Freeman Dyson: Climate Change Predictions Are "Absurd" | Freeman J. Dyson | Big Think
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 апр 2012
- Freeman Dyson: Climate Change Predictions Are "Absurd"
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink/youtube
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“We don’t only have to worry about warming,” the physicist argues. “It could very well be the climate gets colder. Nobody knows”-and we waste time arguing when we should be preparing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeman J. Dyson:
Freeman J. Dyson is Professor Emeritus of Mathematical Physics and Astrophysics in the School of Natural Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. He has taught as a professor at the Institute since 1953, prior to which he was a professor for two years at Cornell University. His work on quantum electrodynamics marked an epoch in physics, with the techniques he used in this domain forming the foundation for most modern theoretical work in elementary particle physics and the quantum many-body problem. He is also celebrated as an author on science and related topics; his books include "Disturbing the Universe" (1966), "Weapons and Hope" (1984), "The Scientist as Rebel" (2006), and "A Many-Colored Glass: Reflections on the Place of Life in the Universe" (2007).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Question: How do you currently rate the likelihood of climate catastrophe?
Freeman Dyson: Well that’s a big subject, of course, and I mean I don’t like the word catastrophe. I don’t think there is any catastrophe there, but certainly the climate is changing and that’s important. It’s always been changing. There has never been a time when the climate stayed put for any length of time, and so I would say all the evidence we have is that we’re having some effect on the climate. It’s not clear whether it’s good or bad. It’s not clear whether it’s going to become a catastrophe or not and as far as I’m concerned it’s very foolish to do anything spectacular to… What we should be doing is dealing with the problems in detail. I mean the first thing is we should build dikes around New Orleans, and I mean there are simple practical things we can do which really would help, like building dikes around cities which are exposed to hurricanes or tsunamis and so these kind of practical measures could be enormously helpful. I mean we’ve seen just in the last few months, we’ve seen two big earthquakes, one in Haiti and one in Chile, and what we’ve seen is that the earthquake in Chile was much larger, but the damage actually was smaller, the reason being that Chileans had taken more trouble to build buildings that would resist earthquakes and so you can… it actually helps enormously to strengthen your buildings. Of course I mean Chile has the advantage of being a richer country to start with, but it’s a dramatic proof of what you can do. You can actually take a natural catastrophe and reduce the damage by a factor of 100 or so just by quite simple measures; just by having good building codes and the same is true of climate. There are all sorts of things we can do in a practical way. It’s not -- we don’t only have to worry about warming. We also have to worry about cooling, and it could very well be the climate gets colder. Nobody knows, and there are many things we should be doing to prepare for that and they’re not all that expensive, but what I think is absurd, what I disagree with very strongly, is the idea that climate is predictable, that we can sort of do things 100 years in advance knowing what is going to happen. That is just not… That is just not the way it is.
Recorded March 5th, 2010
Interviewed by Austin Allen
![NOSFERATU - Official Teaser Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters December 25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b59rxDB_JRg/mqdefault.jpg)
The problem with his solution is that it would actually fix the problem. Politicians don't want problems that can be fixed, they want ambiguous wars on things that can never be won so that they can have an endless supply of money going into their pockets
Nonsense. Acid Rain and aluminum mobilization was "fixed" by installing scrubbers on power plant exhausts. Ozone depletion was "fixed" with a ban on chlorofluorocarbons. Organic pollution was "fixed" with wastewater treatment plants. These were all problems that liberals and conservatives together fixed with proper solutions.
His "solution" is to make changes to building codes. Who decides what those are?
Man-made climate change is made up.
🎯
Pretty much
RIP Freeman! Shame your passing got lost in the Corona panic. Deserved a lot of respect and admiration.
the guy just shredded the climate change hysteria which i see as a backdoor for socialism. the UN already a hive of scum and villainy, just wants more power, any more power.
@@carlosrivas1629 not socialism but it is authoritarianism. I don't think you can hardly find any "socialist" nowadays in most western societies, especially in USA whose people keep mixing both terms and I don't know why. And I don't think there's even any "real leftist" in USA because leftist or socialist wishes to get rid of capitalism, but even Bernie Sanders seems not to have much problem with small or medium companies because he is not a "socialist" either but "social democrat".
Doubt it would have been forgotten if he was one of the Woke warriors
@@voronoit4091 socialism is very closely tied to authoritarian minds. The association is very clear.
@@voronoit4091 well it depends on what you define as authoritarianism. If for you, authoritarianism is that you are required to come up for the cost you inflict on society by polluting through either certificates or (mostly low/moderate) taxes, then sure.
Ah, the marvel of doing things that are actually relevant, needed, and useful.
Yes, and so is reducing CO2 emissions or the problem gets worse, requiring more infrastructure and mass migration.
@@Gladescatwhy do you want to reduce gas that helps you grow bigger crops? Why do you want to spread deserts?
@@pamukpicker `It's not about the crops, it's about their pollinators. If you just want to grow corn, then fine.
@@Gladescat pollinators are being killed with pesticides, nothing to do with any emissions. But you cant have perfectly shaped red apple without chemicals so we eat poison instead of few worms and bugs cant handle poison like us.
@@pamukpicker Don't worry about plants. Worry about their pollinators.
RIP Freeman Dyson, the sad loss of a brilliant mind.
He sure was brilliant, but he's better off leaving this lying, cheating, virtue signalling, hypocritical, LGBTQ+, woke, narcissistic, climate change exaggerated, f**king world that the rest of us have to deal with.
R.I.P Freeman Dyson!
Excellent man - never seen on the BBC.
Television is just a propaganda box now. You can literally get no useful information from it. I will never allow one in my home.
Increasingly many sites, such as this one, is also devolving into propaganda. There will be more.
No.
Even the BBC aren't that crazy.
Very smart man who was mentioned in one of my favorite TNG episodes, In Theory. Wish we had more scientists like you Dr. Dyson.
He's the Dyson Sphere guy?
I watched a lot of Star Trek growing up.
Who am I kidding, I still watch a lot of Star Trek.
@@JB-1138 Yes, he is the Dyson Sphere guy. He was the last living 20th century great physicist. And as a real physicist he wold never be in this "global warming" scam.
he is a genius without the useless Phd that is like a boat anchor to so many scientists
Just read an article that Mauritius will be under water in 30 years time. I also read a similar article from 1986 with the same prediction. In the meantime, the population has doubled (you would expect them to have left) and they have built a new airport (how did they get finance?). The market for virtue-signalling is now crowded, the only way you can be heard is to come up with a more shrill prediction.
Same with Maldives - should be under water in 2018. But they build new airports and the territory is growing. Wiki says they will drown in 2100 now.
@@geokrilov too bad wiki is unlikely to be around in 2100 to witness the (non)event.
Sadly, government’s first reaction is to do something foolish!!
Dyson might not be a climatologist, but he (as a mathematician) certainly knows about models, differential equations, and chaos systems all of which are relevant to climatology.
Don't use such big words on the True Believers. They struggle with "dog" and "cat".
@@ZilogBob Dyson Sphere.
If Freeman Dyson isn't a climatologist, then climatology isn't a valid field of scientific research. I've certainly never heard the term. Who was the first person to write a paper that details the distinguishing property of physics that justifies creating a new tier of scientific authority called "climatology?" Because, I have an answer to that question, it's a scientist who developed an original best-case model for modulating climate change, and his name is Freeman Dyson. That scientists is the person featured as the primary speaker in this video.
