worked a treat and she is willing to be taxed extra for the issue but where does all this carbon tax money go!?!
The money goes mostly in the back pocket of liberals like al gore, his carbon footprint is ten times average
Where does all the coal and gasoline profit go now? Oh, right. To the people who spend untold fortunes deceiving people like you. You know what they say when you support these poor billionaires and believe their lies. They say, "Bless your heart." They mean that in a secretly Southern way, though on the surface they are thankful for your money.
@@bruzote How can I be deceived by the fossil fuel industry when I am willing to pay them for their services? Services I need to provide fuel for my car to go to work, heat my home, cook my food, etc?
"I really don't know clouds....at all."
Songwriter-singer Joni Mitchell had the insight and humility to write that in her introspective hit song from 1969, "Both Sides Now."
Ha! I'm not advancing a line from a song as a serious argument either way. Back off.
But it's a cute piece of patter for anyone who wants to drop something from pop culture into a skeptical presentation.
The 50s had lots of powerful hurricanes up the East Coast all the way to New England.
11:10 "Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of him which is perfect in knowledge?” Job 37:16
Evidently, man's answer to this question is still "no", but even the question itself ought to have pointed us in the direction of considering the importance of clouds to climate--BEFORE concluding that the sky is falling!
It comes down to the government tells scientist "we want to give you millions of dollars to study global warming, unless of course there is no global warming?"
That's right....follow the money.
And, the American taxpayers are being scammed to the tune of over $22 BILLION per year....
As I have said repeatedly: Anything to extract more money from the masses and give to the rich.
That doesn't mean I don't believe Global warming isn't happening though. However, MOTHER NATURE ALWAYS WINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@@blhbsit1251 I read a story over a year ago about a 10000 year old forest that was discovered during an ice melt. My thought was "who caused global warming over 10000 years ago so that forrest could grow there in the first place?"
Fossil Fuel subsidy
priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2014/11/G20-Fossil-Fuel-Bailout-Full.pdf
www.ecosia.org/search?q=the+%245.3+trillion++a+year+taxpayer+funded+%22subsidy%22
www.vox.com/2015/5/20/8630913/IMf-fossil-fuel-subsidies
The $5.3 trillion a year taxpayer funded subsidy gravy train.
The major funders of the denial industry are the Kochs and Exxon. Nine out of 10 deniers are funded by Exxon alone.
shadowproof.com/2013/12/23/study-major-funders-of-climate-change-denial-identified/
www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/30/covert-operations
While I am definitely a conservative and don't lose much sleep over "global warming", I cannot find a single graph that supports Hayward's statement that global warming "stopped" after 1998. In fact, the graphs I've seen show a definite rise since that time, peaking out in 2016 which was the "hottest" year on record.
"Hottest" by some miniscule fraction of a degree, well within the measurement error. And don't forget the cherry picking of temperature datasets that goes on. Climate science is funded by politicians with agendas, and is not the disinterested pursuit of truth it is purported to be.
Who made the graph?
Then why did they change the name from Global WARMING to climate change?. Because it stopped rising and the CRIMINALS figured out a name to encompass any CLIMATE change to make THEIR GRIFT applicable..
No. It was 30° hotter during the late Paleolithic
@@stevenrichardson3000how was the NY stock exchange doing back then?
When I was in school in the 60s. One of our professors discussed the temperature rise that could happen in the future. It comes in cycles.
he explained that this is a good thing for people living in climate that have winter weather for four or five months of the year. Winters will not be as long or as cold. Peoples gas bills to heat their homes will go down. Gas consumption to heat homes will decrease. The growing season for the food we need will be 120 days instead of 90 days further north .. A slight increase in the carbon dioxide make up of the atmosphere will enhance plant growth, food growth, tree growth, plankton in the ocean growth, which is where we get most of our oxygen, from the ocean, not from trees.. if we depended on just trees for oxygen on this planet, humans would be in trouble because, when trees go dormant and they no longer have leaves, they cannot absorb carbon dioxide without leaves. They do not produce oxygen at night or during their dormant cycle..
trees actually use oxygen at night in the summer when they have leaves, and they produce carbon dioxide at night in the summer when they have leaves.
