Conversation UPDATE: William Happer
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 май 2024
- Four years ago, Stuart went to Princeton University to interview Professor William Happer.
When he interviewed him, he was aware that he was a CO2 (and its impact on climate) contrarian.
Mr. Happer points out carbon dioxide is an important trace gas and an integral part of the carbon cycle, a bio-geo-chemical cycle in which carbon is exchanged between the oceans, soil, rocks and the biosphere.
Virtually all of life on the plant requires CO2 concentrations to be above 150 parts per million.
The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere over the past 500 million years has been as high as 4,000 ppm and as low as 180 ppm.
Since 1880 when CO2 was measured at Mauna Loa in Hawaii levels have risen from 280 ppm to 413 ppm as of April 2019.
Happer, as you will hear, says the impact of CO2 on temperature rise has already taken effect and he points to the logarithmic scale, which is a nonlinear scale often used to analyze a large
range of quantities. According to Mr. Happer, it would take another 400 ppm to affect temperature by one additional degree.
Mr. Happer is also aware of the folly of predictions. And he, like Freeman Dyson, points to the inability of models to accurately predict climate outcomes. Then add in length of day, which changes by milliseconds, transferring massive amounts of energy mostly into the oceans - causing oscillations that, according to climatologist Judith Curry, are not considered in current climate models. I must ask: is the science of climate really settled? Can it ever be?
Mr. Happer’s position on climate, his scientific credentials and his role in the Trump administration have made him a very large target.
He is a physicist who specialized in the study of atomic physics, optics and spectroscopy. He is the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics and he is the Davisson-Germer Prize winner in
Atomic or Surface Physics. He is not nor could he be a climate scientist because that designation is so new that UCLA only just launched a degree program in 2018.
Since that interview, Greenpeace outed him in a sting operation and President Donald Trump recruited Professor Happer to be a member of a Presidential Committee on Climate Security.
However, in September of 2019, the unflinching Mr. Happer quit. According to Science Magazine, while Happer may have been unflinching, Trump’s White House isn’t. So on Sept 13, 2019, Mr. Happer resigned.
Professor Happer, as you will see in this interview, firmly believes the impact of CO2 has been misrepresented.
Please become a Patreon subscriber and support the production of this program, with a $1 pledge goo.gl/ypXyDs
This show is produced by Oh Boy Productions, video production, podcast and vidcast specialists located in Vancouver. To find out more, go to www.ohboy.ca
#climatechange #carbondioxide #co2
One of the great scientists who could not be corrupted by the ipcc, UN and WEF. Truly admirable
Trent Gustus- You are right on !! He is a pure person & a pure, honest trustworthy scientist!!
One of the few people you can believe.
Great point and 100% agree
Remember Government now have weather control and that can be used to support climate change. Lots of money to be made by creating climate change narrative
Happer is well-known for spreading misinformation about the issue, and for having been paid by fossil fuel companies to do so.
Thank you Dr. Happer -- we need people like you to keep us on the straight and narrow... the truth about science
William Happer thanks so much for your help in helping me see through the phoney news about climate changes your explanations are truly infinitely common sense in view of our world
A brilliant and timely conversation with a brilliant mind. Thank you!
It’s easy to guess why the mainstream media would never seek Dr. Happer’s opinion on climate change, or indeed scientists who share his views. In fact I believe they would be terrified to do so.
he doesn't go with the communist agenda as do the media
I am interesting in knowing the reason Dr. Happer stepped out of the Trump Administration's position. Who was obviscating?
Doesn't pay to go against the concensus accepted narrative . Funding is at stake , and very few are prepared to bite the hand that feeds , or at least have the courage to speak out. If the last two years has taught me anything it's that most humans are pathetic oxygen thieves.
Aside from the massive money to be made on "the sky is falling - climate crisis" hysteria climate crisis is being used to push an agenda to push in a new world order under communism with an unelected few in charge.
@@THEROOTMATTERS My guess would be the deepstate obamite and Clintonian establishment made his working there a living hell.
“Another one of those mass hysterias that grip people from time to time.” Those are powerful words.
Professor Wiliam Harper is 80 years old, but looks like 60 or so! His mind are just as vital, all my respect for him!
I'm sure he is sincere, but looking at the bigger picture of effects on climate is more worrying.
@@andylec5879 Such as? He's "sincere" AND 100% correct. It's basic, factual science compared to political junk science for those at the government hog trough. You might consider watching again and take notes from a brilliant scientist who isn't on the take.