_"Models, differential equations, and chaos systems all of which are relevant to climatology. "_
**[Citation needed.]**
I would appreciate it if someone would link me the contact information for a professional climatologist, who either has papers published or an educational background in applied mathematics, linear or otherwise. I honestly do not believe such a profession exists in academia, but I'll allow you to prove me wrong, if I am, by citing references for your claims.
Most people dont know this, but Dr. Dyson was pretty involved in putting together the precurser models that are used currently. He in that aspect is one of the forefathers of climatology. So when it comes to this subject, I take his opinion very seriously.
As a mathematical physicist, I'm embarrassed for Dyson. He's way off the mark with these comments...
Imagine calling Dyson a “climate denier” because of this
That's exactly what the WOKE pieces of sh*t would call him, because since they are incapable of thinking for themselves and/or participating in a mature debate to express their point of view, it's much easier for them to resort to name-calling or just ignore the facts. Woke bullshit is ruining life on earth as we know it.
Rest in piece you incredible and amazing man. May you rest peacefully, genius.
And btw, to people on both sides of this issue, please notice his humility, despite being a true legend who has been compared to Albert Einstein.
There's nothing humble about being contrarian for the sake of it about a subject with huge implications, especially when he even acknowledges that he knows eff all about it.
He actually speaks the language of science, unlike the doomsdayers who speak the language of religion.
@@nerdyali4154 He has been more intimately involved in climate science long before all of the current political BS. He was doing research back in the 60's.
ruclips.net/video/JTSxubKfTBU/видео.html
@@nerdyali4154 - he wasn’t being contrarian for the sake of it. He was pointing out that there are still so many unknowns about the recent changes in our climate. This approach is preferable BY FAR to the certainty displayed by that fat- headed know nothing Al Gore. According to his arrogant pronouncements, the Arctic was to be ice-free by summer 2013.
Don't forget that he put the squabbling between Feynman, Tomonaga and Schwinger to rest much the same way Dirac did with Heisenberg and Schrodinger.
I first heard this man's name back in 1992 on Star Trek: The Next Generation. His ideas expanded my own mind and imagination. Thankyou for your life's work.
The “Dyson Sphere” was not even a concept he created-it came from a science fiction novel that Dyson read as a teenager: “The Star Maker” by Olaf Stapledon.
Such a brillant man who deserves to be listened to and respected.
About his own field of expertise yes, but not about climate science, which is NOT his field.
OK....the Physik have Changes in the last 50 years. Pleased explain whats new ?
@@danielu.4957 when's the last time you hired a lanscape gardener to install a power outlet??
Yea, I didn't think so.
@@ceist8552 - Climatologists are people who conduct basic research on the Earth’s climate system, which involves devising hypotheses, designing experiments, producing models and simulations, gathering data, and publishing papers about their results.
But scientific studies are published in public journals so people from diverse backgrounds have access to them in order to critique them. Smart people with technical training are capable of analyzing and criticizing work from other fields.
The laws of physics are the same for everybody. Climatologists as well as engineers study and use thermodynamics, EM-radiation, fluid mechanics, organic chemistry, atmospheric science, numerical modeling, finite element analysis, statistics, etc. Climate science is not some hermetically sealed discipline.
@@ceist8552 With his level, every field is accessible with a little bit of research.
*Massive tornado* hits Illinois, Indiana and Missouri ... one of a series of *12* 😮 ... it killed 800 people and injures over 2000 .... A TORNADO IN MARCH!! The funnel lasted 5 hours!!!
(Oops, that was in 1925.)
bgt63 lol
don't tell al gore, he might have to give back his unearned nobel prize.
@@lloydstanding46 I think you might be onto something about this 'giving them back' thing...
Love your remark
@73dodgedartsport Actually the occurrence of tornadoes is a thing that is quite odd in that they repeat paths and are not generally whole areas. I have some experience with this and telling you a story from my life will drive this home.
I was on a date: We walked to the top of a local mountain (Capshaw Mt) in Harvest Al. The day was Saturday. I got asked by the girl if the area got Hurricanes. (Rarely) but I said we do get tornadoes. I then observed conditions and said about Wednesday Evening when that front comes in, there should be a big tornado at Airport Road and Memorial Parkway. I didn't tell her I was using both current observations and solar cycles. That Wednesday night a tornado did as I said and there is a monument to 43 people killed. Killed the romance....
The District 4 county shed Madison County has been removed 4 times by tornadoes. I think that people do not understand these storms well and if you do, you can deal with them well. RULE #1 Do not build where a major tornado has been before it will come again. The period is 2 solar cycles. Actually most of the area is quite immune. You can buy land and live well right next to the old paths as a 100 yards is too far to be bothered. OK have fun with this I am sure some people will get upset by this but it gives real hints as to how these storms function.
RIP this wonderful scientist
Anyone ever noticed that whenever you see a video going against the climate narrative, some stupid advert appears directly underneath the video or preceding it saying the exact opposite?
The propaganda is more suspicious than the science, frankly.
The whole climate change/ global warming band wagon reminds me of the movie ' Idiocracy'.
* documentary
Ignore the alarmist bandwagon and look at the science. Ignore the hockey stick "handle" and focus on the "blade." What's causing this rise if it isn't GHG emissions? The problem skeptics have is they have no working hypotheses to explain warming over the past 60 years. What happened in the past is largely irrelevant to what's happening now.
This will age like fine milk
But it's got electrolytes?!
@@lorrainegatanianhits8331Brawndo the thirst mutilator.
"A climate scientist making a statement about uncertainty or degree of doubt in the climate debate is categorized as a denier or a ‘merchant of doubt,’ whose motives are assumed to be ideological or motivated by funding from the fossil fuel industry. My own experience in publicly discussing concerns about how uncertainty is characterized by the IPCC has resulted in my being labeled as a ‘climate heretic' that has turned against my colleagues."
"There is enormous pressure for climate scientists to conform to the so-called consensus. This pressure comes not only from politicians, but from federal funding agencies, universities and professional societies, and scientists themselves who are green activists and advocates. Reinforcing this consensus are strong monetary, reputational, and authority interests. As a result, I have become very concerned about the integrity of climate science."
Professor Judith Curry, Climatologist
It is obvious to those with eyes to see, that the cudgel of "Climate Change/Global Warming" is a powerful weapon, allowing control of land use, housing, energy, natural resources, agriculture, transportation, industry...almost any human endeavor imaginable.
This weapon of control of "everything" is something that governments and their vast bureaucracies want very badly. That kind of complete control has been their goal for decades.
Add to that, the "Crusader Effect" generated among all Leftist's, but particularly powerful among gullible young people; making them zealous pawns of their Green-Socialist masters.
“Going Green” went off the Loony-Tunes Track a long way back...
Richard Schaefer put simply people are being manipulated by those with agendas, what’s new? In the 1970s we were told oil was running out... it hasn’t How can you tell they are lying ? there is absolutely no ups in their prognosis where there always will be some benefits from change.. fear mongers peddling guilt and fear..
Well said.
I really hope your views on this have changed now as it is becoming increasingly obvious that it is a catastrophe.
But maybe it will take next years catastrophic wild fire, heatwave or drought for you to see that, or maybe a few more. But by that point it will be way too late. We can all do something about this, we just need to accept it as a reality and fight against it.
There are hundreds of scientists, who don't receive huge "controlling" grants, who do not see global warming as anything abnormal; but just another cycle in a very long history and pre-history of warming and cooling.
Keep in mind that lots of stuff grows in industrial greenhouses, larger than a football field, with C02 levels nearly twice as high as atmospheric levels. These greenhouses produce nearly twice as much food per sq.meter as outside. The growing season is year-round and people work in them 24/7 without ill effect.