The overall temperature around the globe has not varied even 1° since the 1940s When Great Britain started to pay very close attention to the weather temps during World War II..
by the way, Japan, Great Britain, and here in November 2021, Finland have committed to going hydrogen for power generation, automotive, industrial, vehicles.. that makes the most sense because, here is a scenario that is true right now..
if every car at this moment in California was an electric car right now. all the power generated in California at this moment from solar, wind, Hydro, fossil fuels, atomic power, all of them right now, could not produce enough power just to charge the cars if they were all electric at this moment.
The world has millions of automobile mechanics trained to work on internal combustion engines. There is a very tiny number of technicians trying to work on electric vehicles right now. If you have an electric vehicle, you cannot take it down to the corner garage to have it worked on. You have to take it to a licensed dealer that have certified mechanics to work on electric vehicles.
on the other hand, a hydrogen burning automobile will have an internal combustion engine, a transmission with a number of speeds to it, it will be very similar to a internal combustion engine that burns gasoline or diesel. So there won’t be a great shock to the system when it comes to servicing hydrogen vehicles. hydrogen vehicles will not need emissions control systems. Can you imagine having a car that the check engine light doesn’t come on because of a glitch in one of the emission control sensors?
when you burn hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. The only things that come out of the exhaust pipe or oxygen, and water.
hydrogen is not a total answer, but it is the best answer they can be implemented without training millions of mechanics to service the vehicles. It’s a no brainer
re hydrogen-fueled vehicles producing oxygen and water: Think of all the portions of the US that have temperatures below freezing for part of the year. Then think of having water (or water vapor) coming out of the tailpipes condensing and then freezing on the ROADWAYS! Have you ever driven on an ice-coated road (say from an ice-storm)? Hair-raising wasn't it! How would you like to drive on roads like that all winter???? Especially on icy, hilly streets like in Duluth, MN!!!!!
Hydrogen is considered to be a worse greenhouse gas than CO2 when it escapes.
@@dragonmartijn
never heard that till right now. Europe is going hydrogen in Great Britain and Sweden. They have already gone all in for that.. it’s funny that the most common elements in the universe hydrogen and helium would be bad for the atmosphere. I wonder who put that story out, A journalist, or someone looking for Clickbait headlines
You forgot that there is nitrogen in the atmosphere and when you use the atmosphere with hydrogen you get different nitrogen compounds, some of which are worse than carbon dioxide. It is not the perfect fuel but is better than gasoline.
I thought hydrogen powered vehicle would use fuel cells and an electric drivechain.
My father used to tell me when the herd is heading in 1 direction, u better turn around because there is a cliff where they are going.
When the Treasurer of the Donor's Capital Fund speaks about science, you know you'll be getting an accurate and unbiased opinion - cough, cough - unaffected by power and money - cough, cough!
Accurate and unbiased indeed! I'm sure the money from the Koch brothers also has noooo bearing on how Hillsdale decides to frame the climate change "debate." lolol Sigh, at least the history department was solid. CCA's were (and apparently remain) a big joke.
@@two_owls And, who is funding the "other side"? Bet there is no agenda there...
Banks now are refusing to give loans to coal mining, insurance companies demanding "climate change" be considered when insuring properties (they don't want to pay out on what used to be natural disasters), multinational companies are pushing the multiculti/diversity crap when hiring staff & the UN IPCC are promoting the climate catastrophe lies. This is UN Globalism interfering in sovereign nations. The West must stop funding them. Resist it while you can.
His statements that global temperature rise has stopped is patently, demonstrably, irrefutably false. It is now 2018, global temperatures set a new record high every year, and continue a trend shown since 1870.
It is now 2019 and your statement is even more true.
ruclips.net/video/-j0ykCVAQVM/видео.html
Am I the only one who remembers the 1970’s when Leonard Nimoy was warning of us of the coming of the Ice Age?
There was never a scientific consensus in the 1970s predicting an imminent ice age the way that there is now a scientific consensus that the total heat content, and therefore the average temperature, of the climate system is increasing due to the increase in atmospheric GHGs (greenhouse gases) due to human activity. There were some media reports in the 1970s claiming that "scientists" were predicting an imminent ice age, which made it sound as if that was the scientific consensus at the time, but whereas there were some peer reviewed scientific papers published in the 1970s predicting an imminent ice age, there were actually more peer reviewed scientific papers published in that decade predicting global warming due to increasing atmospheric GHGs as a result of human activity. At the time, however, there was never a consensus in the scientific community, one way or the other.