My son worked on the research programme by the University of Southampton Oceanographic Centre in c 2010 and took ocean temperatures across the Atlantic from Africa to USA, he said there was no change
Ah I nearly did my degree with oceanography at So’ton, lovely department. I ended up focusing on biochemistry. It was a regrettable really. Kudos to your son ;)
THANK YOU so much Professor Happer, you truly are an extremely wonderfully talented man.....everyone needs to listen to you.
Finally some honesty about CO2!
The scientific community uses CO2e or "CO2 equivalent". For example, methane (another GHG) is said to be 28-36x more potent than CO2 itself. CO2e is simply a common denominator of all GHG's that allows for an easier discussion. Otherwise, we would have to discuss the changing levels of CO2+CH4+N2O+CFC+HFC+HCFC+PFC+SF6 etc. www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases
There's plenty of them.
Thanks to this channel and to Dr. Happer for battling Climate Alarmism with real science.
Happer is a twit and has been thoroughly discredited. Next you'll be touting Tim Ball or the team of Spencer and Christy. Good luck with THAT.
This is a fantastic interview with a very honest respectful gentleman!
@@408Magenta There are other talks on this and other channels.
Why is Happer honest, and a respectful gentleman?
Because he trivialises the anthropogenically induced warming of the planet?
Because it fits in with your preconceptions and denialism of AGW?
Has Happer published his predictions? What is his global warming and climate model based upon?
How much research has he conducted in the area of Global Warming, Climate Science or atmospheric physics?
yes he must be honest and a gentleman - no doubt about it folks
@@PetraKann Ha! Shill.
@@PetraKann
It's like saying Happer is a blasphemer because he doesn't believe gods exist.
To be honest, there's nothing to deny. It's kind of comical in a way. The temperature continues to creep as it has done for I dunno the last 20k years. There's little to no change in climactic activity. And as has already been pointed out enough times we're actually at the low end of the spectrum of CO2. If you were to halve it, we'd see more issues than if you doubled, tripled or quadrupled it.
It was what? 20 times higher when life exploded on the planet?
I've said this many times that CO2 is the new cholesterol. Most people would be surprised to know that as many if not more people die from low cholesterol levels than high and yet everyone wants it as low as possible. Most think of it as a toxin and probably think we should have zero levels of cholesterol in our body despite it being essential to life and those with the highest actually living the longest.
I love my cholesterol and I live and breathe CO2.
@@TheCompleteGuitarist What does your following comment actually mean?
"...The temperature continues to creep as it has done for I dunno the last 20k years"
If you "dunno" then why make such a nonsensical comment?
I saw Happer give a technical presentation at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton a few years ago. The Q@A was great. The smartest people on the planet are there. Nobody is a climate alarmist... because they are too smart for that.
@@elaine1034 The man being interviewed is William Happer (Scientist). The person in your reference is Stephen Harper (Politician).
@@geoffreyveale7715 No..it's Stephen Harper in the link I gave. He is introduced at 34 seconds in.
@@elaine1034
I watched your link and the guy is younger, different looking and in fact a different person altogether?
Please explain
@@elaine1034
no argument and we are talking about William happer here - different person
+@@adenovirus. When I click on my link it is PM Stephen Harper at AIPAC. As a Canadian I definitely know who our PM was.
Thank you Dr. Happer. After spending many years in the commercial greenhouse industry, I've never believed CO2 was a pollutant. You have given far more clarity.
Happer failed to mention that within the CO2 enriched greenhouses all the other needs of the plant are optimized to compensate for the higher levels of CO2, including plenty of water, soil nutrients and protection from pest and pathogens. William Happer has no credentials in the biological sciences.
The climate science denial information sites that you likely gravitate to are highly unlikely to mention the following articles.
New study undercuts favorite climate myth ‘more CO2 is good for plants’
www.skepticalscience.com/new-study-undercuts-co2-plants-myth.html
Climate explained: why plants don’t simply grow faster with more carbon dioxide in air
theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-plants-dont-simply-grow-faster-with-more-carbon-dioxide-in-air-115907
Trees and plants reached 'peak carbon' 10 years ago
cosmosmagazine.com/climate/trees-and-plants-reached-peak-carbon-10-years-ago
Earth Stopped Getting Greener 20 Years Ago
www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-stopped-getting-greener-20-years-ago
Experts explain how rising carbon dioxide depletes nutrients in our food
m.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/human-nutrition-at-risk-from-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-in-atmosphere-studies-show/70002961
Trees absorbing less CO2 as world warms, study finds
· Shorter winters weaken forest 'carbon sinks'
· Data analysis reverses scientists' expectations
www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jan/03/climatechange.carbonemissions
Rising CO2 levels destroying African savannah, scientists warn
www.independent.co.uk/environment/africa-savannah-plants-co2-climate-change-greenhouse-gas-a8804646.html
Amazon rainforest losing ability to regulate climate, scientist warns
www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/31/amazon-rainforest-deforestation-weather-droughts-report
Satellite observations show global plant growth is not keeping up with CO2 emissions
phys.org/news/2015-12-satellite-global-growth-co2-emissions.html
Exactly, we thought it more like a fertilizer, it worked so predictablely.