Tell you what, I'll spend 10 days in a greenhouse eating food grown there, breathing twice the CO2 as outside air, and you try the same experience on an iceberg. Make your will out, because you will be dead in a few hours.
Finally, an actual scientist with a working brain telling the truth. Thank you Mr. Dyson
Too bad he was wrong
Is he a good scientist because he is saying what you want to hear?
@@natbrownizzle1387 Dyson would be over 100 yrs old today... He knew when he made this he wouldnt be around to suffer from climate change.... If he had real science to prove his pt then why is he making youtube videos instead of showing his science???
@@natbrownizzle1387 OMG U try to protect and misrepresent an ongoing threat and you are failing at it miserably. Dawson is a well know denier not because he denies that GW is man made and happening.... Even he cant deny the basic physics of that... He denies that its bad... Its the nonsense that isnt a greener plant a happier one ? The real answer is NO !!! We eat and we need plants to survive.... We cant eat moss and algae that love a hotter wetter far fewer mammalian life planet...
Thanks for the laugh on your Trump plan to ' clean the forest plan " Oh ya because fires dont burn better just because it has dried out from several yrs and yrs of drought... Who ever heard of such a crazy idea... I suppose hottest EVER heat wave is just another coincidence too huh ? U might not have the common sense to tell you that the food your Mom buys for you at the store that actually has to be grown outside 1st ! Imagine that, and who knew right ? Anyway they actually grow much less of it when it gets too hot... Ppl living in cities with no understanding of how anything survives and having not even BASIC knowledge of how a bio system works are in for a HUGE shock ! Its not YOU (its always all about you isnt it) I'm try to destroy... Its about our planet that we want to SAVE !!!
@@natbrownizzle1387 Of course there is no modeling that EXACTLY predicts what the climate will be ! Because climate (like anything else) depends a lot upon human behavior to it !!! Which is why best case and worst case scenarios R always given on and the outcome has always fallen between these 2 things...
Building a New Orleans sea wall wont stop climate change it will be luck to stop the surge damage only... A hurricane is much more than that..
U must be a MAGA lover because only Trump would look at forest fire and pretend that it has nothing to do with dryness from yr after yr of drought... Australia is one big drought from climate change... Here is news to you, when its dry it burns, it burns A LOT more than if it werent dry... U can deny all you want but when its 115 in Oklahoma a temp NEVER EVER seen before and youre going to pretend thats just random... Besides the simple basic laws of physics telling us it will get warmer from too much CO2... Its simple common sense that we see droughts everywhere, record heat all over the globe and a great extinction happening right now and this is an over all plus to U ? This guy is a theorist with no practical understanding of how biology is about BALANCE...
Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it's rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have."
Ignore the alarmists and be suspicious of the media. Follow the published science. The scientists are upset because skeptics criticize "warmers" but skeptics cannot explain why we're warming if it isn't GHG emissions. Skeptics erect straw men and toss out irrelevant arguments to the problem at hand. Where's the missing variables and hypothesis that counter the Greenhouse gas hypothesis? We've been waiting for decades now for skeptics to produce one. *Crickets*
I am sure that Dyson would have appreciate critcism from uninformed people too.
I do not know which date he said that. 20 years ago?
Dear, ithinkwithmyliver: thank you being so honest about how you feel. You are an excellent example of what is wrong with the climate change argument, on both sides of the issue. Love, Fred.
Exactly, on both sides … fully agree
“Climate change argument”, what argument?
It seems the climate change debate has become tribal. What it’s got to do with the left or right of politics.
What's interesting is that the politics who supposedly buy this shit bring in people from low IQ areas who couldn't care less about the issue. Also fly around in private jets, buy property on the sea. Very logical and consistent.
John Ramsden The IPCC is a UN governmental body that attempts to produce science. Funding is tied to the production of science that fits the political ideology of the UN ie the transfer of wealth from rich to poor.
@JT that’s far fetched . Pollution is bad. coral reefs are almost gone/ Rain Forest half gone. / oils spill disasters are part of it.
environmental laws at least slowed it down .
to argue argue about climate change is a way for the biggest polluters to buy more time for more profit,
It shouldn’t be political. but i think it has become so because the biggest polluters have their hands in the pockets of Republicans more than they do with Democrats.
They longer the debate the more time to maximize profit. environmental laws cost the polluters. Some day all of us have to agree on priority .
Control and tyranny.
R.I.P. I miss your clever mind in the era of idiotic fanatism.
He did not have a Ph.D so was not trained in 'what to think' he obviously taught himself well in 'how to think' and could think outside of the box. Practical thinking at its best.
And you, I assume, are a master of this, practical thinking?
@@abadjoke6169 No, I have a far higher IQ than 90% of those around myself which is next to worthless, I am master of 'nothing' and am no 'expert' either however, I do understand actual 'truth', 'reality' and human consciousness and what makes humans 'tick' deeper than many ever will. I wish you well.
@@stephennixey He did not have a Ph.D? Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't a Ph.D require you to think for yourself and to come up with new ideas unlike your standard masters degree?
@@shanecarlson1057 In short, all too often academia leads us into a vicarious mental 'box' of illusory 'belief'! Thinking 'freely' is not what most people 'think'. Academia often teaches us what to think and not how to think as we are all unique individuals however, nowadays looking around myself I see various groups of people all thinking the same thing, attached to the same things , telling me that I am 'wrong' and they are 'right' 🙂 again I question how would one know anything that is 'true' over being 'right' or 'wrong'? (as what is wrong to some is right for others) that is what attachment and belief is about not what truth is about. Nowadays far too many humans want to belong to a 'philosophical gang' 🙂of being 'right' and doing the moralistically right thing where none of that has anything to do with actual 'truth' or 'reality'. Intellect is often used as a weapon against others and again it is often fake and illusory due to the personal subjectivity of any debate.
One open example is psychiatry and the scam of 'chemical imbalance' nothing provable and all based in vicarious academic 'belief' with all the 'apparent' and illusory realities attached and the industry passes out damaging medications to unwitting victims.
I wish you well.
A man of his time
This man is a STUD
Always good to hear the thoughts of an actual scientist on the topic.
Freeman Dyson had no papers published on climate related matters, no expertise in the subject and merely repeated false and comprehensively debunked myths that had previously been churned out by think tanks financed by fossil fuel companies.
@@Tengooda No expertise?? Who is YOUR idea of a scientist that does "expertise" in climate related matters and what are their qualifications. Can't wait to see your answer, if you dare try. Hopefully, Bill Nye the science guy is not your cup of tea either.
@@wade5941 Expertise in scientific matters is established by publishing papers in reputable scientific journals particularly if they are then cited (ie referred to as sources of information) by other scientists in their field.
Freeman Dyson was a physicist with acknowledged expertise, and numerous published papers, in the field of quantum mechanics, particularly quantum electrodynamics. He has had no papers published in the field of climate science or indeed any related subject (eg meteorology, geology, palaeoclimatology or indeed any subject that could be describes as relating to the environment) nor did he study such subjects.
Dyson's pronouncements in the field of climate science are frankly ridiculous and childish in their simplicity. AS I stated above, he merely repeats long debunked myths with no scientific credibility.
You apparently want to believe that Dyson does have expertise in climate science but you will not be able to mention a single published contribution to that subject.