The premise of his argument is global temperature increase has paused. In the years following this lecture global temperature increased very significantly. Look at the data.
Quite right. But his argument was also a failure even when it came out.
At 42:30 - he makes fun of the fact that if EPA rules meant that US energy CO2 emissions were cut 30%, it would only cut total US CO2 emissions by 10%, and that this would 'only' cut global temperature rises by 0.02 degrees. He deliberately ignores the fact that energy sector emissions reductions won't be done in isolation, so a similar cut in other areas would mean the total US reduction should be around 30%, which would mean a 0.06 degree reduction in global temperature rises. And that if the rest of the world does similar cuts, the impact would be 0.5 - 1.0 degrees less temperature rise... and given the global temperature rises in a 'do nothing' scenario are around 2.5-3.0 degrees (and would have substantial adverse effects), reducing this by 1/4 or 1/2 is a major step in the right direction. He can make fun of the impacts of the EPA changes as much as he likes, but presenting 'facts' in a deliberately misleading way is academically dishonest.
How refreshing to hear the truth with a bit of comedy, Thank you
Keep turning dirt into concrete and you will keep getting warm temps around your thermometer, toss in more hot roofs, metal roofs, and asphalt roofs just to get a cap on it. Then we can disregard the fact that we radiate heat parallel to both absorption and geothermal production. Let me know when you can model clouds and rain globally and then I suggest your temperature parameters were to variable to actually predict either over time.
Equivalent statement:
"I've always maintained that if the meteorologists can't predict the weather four weeks in the future, then saying that the seasons are due to the tilt in the Earth's axis as it orbits the Sun is not science, it's what I call best estimate."
Al Gore said that the Oceans would rise 12 feet. QUESTION. Why then is ocean property all over the world sky rocketing in value?
And why aren't lower Manhattan, Hong Kong, Monaco or west Berkeley under water yet?
@@billolsen4360 They got it wrong! Through ignorance and faith in the malignant envirofascist movement.
Funny thing in this talk: the speaker says the US emit 20 tons of CO2 per capita and then claims reducing that will take the US back to the early 1900's in terms of wealth … 5 minutes later he uses France (6.5 tons per capita) as an example for how unrealistic the climate change targets are. He apparently does not notice how even his own numbers suggest the US could reduce their CO2 emissions by 67% and still run a country with on top of that health care and solid social security for all and high-speed rail.
It goes to show how these folks construct their arguments: use whatever numbers they can find that fit their narrative and ignore these same numbers wherever they don't fit their narratives. This is ignorance and ideological blindness wrapped in fake legitimacy.
Isn't Americas GDP 20x larger than France's.
You, sir are a tool of the IMF and their great reset agenda. Klaus must be so proud of you!
@@chasl3645 Per capita it's around 30% higher.
France is small, in the middle of a small densely populated continent, which is why their transport carbon emissions are so much smaller than the US's. They've invested massively in nuclear plants, the reason their power generation emissions are so much smaller. They benefit from Gulf stream warming of Europe which reduces the heating costs (compared to North Ameruica). The point is that even if the US could duplicate the French in terms of power generation, other needs like winter heating and transport over long distances preclude them ever getting to the projected 2.5 tonnes per capita in 2050.
The whole thing is moot - CO2 doesn't cause climate change, it's the sun, which affects Everything. Patrick Moore calls the earth's fossil fuel deposits the largest solar battery that ever has or will exist.
Actually, they can be evaluated. If the predicted ground temperatures match, they are good. If the predicted ground temperatures do not match, they are bad. There is a test and the tests prove that their models are failures.
Ice Ages were modulated by ice-sheet albedo, not by CO2
CO2 not necessarily the primary control knob. In reality, the feedback agent modulating ice ages is probably ice-sheet dust-albedo. See my paper “Modulation of Ice Ages by Dust and Albedo”. .
The first problem with ice ages is:
When CO2 concentrations were high the world cooled, and when CO2 was low the world warmed. This counter-intuitive temperature response strongly suggests that CO2 is not the primary feedback agent.
The second problem with ice ages is:
Ice ages are forced by increased Milankovitch insolation in the Northern Hemisphere (NH), but never by increased insolation in the Southern Hemisphere. If CO2 were the primary feedback agent interglacials could and would be forced by increased insolation in either hemisphere, but they are not. The fact that interglacials are only ever NH events, strongly suggests that surface albedo is the primary feedback agent (the great landmasses being in the NH), rather than CO2.