Then you are either a liar or a dolt
Greenhouses should teach you about the dramatic effect co2 has on temperature
What a thoroughly engaging, delightful man. I suggest a globally televised debate between him and all of extinction rebellion. Hopefully that would put an end to the madness.
You just wont't get it here in the UK. Today about a quarter of the BBC's news output on Radio 4 was about the climate crisis.
Extinction Rebellion would decline an open debate. The Heartland Institute recently ( I think ? ) offered an open debate but the alarmists didn’t even turn up. Further , in the UK , Piers Corbyn has repeatedly called for open debate but it had fallen on deaf ears. It seems these people would rather argue from the comfort of their PC screens rather than be present at a debate. Fools.
They would be rude to him. His charm is being able to separate his demeanor from his opinions, they are completely incapable of this.
@@billbogg3857 extinction rebellion would probably be too busy milk shaking him and then using michael mann talking points like "well CO2 is increasing because of man" - that is pretty much the only real tangible thought they have.
Example:
CO2 is beneficial for the planet
"well CO2 is increasing, look at this chart, Al Gore had to use a mobile lift, see?"
Well still, we are at a 97% low in CO2 in the worlds historical record
"well CO2 is increasing, just look at this chart, this can't be good
Well in your car when driving after 10 minutes your ppm of CO2 is close to 2000 ppm and you're fine
"well CO2 is increasing, we're at 415 ppm! ahhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Well CO2 is harmless to humans, doesn't increase UV ray absorption the more that is in the atmosphere
"well yeah but CO2 is increasing! UHMAGAWD!!!! we're all going to die!!!!
You can't reason idiots out of their religion.
"We should be cleaning up real things that make a difference"
Real pollution, and not something that's essential to all life!
The element selenium is an essential nutrient for humans and yet if we are exposed to around 100 times the minimum daily requirement level we will develop pathologies from it. The above video is filled with over-simplified thinking and presented to an audience that doesn't have the technical tools to challenge what they are being fed.
The fact that CO2 levels were much higher many millions of years ago has no relevance to modern humans who have only been around for about 300,000 years. The RATE-OF-CHANGE in CO2 levels now is between 10 to 100 times faster than in the past 800,000 years. Most of the biological organisms, that are behind our life support system, can't adapt to such rapid changes. These are details that are deliberately excluded from climate science denial information sources.
The Threat of Global Warming causing Near-Term Human Extinction
Temperature, carbon dioxide and methane
arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/threat.html
CO2 Concentration - Last 800,000 years
scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/co2_800k.png
So is Arsenic, the dose makes the poison. Hell just speaking of plants, look at nitrogen, it is absolutely essential to plant life for foliar growth and its the primary gas in our atmosphere yet nitrogen is one of the worst and most pervasive pollutants in the world.
@@chinogambino9375 - If plants are exposed to nitrogen, that only has current levels of CO2 in it, they will die. Correction, the nitrogen oxides in the atmosphere are regarded as pollutants if their concentration is too high. Those, who have a background in plant physiology often lack an in-depth understanding of pollution and greenhouse gas effects on the temperature of the planet.
Another gas that is essential for us is oxygen in the atmosphere. Perhaps you were not aware that if we are only provided with pure oxygen to breathe it will soon prove toxic to us.
Climate science denier sources, such as William Happer, never mention the downsides of excess CO2 in the atmosphere. People, such as him have a political agenda to uphold.