Quite why Dyson allowed himself to sully his previous scientific reputation with his absurd statements about climate science in the last decade or so of his life is an interesting question, but one I cannot answer. I suspect it was a mixture of arrogance (believing that because he had expertise in one narrow field, he didn't need to try to understand another unrelated and quite different field) and possibly dementia, both spurred on by his political convictions.
As for your request for climate scientists: they are too numerous to mention, but off the top of head (and I'm sure leaving out many that deserve mention): Peter Ward, Michael Benton, Eric Rignot, Stefan Rahmstorf, Trenberth, Gavin Schmidt, Eric Steig, Michael Mann, James Hansen, Grant Foster, Ray Pierrehumbert, David Archer ... and many many more. I can't be bothered to write down any more. You can look up their qualifications yourself, if you are really interested, which I doubt.
@@Tengooda I would put Freeman Dyson's education and background up against anyone when it relates to the physics of climate change. He is orders of magnitude brighter than most scientists working in the field of climate. I am well aware of all the names you mentioned and expected you to list them. You left out a few...James Christy, Roy Spencer, Richard Lindzen, Peter Rudd, Bjorn Lomborg, Kiminori Itoh, Will Happer, Ian Pilmer, Judith Curry,… Give me an example of one of Dyson's long debunked pronouncement and how it was debunked. Just one will do.
@@Tengooda the nerve you got from dismissing the opinion of that scientist based on how he got no credibility in that field while you are a nobody who published nothing whatsoever , parade on internet about how right you are about a field you have no authority on it and does not mind the lack of credentials someone got as long as he rub you the right way . You are a drone .
What he is saying is management is more effective than science. True. Only ask a scientist “what is it?”, never ask them “ what should we do?”
Do both and more so you are better prepared and able to manage it
That is an utter nonsensical statement and absolutely not what he was saying. “Management” completely relies on science.
@@LomuHabana science is a part of management, not entirely dependant
@@Mambojambo157 well, then, give a definition of management.
@@LomuHabana management considers factors such as science, economics, social, political, risk and unknowns, priorities, to achieve a desired outcome that produces benefits and minimises costs deemed as relevant
If the science is settled what point is there in funding for any further research.
To cure your stupi8dity.
@@boffeycn Then use your own money.
@@samthegreekboy6812 I don't need to but you do. Germ Theory was setted rather a long time ago so presumably we should have stopped there? No medical research needed whatsoever.
Similarly with electromagnetism, thermodynamics, aerodynamics, nuclear power and so on.
Why don’t you try using your brain? It’s very easy, you just stick a finger up a nostril and go “click”
There, fixed that for you.
That still doesn't mean we shouldn't be striving to clean up our act, e.g stop the deluge of plastics flushing into the oceans; limit the pillaging and decimation of rainforests, stop overfishing of the oceans etc. We can build stronger buildings, build higher walls and devise the band-aid solutions you advocate. But humanity should always strive to make the world a fair place for other species to survive, doing our very best to minimise pain and suffering where possible. If it means creating cleaner and less intrusive energy industries which may be expensive initially, in the long run, how much more sustainable would that be?
First resonable comment I saw. Took way too long to scroll :(
Yet you never hear climate change alarmists talking about cleaning up oceans or stopping the pillaging of any other resources besides fossil fuels. Which incidentally are keeping people alive and functioning at the present period in time.
We haven’t proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that higher CO2 causes warming. In fact many scientists believe it’s the other way around.
So until one of those esteemed scientists comes up with a reasonable successful way to heat homes and starts actually suggesting we clean up our act starting with ocean and air pollution, I’ll wait.
The carbon tax will be used for everything except cleaning the envornonment like paying off the debt.
Right on the point. Its all cheating. Amazing that so many people do not see this obious fakt. Suddenly many believe in mainstreampropaganda and the good will of moneydominated Goverments. Maurice Strong invented Co2 Certifikatetrade. A Coal and Oilmagnat of the strongest.
That is what a true genius looks like, and a decent person with it.
Too bad he was wrong
A beautiful person from what I've seen
geniuses don't deny climate change without evidence. LMAO.
@@zeyadsaeed9580 Science doesn't work like that (or law). The proponent has to justify their hypothesis before it becomes a theory. This has not happened for climate change. It's their side who need to provide sufficient evidence but they have seriously failed to.
@@kevinnielsen1356 No, everything he says is correct.
What a truly GREAT man!
As a 19 year old, used Maths to plan how the Royal Air Force could best stop German bombers.
Slightly older, worked on the physics of the Manhattan Project; made great contributions to Quantum Theory; worked on the US Space Program.
The only reason he didn't get a Nobel Prize was that he did TOO MUCH!
Dysons rebuttal has more to do with the failure of Statistics and probability than with climate change. Some in the comments have never went beyond Algebra and have never fully immersed themselves into the study of probability theory,which is where most of these climate change predictions stem from. Just because you throw in some fancy mathematics into your area of study doesn't make it objective.
Moron, speak for yourself.
They actually stem from solutions of partial differential equations, many of which rely heavily on getting the initial and boundary condition perfectly right for the prediction to be within acceptable margins (Check Dynamical Equations). You can't make wide ranging prediction about climate based on limited statistical data. Of course, this is all assuming that the current equations are right which is rarely true as they are continuously modified, refined and very often replaced.
The cause of faillure is systemic error
Thanks for your equations on electromagnetism Mr. Maxwell!
Math is absolutely objective
Many people have this level of intelligence. I am not one of those people. What impresses me more is his courage and willingness to speak up and speak out.
Just because you have a PHD doesn't mean $hit...
"I don't give a damn about your degree" - Elon Musk
Yes. Take practical precautions. CO2 does not control climate. Ocean warming since the little ice age has caused the CO2 concentration in the air to rise but it takes time for the oceans to warm. The 4% contribution compared to other natural sources of CO2 released by man each year has caused local greening of the planet which is visible by satellite. More local plant growth.
The statement CO2 does not control climate is a false statement .. there is a correlation between CO2 concentrations and ice ages it's all in the physical record, his overall statement that climate is non-linear is true, however, this doesn't mean we can't make .. Good Guesses
@@aidanmargarson8910 There is a correlation. Is CO2 causing warmer temperatures? Or are warmer temperatures causing CO2?
@@kenmarriott5772 my understanding and my memory is not the sharp focus of 20 years ago, so when the formation of rocks swallowed the free CO2 in the atmosphere we had snowball earth, this coincided with the earth's orbit being such that we would have had an ice age at that time, in any case but the absence of a percentage of CO2 acted to make it much more extreme, now today according to the established cycle we are heading into *in the 10000 year range, an ice age at so hence one would argue that increasing the concentration of CO2 *and the shear volume of CO2 being released into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution is warming the atmosphere, this warming is actually leading to the current release of methane from the permafrost regions and indeed the beings of the release of methane and other gasses from the methane hydrate deposits in the oceans. *which may well be the last tipping point *having trained in Mathematical modelling at uni and understanding how tipping points actually work
@@kenmarriott5772 CO2 absorbs infrared radiation. CO2 causes warmer temperatures.
@@jacp5628 in the 70s, CO2 was blamed for global cooling. Is that why the IPCC was named “Climate Change”? They couldn’t say if more CO2 makes it cooler or warmer. My money is the big white fluffy clouds of water trumps any CO2 effect.
Man do we need people like him now
That aged well... 🤣🤣🤣
No sense in funding a research if the science has been settled, we can use the money for something else.
Science is never settled? Science is always a proposal once proven wrong, another theory will be correct but will then be proven wrong and so on until you could no longer prove it.