The third problem with ice ages is:
During an ice age, many NH Milankovitch maxima produce little or temperature response. Again, this would be unlikely if CO2 was the primary feedback agent, but it is to be expected if surface albedo was the primary feedback. High albedo ice sheets covered in fresh snow can and will reject the increased insolation from a NH Milankovitch maximum, resulting in little or no temperature response.
Unless, of course, the ice sheets are somehow covered in dust, thus reducing their albedo. Fortuitously, the northern ice sheets do indeed get covered in dust just before each and every interglacial. This is the topic of my ice age modulation paper - the counter-intuitive method of dust production, and its function as the primary feedback agent controlling interglacial warming.
The fourth problem with ice ages is:
The CO2 is a very weak feedback agent indeed. During an interglacial warming era, the CO2 feedback requires warming from decade to decade, to feedback-force temperatures into the next (warmer) decade. Unfortunately the CO2 feedback is only 0.007 W/m2 per decade, which is less energy than a bee requires to fly.
Conversely, reduced albedo ice sheets can absorb an extra 200 W/m2 every single annual year, when measured regionally. Clearly the albedo feedback is far stronger than the proposed CO2 feedback, and could indeed dissipate the vast northern ice sheets in about 6,000 years.
All of the above points strongly suggest that ice sheet albedo is the primary feedback agent modulating interglacials, rather than CO2. …. Increased dust is caused by low CO2 concentrations, because CO2 is plant-food, and the most essential gas in the atmosphere. Thus low CO2 concentrations cause the death of all C3 vegetation at high altitude, causing CO2 deserts to form across the Gobi plateau. Dust from these CO2 deserts formed the huge dust deposits of the Loess Plateau, and also covered the northern ice sheets in dust - which lowered the albedo of the ice sheets and precipitated melting.
Ralph.
I have always maintained that if the Climate Scientists cannot accurately predict the "warming" one decade into the future then its not science its what I call best estimate. Politics and science should be separated like religion and politics and hopefully economics and politics. Politicians do what is popular not what is good for their electorates.
+Rick ZW environmentalism is a religion
I think he's saying that the global warming proponents are full of hot air.
@Bill Carson And yet it continues to warm....SAD!
@Bill Carson Hi messenger ;o) one flaw in all you had to say about the right is this: Who's the POTUS? ruclips.net/video/XMwwq211XZo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/m0sY2tjmr_Y/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/fA5sGtj7QKQ/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/UFHX526NPbE/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RZlICdawHRA/видео.html
Ya think? I believe they are full of something much more dangerous. They are full of hatred for humanity.
@@annemouse6788 Hillsdale is charitably naive in assuming that the left plans to meet its goals with an intact world population. Two options: 1.) Cut back on per capita usage of energy and 2.) Drastically reduce by ~80% the actual numeric "per capita". People haters, pure and simple.
@Linda Hathaway You are a well educated and perceptive individual. You must not have a college degree... At least not in anything like sociology...
Considering how much heat is added to the atmosphere from human activity and added receptors of radiant heat. Large buildings. Blacktop roads, etc. There has been little global warming. Water evaperation removes heat. It's called the latent heat of evaporation. Plus the added clouds and hot air rises. Thhe last time I flew the temperature at 35,000 ft the temp was -60 deg f.
Has the left outlawed greenhouses yet? Or their opening of greenhouse windows?
The student who asks the final question, gives me hope for the future. Alarmists should be as well informed.
+phillip batsch Solar irradiance and oceanic cycles are still being investigated and assessed, not ignored. The assessment currently is that their contribution to the trend over the 100 year period is not significant. I do not hold the student in such high regard because his question appears to imply a lack of investigation or understanding or of ignorance in the climatology community, whereas the ignorance lies entirely within himself.
The "Tesla" comment on not being practical or affordable is what got the like from me. A realist speaker is refreshing to listen to.
You really are a pathetic creature aren't you. A troll.
In B.C. Canada on Vancouver Island & the GVRD we had 6feet of snow in January and in late 50s & early 60s I was skating on local lakes in the winter. Now we hardly ever see any snow in the Lower Mainland.
How much of our present weather: flooding, fires, drought are manmade?!