New study undercuts favorite climate myth ‘more CO2 is good for plants’
www.skepticalscience.com/new-study-undercuts-co2-plants-myth.html
Climate explained: why plants don’t simply grow faster with more carbon dioxide in air
theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-plants-dont-simply-grow-faster-with-more-carbon-dioxide-in-air-115907
Trees and plants reached 'peak carbon' 10 years ago
cosmosmagazine.com/climate/trees-and-plants-reached-peak-carbon-10-years-ago
Earth Stopped Getting Greener 20 Years Ago
www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-stopped-getting-greener-20-years-ago/?amp
Experts explain how rising carbon dioxide depletes nutrients in our food
m.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/human-nutrition-at-risk-from-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-in-atmosphere-studies-show/70002961
Trees absorbing less CO2 as world warms, study finds
· Shorter winters weaken forest 'carbon sinks'
· Data analysis reverses scientists' expectations
www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jan/03/climatechange.carbonemissions
Rising CO2 levels destroying African savannah, scientists warn
www.independent.co.uk/environment/africa-savannah-plants-co2-climate-change-greenhouse-gas-a8804646.html
Amazon rainforest losing ability to regulate climate, scientist warns
www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/31/amazon-rainforest-deforestation-weather-droughts-report
Satellite observations show global plant growth is not keeping up with CO2 emissions
phys.org/news/2015-12-satellite-global-growth-co2-emissions.html
=====
The thinking error at the root of science denial
theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-of-science-denial-96099
@@vernonbrechin4207 I was getting more at the agricultural amendment run off but i think we are in agreement generally.
Well why is a pleasant and clever guy like this never interviewed in mainstream media? Thanks for posting this to give us more confidence that debunks what the so-called environmentalists are preaching.
Many people have bought into the concept that the mainstream media is the enemy and only media, such as Fox News and Breitbart News, can be trusted. This is a strategy also imported by the Nazi's to discredit opposition to them. Also, it is common to play the victim card to explain why your heroes are not getting equal coverage.
The thinking error at the root of science denial
theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-of-science-denial-96099
Makes me long for reasonable and rational debate.
It's about 15 years too late for that 😢
How do you debate not knowing what you don't know? Its way to complex and the models are wrong. We don't even consider space weather and the solar forcing. ruclips.net/video/rEWoPzaDmOA/видео.html The more I learn from Ben Davidson The more I know I need to learn more.
@Ride the Wave are you saying only people who refute climate change due to human activity are rational
@kkthxkMarxisms really bad and we have to fight , and they are using the climate situation for political point scoring . But that does not change facts CO2 is a greenhouse gas CO2 levels are rising and with that average temp is rising and will continue to do in tandem with CO 2 levels , Now you can deny this for political or religious reasons that is your right but , the result will be the earth will be fine it will find a balance there just wont be any humans left to worry about it 200 years just like the neanderthals climate change will wipe us out , they could do nothing to stop it but we could but wont because of money
The one thing I've never seen is two scientists one supporting climate change emergency and one denying it have a debate. I've seen scientist supporting climate change emergency debate ordinary 'climate change deniers citizens. I don't know why it's impossible to get the debate I want to if both sides think they have it right.
Great clarity. I love how he has to hold back from laughing when some of the theories are mentioned. He remains graceful and answers the questions patiently.
When listening to William Happer, I realise how small a scientist I am. The guy is brilliant. We should listen more to people like him and not so much to people who massages data to fit fairytales.
Most people would rather listen to Greta. She is so passionate so must be right, LOL.
@@geoffreyveale7715 or you should listen to, in proportion, a bunch of people on the other side with as much scientific credibility rather than listening to just the one that supports your views already
Carbon dioxide at 0.04% is a 2,500th part of the atmosphere. that means to warm the climate by just 1"c carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2,500"c of heat energy. That is impossible. It also breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics.
Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible. To cause 1°c of heating methane would have to capture 600,000°c of heat energy. Problematic as this is over a hundred times hotter than the surface of the sun. (Methane rapidly breaks down in sunlight).
However, the climate is changing. This is because of deliberate geoengineering programmes, inparticular ozone thinning away from the poles. Though largely unreported ozone thinning effect is directly observable producing an unnaturally bright sun and even a bright moon. Under these conditions the pain felt when looking at the sun is not only from the increase in visible light but the much larger increase in infrared. (Look up at the sky and you will see a range of geoengineering operations in progress, these include chemtrail induced cloud or hazing, ripple patterns caused by HAARP installations, bizarre and unnatural cloud formations).
Climate change is a programme to force change in accordance with the implementation of Agenda 21/2030. Current events demonstrate this transition is well underway and will involve massive population cull through injected nanotech (re transhumanist programme), engineered famine, conflict. Agenda 21 also sees the permanent loss of all property rights with the introduction of universal basic income (ref nesara/gesara) and has/is being promoted by the World Economic Forum.
'You will own nothing and you will be happy' WEF
In a depopulated world the surviving brainwashed and controlled population will be confined to mega cities. Carbon limits will be used to restrict consumption and liberty. Meanwhile the re-greened wilderness will be the exclusive playground of the ultra rich elite posing as conservationists.
The co2 hoax amounts to the theft of the world and the enslavement of humanity by a parasitic few.
Welcome to the future!