@@JerryTheSlime0 science is wrong sometimes?!? Yup... then you science is really just money.
One of THE greatest minds of the 20th Century!
At 19 he was using Maths for the RAF to predict where German bombing raids would target mext.
Then in WW2 he worked at Los Alamos, then on the H-Bomb ... meanwhile making important contributions to Quantum Theory!
Died aged 99!
Seems like he's advocating using our current energy production as a means to the end of adapting to changing conditions in the face of our inability to predict or alter the changes that will take place. Seems quite reasonable to me.
We'll definitely what he's not talking about is building solar panels and wind generating Farms they're very expensive more toxic to the environment than nuclear energy, wind farms kill hundreds of thousands of birds every year and these are migratory birds birds that are protected by the federal government, huge solar Farms out in the desert what size do your transmission lines have to be if you're going to provide solar energy to the Earth, they would be huge and they would be expensive. Also solar panels again are very toxic to the environment they might be okay for a individual home but to build huge fields and Farms of these is simply insanity, throwing too much money at something that may not be an alarm is simply weird, we don't know what's going to happen to the climate in the next hundred years we simply don't it changes all the time so don't say this guy's saying are green with practical changes there's nothing we can really do to change the climate for just man and we hardly emit enough CO2 to have any effect on this planet's climate when man only contributes less than 3% of CO2 Emissions on Earth and the rest are natural occurring grow up people. Listen to the politicians and the alarmists who want to spend our money and effect other countries ability you climb up to these successful ladder of civilization...
@@trentvo2736 Well stated. All of us are still waiting for the alarmists to show us a period in history and a CO2 level that provided a safe environment free of natural disasters and droughts and floods, etc.
They imagine that such a state can be brought into existence by some means or another, as a means of seeking relief from their existential anxiety over so much that cannot be controlled in this life. And there's always a lot of money to be made by selling the illusion of a light at the end of a tunnel.
I'll bet the three of you drive vehicles that get less then 30mpg
CO2 is not warming the planet. If the IPCC ‘s claims were correct, greenhouses with 1200ppm, would be 6 degrees warmer than those at 410ppm, but that is simply not the case. There is no observable increase in temperatures for higher CO2 level environments. It would also be like having a free energy production which would have already been exploited, if CO2 retained heat like they claim. Also, it is the warmer temperature causing CO2 to be released from the ocean, not CO2 causing warming of the temperature. Warmer temperatures cause the ocean to release CO2 just like a warm beer releases CO2 and explodes or goes flat(if open). If CO2 caused warming as well as warming causing CO2 release, then the earth would be in a vicious cycle of never ending warming, but that is simply not the case. We would be a planet of hell. This CO2 causes warming theory is simply not true. The whole thing is a scam to change the monetary systems as well as implement control systems-all of which I really Hope does not happen because it is nightmarish. People don’t seem to be able to get a grip on what the elite are planning. Too many people are incredibly gullible and naive regarding all of this.
6400 BC Climate Change Disaster happened, remember when Henry Ford of Akkad invented the Akkad T?
CO2 does have an influence. It's just that the influence of water is hundreds of times more powerful, and that's just the vapor in the atmosphere. Evaporation absorbs heat from the ocean, and releases it when it condenses into clouds many kilometers up. Raindrops are cold because it is the return cycle of a heatpump that moves heat from the bottom and emits it to space.
Anyone who calls it "Simple Science" is repeating propaganda. Clearly they haven't done the differential equations.
True it doesn’t have a great effect but it is harmful to human health. I mean the planet will survive what we throw at it long before it dies. In fact we will die before the Earth dies if humanity continues onto a path of destruction against itself.
That is going by if a sudden change isn’t to be made to change the trajectory of how humanity advances itself in the future.
I certainly don’t worry about their predictions or any future of how things advance as it is far away from my lifetime however I do believe people should change for the better that is if we want humanity to survive and progress towards a greater future.
It all depends on how society and people take it all together as a whole and what the results end up to be
@@apuapustaja1958 I assume that English isn’t your first language so learn it better to better explain whatever it is you are trying to say as none of that makes sense or even points towards anything true
@@c.galindo9639 it took you 9 months to figure out that you have not a clue about this planet's and humanity's history and instead of admitting it you write a sassy comment to veil your ignorance.
It is alright, nobody cares about your ego on the internet except you.
I work in London and recently our illustrious "mayor" introduced a ulez zone banning all vehicles fron central London on account of the emmissions they produce in order to clean up the air pollution that contributes to "global warming"
funny thing is that you can still drive your crappy vehicle into central London if you pay a fee so can someone please enlighten me as to how this is supposed to help our environment because I see this as just another tax
1. It reduces the number of crappy vehicles brought into London. 2. The fee _could_ be used to plant trees, to offset the CO2 generated by the crappy vehicle. (I don't know if it is.)
@@ilikethisnamebetter take it from me it doesnt reduce the crappy vehicles and trees yeah right ?
@@michaelreynolds6543 Er, no, I won't "take it from" you, yeah right?
@@ilikethisnamebetter whatever!
@@ilikethisnamebetter Trees wont make a substantial difference and the fine wont make a substantial difference. A ban would make a difference but it would not increase revenue for the interested party.
It’s not because the climat is not predictable that we cannot predict the effect of greenhouse gaz on the climat.
I love this man. Finally some common sense.
If all scientists, politicians and law enforcements were to graduate from the university of common scenes," if we had such a thing" we would have a better world.
Too bad he was wrong
@@kevinnielsen1356 wrong about what?
@@rideon6839 about dicounting the devastation climate change is wreaking upon humanity
That's not what he said and you know it. You paid billionaires shill. He said climate DOES change, but human activity is only responsible for less than 1% of that change. Dozens of natural factors like..erm..the sun cycles are much bigger factors.
I acknowledge that there are different fields of science and that scientists specialize in said fields. The problem comes from the difference in opinion. You say: they have no right to comment on any other science than that of their specialization. I say: they (and any other person protected under the first amendment) have the right to comment on anything they please - whether they be right or wrong.
The Thames Barrier prevented floods from sea water 5 times in its first 10 years
Nowadays it's 30 times in 10 years
Could anyone has an answer, why BBC has not aired Freeman Dyson? can not find any video published by BBC?
Because he doesn't spout the nonsense narrative
BBC has gone woke long time ago. London has fallen.
@@geokrilov Such a shame to go backwards. cheers
Dyson's views got caught up and distorted by the politicization of various competing interest groups he was trying to highlight as a problem. He was not and never has been a climate change denier-he's just saying that so much of the polemic about climate change is clearly sensationalist and alarmist and this is having a negative net impact on awareness of the real issues involved with natural disasters and climate. (Many of which have more to do with sociological problems and corrupt leadership than people driving gasoline powered cars.) The emotive headlines about countries being inundated by rising oceans and eternal winters has neither led to increased public awareness for the stated problems or widespread pressure on leadership worldwide to curtail actual sources of pollution (which are overwhelmingly corporations and not common people). The screaming routines from both sides have simply become static-more noise-clogging already noisy lines of communication in a privatized and myopic media industry that most people can sense has no relevance to their daily lives and the problems involved therein. The only accomplishments of this have been-quite visibly-symbolic hashtag moments and feelgood slogans that do nothing to avert the dangers many people are indeed facing from the Earth's climate cycles. Ignorance of these problems has only been getting worse and the way in which western media has attempted to capitalize on climate change buzz has only been a disservice to the people facing real problems from it.
Anyone who throws down the “denier” label loses credibility out of the gate. Who is denying the existence of climate (climate denier) or who is denying the climate changes (4 seasons)(climate change denier). These tactics are disingenuous.
I stopped reading at "climate change denier"
Captain Hawkeye, that was a gem of a comment.
There were times only few people knows about sun eclipse, and there are those who exploiting it by creating fear to those who does not know about sun eclipse.
Gin,
Tony Heller is sometimes shadow-banned on RUclips. I wrote an article on this. You can easily find it on the website of my Stanford University office.
I use Heller's simple temperature graph code generation as an example of poor science from a self-proclaimed expert. Even middle school students understand within 10 minutes that you cannot use simple averages of raw temperature. His ignorance of gridding is both astounding and embarrassing. It's why Heller's simple code shows cooling in the US (wrong) and an incredible 9°F warming in Webster Europe since 1895 (also wrong). If Heller were to attend a college science class he may as well buy some red sharpies and write a large F over the front page and save himself the embarrassment of having an expert read his garbage.
It's also fun to watch as he posts old pics of shorelines, claiming there is no sea level rise. Tony does not know the tide at the time the photos were taken, so using Heller "logic" I can prove that the ocean levels are 30 feet higher today than they were yesterday using this method, using pics, at the Bay of Fundy. No wait, they might be 30 feet lower. Let me check again...
The strange thing extremist Climate alarmists is that they're more concerned about a possible future than a definite present (or near future). They seem to be more concerned about a catastrophic future for our children or grandchildren than they are for the people who are suffereing right now due to extreme weather events (whether due to man made climate change or not)
Very much like a religious cult selling doom to believers.
Finally someone that has some practical ideas instead of just spreading fear :)
Well, this video is over seven years old; and the world has all but ended right? No more polar bears. All large costal cities are indeed underwater; mass world wide starvation, and freezing.
A message to the alarmists from 2012, I am so sorry that I ever doubted yourintentions.
You're not the brightest are you?😊
That was not the time for the predictions, but yes, it has already started. Some areas are unhibaitavle, I have been feeling ill due to heat and food inflation is here due to these issues
He's talking about building resilience into infrastructure.
Ive given up on worrying about CC. Inertia in economic and ecological systems means we’re pretty much locked in. So enjoy the ride.
We have climate change right now. Spring is right on schedule. The sun is the major influence of the planet's climate. It's all about cycles and sun influence. It's not about taxing people for breathing.
The sun is what warms our planet, so what happens when we put more molecules into our atmosphere which absorb more of the infrared radiation from our sun? Carbon dioxide is one of those molecules.
preposterous. noone taxes for breathing. what an absurd simplification. also do you think climate scientists are major idiots and dont consider natural cycles and sun influence? they did and they contradict your statement.
It is true. We as humans cannot know what climate will be like and it has gone through many many changes throughout the Earth’s existence.
The only thing that is certain about the effects man puts on the planet is our quality of atmospheric air to breathe, polluting our drinkable water sources, trashing the planet with our waste whether it be biological, chemical, or some other form of waste, and finally how we will deplete our resources in the next couple centuries or so and would go back to square one with how to innovate a new technology to help sustain our civilization.
The man is smart in pointing out that there are ways to engineer and prepare for what nature’s forces puts against people as the inhabitants of Earth are like any other life form on the planet. At the mercy of the elements.
We are not even close to any type of technological advancements to control or affect whether to a near certainty. Nature is way more complex in how its elements act in the environment and humanity does not even remotely have any control over it.
Also Earthquakes are not a part of climate change but tectonic shifts in the Earth that happen due to a breach or weakening in its layers that it covers.
What is beneath our feet is in constant movement and is only held still by strong connected tectonic plates running into each other but over time a shift will occur.
When is uncertain and are like volcanoes. Not having to do with climate but Earth’s natural cycle of it forming itself
my daughter is five and could have reported on this theory with as much intelligence , are you now just starving for news where anything is something , your planet isn't drowning your brains are.
It’s always 10 or 11 years ago on these videos. Wouldn’t you make a more convincing case if you showed updated statements by these people or others who agree?
Climate change is a business
☠️
How crazy… within 10 years, our situation became a catastrophe.
And still there are climate change deniers... Wish you all the best for the next 10 years.
A catastrophe of collective hysteria.
@@enemaskywalker1559 You mean collective denial.
@@hochminus-iy7ro For 20% air/'ground'/'sea/'terrestrial/'maritime' warming by CO2, the temperature of the air would have to be one EIGHT MILLIONTH of the temperature of the ground or, alternatively, each of 2500 air molecules would have to be giving out heat at one EIGHT MILLIONTH the rate at which a ground surface atom/molecule emitted heat some of which would reach a CO2 molecule in the air that would, subsequently, heat the surrounding 2500 air molecules by thermal conduction. Explained in detail in 'LATEST/[MOST RECENT] COMMENT 'above'.
Simply because a person is really smart, this does not mean that he's right about everything. Einstein was wrong about quantum mechanics.
It will be pretty hard without food
I wouldn't let a world class engineer diagnose and treat a disease, any more than I would let a world class doctor design a bridge or a hydroelectric dam
You can trust engineers to smell BS, though! Just beware of false positives, engineers deal with a lot of BS.
As for me, I know propaganda when I see it, and I know when someone is trying to hijack my brain and soul. I will not budge for such. I will remain neutral and skeptical until I choose otherwise. If the science really were settled there wouldn't be a debate!
Right on - this guy is right up there with the best.
Too bad he was wrong
Totally correct - no global warming - just man mad crises which the politicians create in order to save you from themselves
No he is 100% correct. Political psychological tricksters like you can cope.
@@user-pf5xq3lq8i which part - the global warming fakery is a lie perpetrated to gain further control over people or the lie that people control the temp - why not turn up the heat then if your able to do so
Is there a way I can make a regular payment to the climate change solution?
P.S. The musician analogy was pretty dead on.
"Could very well be the climate gets cooler... nobody knows". Is this argument not equivalent to saying that if you put a Bunsen burner beneath a beaker of water that you can't predict whether the water will heat up or cool down? It was 1896 when Arrhenius predicted doubling CO2 would increase global temperature by a degree... surely our understanding in the intervening 120 year has become more precise and better grounded.
This guy is Einstein.
No, He's Dyson
Einstein, ahahah. Einstein...
The NAWAPA project and similar ones in Africa that never got completed are the pragmatic answer to climate related issues. However, those never seem to be followed through on.
Regardless of whether they're correct or not the answer certainly isn't to destroy our economy and pray for some hypothetical alternative energy.......nevermind all the products we only know how to make with fossil fuels and have no cheap alternatives.
yes but noone wants to destroy economy or propose some hypothetical alternative energy. we know working alternative energy. we dont destroy our economy by implementing them. we know climate change is real as well as your influence.
There is a such thing as alternative energy however with our limited technological advancement we don’t have the capability to be as effective and maintain our livelihoods the same without fossil fuels.
However if a sudden change were to happen where someone very capable and innovative created such a marvel of technological advancement. Fossil fuels would be a thing of the past, but I doubt it will happen any time soon or within my lifetime but it would be good to be proven wrong.
Anyways we have at most a couple centuries before we would start to run out of the resource that we depend on to sustain society, so I am not at all worried about my livelihood being affected by such predictions but if anyone were to worry about future generations then they would want something to happen.
So eh, it is what it is
@@BuGGyBoBerl climate change is real as far as the Earth’s cycle goes but as far as humans having an effect on it, that is all conjecture and paranoia
@@c.galindo9639 plain wrong and disproved by facts and evidence.
@@BuGGyBoBerl oh yeah?
Then explain or give a link or state the facts and evidence
This is the problem when a scientist wanders outside of their area of expertise. Dyson is a brilliant astrophysicist, not so much as a climatologist. The overlap is not nearly as much as you would think. Like others, his weighing in wirhout truly having the knowledge base and research experience does a disservice to the subject. Read cutting edge climae research on NASA's climate scientist blog, RealClimate.org. They provide in depth research and current understanding of this subject, and address all of the misconceptions about it, including those of Dyson. Well worth your time if you are open minded enough to look at tons of studies, analysis, commentary and explanatory graphics.
This study demonstrates that changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration did not cause temperature change in the ancient climate
res.mdpi.com/climate/climate-05-00076/article_deploy/climate-05-00076.pdf
You have 11 years left before your catastrophe. Or was it still 12 years. Or was it 2015 and it didn't happen. What's scarier to you global warming or global cooling?
Not unlike going to grad school or even a bachelors program where, for example, a chemistry major will have to take biology classes or a physics major would have to take astronomy classes.
So he's saying we could be right we could be wrong g but fuck it. Let's dig some holes and see what happens
Absolutely right..
Little can be done about climate change earthquakes etc BUT PREVENTION is still the best.
Just look at Japan and Iran and Indonesia.
Japan introduced many strict building codes and the result fewer damages and lives lost
In both Iran and Indonesia after each quake big damage and lives lost.
Sadly those governments do very lttle except stuff their pockets..
There's a great channel on this on YT called CDN (Climate Discussion Nexus).
As another great genius said, " For the stronger we our houses do build, the less chance we have of being killed."
10 years later, and the earth continues to warm. Not so absurd. These denier videos never age well.
No it does not.
If you look at sat temperatures - they are falling for 3 years now and did not grow since 2015.
In fact 1998 was епу warmest year, so NASA had to "correct" satellite data to make 2016 and 2020 "warmest years on record".
At the same time CO2 continues to grow no matter what decisions climate summits make. That shows that CO2 does not affect temperatures, which was clear from the beginning to a really outstanding physicist as Dyson.
@@geokrilov "they are falling for 3 years now" Why not use 10? 20? Three seems to be pretty cherry-pick specific. Use 30 years if you know what you're talking about, but never three.
"so NASA had to "correct" satellite data" No, RSS did no such corrections, but RSS did. There's something silly and childish about wishing RSS kept their bad math quiet, but here you are. They had to correct for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites (I believe they used the wrong +/- sign and really f-ed up) and you're here to ask that they go back and use the wrong math?
"In fact 1998 was епу warmest year," 1998 ranks as the 9th warmest year. The past 8 years have all been warmer, and in fact are the warmest 8 on record.
"CO2 continues to grow no matter what decisions climate summits make. That shows that CO2 does not affect temperatures" Um, just go buy a red sharpie and put a large F on your paper now and save yourself the embarrassment of handing it in.
@@scottekoontz you wrote "10 years later, and the earth continues to warm" it is wrong/ It does not "continue" to warm since 2015 and is cooling 3 years round.
If not for NASA tampering with data, еру Earth is no warming for 24 years.
@@geokrilov Yes, it is obviously warming for the past 24 years whether the data is adjusted or not. There is no OMG OMG DID YOU SEE TAMPERING or any other nonsense the science aliterate throw out there, but raw data shows warming as well. 24 years and the increase is 0.28°C increase.
How did you confuse +0.28 with -0.28?
10 years later, and sea level rise hasn't accelerated; polar ice caps remain solid; and the world still isn't coming to an end. Climate predictions don't age well.
Solar minimum is about to take place starting end 2018. In 2021, it's effect gets observed
Even a grand solar minimum would merely delay the heating from CO2 by a few years. It would not negate any of it in the long term since one the minimum ended temperatures would still continue on to the equilibrium point. (Not to mention that a minimum is just part of a cycle, and will be followed by a warming maximum.)
How are the wildfires going?
Hello from May 2024! 11 consecutive months of record high temperatures. Were these the effects you was talking about?
My wife and I fight about Climate Change all the time. She is for the dire predictions. I tell her honestly that I hope she is right, because of the money that is going into it. We had a prediction here in S E Queensland before Christmas,24, saying we were going into a dry spell. Well it hasn't stopped raining. She fires up if I dare to mention it.
Check out Greenpeace Founder Dr Patrick Moore, Physicist William Happer, American climatologist Judith Curry & people in there circles & you'll be able to convince your wife she's been fooled about Climate Change. The sad thing is its people with good intentions like your Wife that get suckered into these agendas. There's also a really good documentary released in 2023 called Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) directed by Martin Durkin With staring a lot of older Scientist that lived through the Scientific Realm the past 20-30 years that have just over the past few years had to courage to talk about this issue. Because the Science profession isn't self funded its subjecticed to donors that pay for predetermined Scientific Theories that align with Agendas. Many Scientist from the era when the Global Warming theory became mainstream no longer have anything to lose. While I'm glad so many Scientist are speaking out now I hope younger Scientist can have the courage as well but I understand the reality that if you do speak out it may cost you your career. That Climate Change the movie film was released on the internet for free & there's plenty of interviews with the Scientist I mentioned online & some even on RUclips.
@@wandameadows5736 Check out Judy Curry. She proved that the temp graphs were correct, the warming rtes known to all scientists are correct, and that CO2 is the primary forcing. She is the only climate scientist on your list.
You were suckered into non-science. Will take a lot to drag you back out, but start with papers from any climate scientist(s) from any country from most any decade. If you want to use Curry, be sure to read her work on BEST.
So don't worry, just build seawalls around the entire country of The Netherlands, Bangladesh, Tuvalu, all of southern Florida, all of Manhattan, Boston, most Pacific Islands, across the Straight of Gibraltar, etc. Also, if you expect a tsunami to ever come, build a great big seawall. Like, all around the entire countries of Indonesia and Japan, Alaska, the entire Pacific Northwest, and Hawaii.
+Johann Larkin
Thats what Japan has done.
nah new islands will be formed if the planet does warm up considerably. deforestation has q great deal to do with increased co2 levels also.
"So don't worry"
Thats certainly an option. It wouldnt be the first time in human history people have had to abandon their homes because of local dangers.
Isn't the acidification of the oceans, bad enough on its own to qualify as a reason to view AGW as a serious problem ? Let alone, rising sea levels, unstable weather patterns, extinctions, rising temps and so on.
all those changes are normal.....
The ocean is alkaline (pH = 8.0-8.2), not acidic, therefore the ocean can't acidify. The only thing that can happen to an alkaline liquid is that it's alkalinity can increase or decrease. The GW propagandists use the term acidification because it sounds scary to the ignorant masses. The GW scientists that know this lie keep quiet about it because they want to push their false agenda.
As for sea level rise, go to the NOAA tide charts and look at the historical data from the last 100 years. If the warming was accelerating like the propagandists say it is, you would see an acceleration in the rising sea level. But that's not what the charts show. The rise is dead straight with zero acceleration. When is sea level supposed to start accelerating?
Here's the chart for LA:
tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=9410660
The sea level is rising at a rate of 4" per century over the last 90 years. Yet the propagandists are saying we're in for at least 1 meter of rise by the year 2100. And you people believe that crap.
To add to what the person above has said, the way you handle rising sea levels and unstable weather patterns is with industrialisation and technology. One of the pillars of this is cheap and reliable energy that can scale. Fossil fuels are the only solution presently, with hydro working in geographically favourable areas.
When you limit industrialisation, 2bn people will take longer to see a light switch for the first time. Not to mention another 2-3bn who are moving into the middle class. This is where most of the world’s Elon musks will be found.
Imagine 100m Elon musks alive at the same time living in first world countries.
Asteroids and solar flares will be no match for the innovation from that crowd.
@@bennyl7224 Dude, there's no way out. Temps will continue to shoot up. Ecological collapse is already underway. It's almost time for planetary hospice. Look up McPherson's paradox.
@@biggav7434 the biggest concern for our future is energy poverty. Other problems can be solved. The planet will be just fine and ecosystems adapt to changes. 99%+ of species do become extinct as a rule, even before humans industrialised. The climate is already violent and dangerous and our progress as humans has made is safer and fossil fuels have allowed us to prosper.
Best of luck with your alarmism on your friends. I choose to learn off scientists
Grey science is a free point,in saved gravity
We have no impact upon the weather nor do humans produce Carbon.
Great video nice talk, I hope believer with shut their mouths and let people work and figure out what is really happening.
only a stupid person will believe in what the media supports, rather than let scientists have their debate !
التيار الحداثي this guy isn't a climate scientist
Look at the evidence . Its freely available.
what does the media have to do with the fact that the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree on climate change
heliopyre
All these ‘scientists’ are government funded. 🤔
@@renegade2853There have been a number of different institutes from all around the world that came to the same conclusion. To believe that they're lying to us all to maintain funding is just a crazy conspiracy.
It's not the change, it's the RATE OF CHANGE
A simple precaution to watch for from sides helping to cause global warming would be to look at the sometimes taught current is outside of the wire logic, where the magnetic field should be. If this allows the magnetic field around the wires is allowed some how to become a source of energy to the air going up to the clouds, as starting point found around electrical utility wires, using Tesla's physical science natural wiring connection logic for it might be possible, to the magnetism project could be used to create cloud or the air around them into magnifying glass effects that warm the ground and this over time caused the atmosphere to warm too. A pirate story of the Africans becoming to bold with fighter boats and liking warm weather. Unequal weather patterns, violent storms, predictions, etc. that yearly increase in strength, something capturable by meanings.
Still can't stop thinking about "HOW DARE YOU"
It's truly sad to see such a great mind unable to come to terms with the "toxicity" of fossil fuels. To remain unspoken, and to speak about "dykes" around New Orleans shows even great men are capable of such fallacy as to not question the very cause of this toxicity: dependence on fossil fuels.
The slave kids are mining your lithium as fast as they can. If only there was a way to keep them from dying all the time. Ah well, good old European philosophy, can't make an omelet without cracking a few million African eggs, huh?
""[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, ABOUT WHICH I DO NOT KNOW MUCH, but it’s rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have."
~ Freeman Dyson, 2009
Well, they should be more polite, but their getting frustrated at skeptical scientists' failure to come up with the missing variable(s) and hypotheses that explain our current warming if it isn't rising GHG emissions and levels in the atmosphere. It's been over 30 years now and still nothing!
Yeah... imagine knowing for a fact millions of people will die and suffer along animals unless u take action immediately and u have to suffer deniers and fools lingering on their mundane egotistical needs, pride and denial that put up an unfruitful and useless fake debate with opinion that deny a fact and be intolerant of that...
First to Quantum ElectroDynamics, first (by thirty-years) to recognize QED's internal-inconsistencies and best marketing name until Tesla.
• 'SOME SUMS ABOUT THE SUN':-
• How can a molecule/atom on the very surface of the ground cause the temperature of a CO2 molecule in the air to increase until the temperature of the CO2 molecule is equal to the temperature of the ground atom/molecule if the CO2 molecule is not capable of absorbing ALL the infra-red radiation emitted by the ground atom/molecule?
• I.e., if each CO2 molecule in the air were absorbing terrestrial infra-red radiation at a rate one 16,000th of the rate at which infra-red were emitted by the, eg, 'ground' and heating the surrounding 2500 air molecules by conduction CO2 molecules would have to give out heat at one 16,000th the rate at which they were heated by the ground and then, by giving out heat at the same rate as they received it from the ground, the CO2 molecules would, subsequently, have to transfer heat to the surrounding 2500 air molecules at one 16,000th the rate at which the ground emitted infra-red meaning the 2500 air molecules receiving this energy would then have to give out heat at a rate of one EIGHT MILLIONTH (i.e., 16,000 X 500* = 8,000,000 [*500 not 2500 because CO2 is responsible for 20% of air temperature, allegedly]) of the rate at which infra-red were emitted from the ground in order for the air to reach a temperature that would be one 16,000th of the temperature of the ground; or, alternatively, the air would have to only reach a temperature that would be one EIGHT MILLIONTH of the temperature of the ground at which point the 2500 air molecules would be emitting heat at the rate they received it from the CO2 (i.e., if the 2500 air molecules could not be heated by the CO2 molecule to one 16,000th of ground temperature; so, therefore, instead one 16,000th divided down by 500** = one EIGHT MILLIONTH, i.e., EIGHT MILLION TIMES COLDER AIR THAN GROUND (**i.e., not 2500 because CO2 is responsible for 20% of air temperature, allegedly).
• However, IS the air during the day at a temperature ONE EIGHT MILLIONTH of the temperature of the, eg, 'ground' or IS there a vapour/gas in the air that really gives out heat, eg, EIGHT MILLION TIMES SLOWER than heat is emitted from the ground as explained above?
Seven years on from this video, what the climate scientists have been warning us about is coming to pass. Eighteen of the warmest years on record have been since 2000. We've just seen a once in two thousand year flood in Queensland where farmers were rejoicing at getting a year's rain in 24 hours to relieve a drought to despair the very next day with too much rain that killed thousands of live stock. Every day we're hearing the words unprecedented , catastrophic, once in a hundred years etc. etc. etc.
It's easy to believe the tv news.
However, climate records, ice core samples indicating CO2 levels, etc. Show humans have lived through much warmer periods in time. Also, as a species we have survived 5 major ice ages and several shorter cooling periods. Near extinction by a mega volcano. Humans will live and thrive in whatever climate is thrown at us.
The climate changes we're going to experience this century are small in comparison.
Once again, RUclips puts their thumb on the scale with their “Context” banner about climate change. We don’t need corporate oligarchs telling us how to think.
Amazing mind, a great human being but I have to say in this specific video he is a little bit like a Lord of The Rings goblin (a good one though) :)
Talks a lot of sense. The idea there was no climate change before man made carbon emissions can be shown to be false. So the idea we can "stop climate change" by reducing man made carbon emissions to zero is, by extension, quite absurd. I still think there is some merit in moving away from a reliance on fossil fuels but lets get words like catastrophe out of the discussion.
Nobody with a brain has made the argument that climate change began with anthropogenic forcing - which might be why they talk so much about the history of global climate change dating back hundreds of thousands of years, and the fact that current climate change is atypical in both rate and intensity.
@@catparka7698 There is cause for concern, I'm concerned and I believe we should be aiming all future human development at minimising carbon emissions. Sadly I fear achieving zero emissions is not a realistic target for humanity and the climate activists are unrealistic in their demands. Also we really don't have enough data at high enough finesse to demonstrate climate change is atypical to a satisfactory deterministic level.
@@daviddevoy5966 Umm... so that's really inferring that the data isn't all in - which is not the view of qualified parties - and that we should, if we do anything, aim small - which is also not the view of qualified parties. I know where you're coming from.