_________
I have included a debunking of 'accumulated heat' as it is so often used to explain how trace elements, so called 'greenhouse gasses', can warm the planet.
Accumulated heat whilst sounding a reasonable explanation of how heat can build up is rather nothing more than gobbledygook. In fact it shows those using such arguments do not even understand what heat is.
When we measure temperature we are measuring the heat energy a thing is losing. In short heat is a measurement of flow, the transfer of heat energy and this will always be in the direction towards the colder. For this reason a thing can never 'accumulate heat' in the way those advocating co2 climate change describe. The temperature of a body is the measure of heat output, it can never be greater than the measure of heat input. Output = input. When a thing is warmed it is heated to an equivalent of the heat input. If this input is not maintained it will cool. Those that propose that heat can build up to be hotter than the total measure of heat input at a given time either do not understand what heat is or are being deliberately misleading. To illustrate, an object being heated by a flame can never become hotter than that flame, it's temperature cannot rise inexorably to the temperature of the sun for instance. Heat cannot be accumulated. When we think about it common sense tells us this must be the case.
Nasa and even nobel prize winning physicists have expounded 'accumulated heat' as the explanation how co2 is able to warm the atmosphere. They claim that over hundreds of years co2 has captured heat energy and this heat has 'accumulated' to produce a serious warming effect. As I have just explained, this is totally impossible and fundamentally violates all the laws of thermodynamics. That respected scientists should support such uneducated, unthinking nonsense is disturbing and only reflects that in terms of being able to think clearly about a subject they have no facility or inclination. These are the dark ages of science. Belief has outweighed logic or any critical thought. It tells us that we should not unquestioningly accept anything we are told, that experts can be fools.
(nb: Be aware of attempts to discard thermodynamics by talking about biology.
eg. 'it only takes a drop of arsenic to kill a person.'
This would be somewhat desperate, muddled thinking. clearly biological processes based on the reaction of a cell are not the same as the laws of physics/thermodynamics).
This argument is described as 'the butterfly effect', that insignificant changes can have massive ramifications by knock on consequences. Not only is it illogical, a butterfly cannot repeatedly demolish a brick wall for example, it is against the notion that the earth has robust ecosystems. Were this otherwise the most minor changes to almost anything would have long since rendered the planet uninhabitable. In short, 'the butterfly effect' is simply magical thinking, to wish 'this must be so though I don't know how'.
Continued...
It is impossible to trap more energy than the energy available. This is the first law of thermodynamics.
Furthermore, climate change models require that this heat must be from radiant heat from the Earth's surface. The reason this must be so is explained by the thought experiment as follows:
'Five photons of energy from the sun, one photon is absorbed by CO2. Does the planet warm more than if all five photons had hit the surface? '
Anything that captures radiant energy will in turn radiate 50% of its energy back to space. This is as much a point of logic. It is also easily proved by everyday experience. When a cloud passes overhead it immediately becomes colder, this is because radiant energy is absorbed by the water molecules and the same will be true of CO2. Carbon dioxide can only reduce surface temps though as I explained the proportion of CO2 is so fractional as to have any measurable effect. Clouds, and the fact that nights are colder than days, also demonstrates that Earth loses heat extremely quickly and shows the importance of surface heating from direct sunlight.
It also explains why all those peddling the CO2 climate hoax have to ignore infrared in direct sunlight. Were they not to do so the whole charade falls apart as it means half of all infrared energy from the Sun will be radiated back out to space. This is problematic as almost half of the Sun's radiant energy IS INFRARED!!!
... OUCH!
Fractional elements have fractional effects. We understand this in everyday common sense as proportion.
To imagine carbon dioxide can capture this magnitude of energy is absurd and breaks the basic law of thermodynamics. Were it so all energy needs could be solved through the magical energy capturing power of CO2.
There are many other fundamental problems with the CO2 climate change model. Eg that CO2 is highly soluble and is washed out extremely quickly in rainfall; that CO2 levels fluctuate drastically seasonally showing on earth with its high rainfall CO2 is not a gas that accumulates; that heat cannot be trapped in oceans as described in climate models as they are more 'energy dense' than the adjacent air, rather if oceans are becoming warmer it can only be from direct sunlight; that increasing biomass increases CO2 because it increases the carbon in cycle; that correlation is not causation otherwise it could be said daisies cause hot temperatures because there are more daisies when it is warm; that there is extremely dodgy Victorian science/politics behind Ice Ages which is never questioned or examined - eg mammoths, which were the initial reason why Ice Ages were proposed, despite claims otherwise are not adapted to cold but rather appear to be cold temperate animals similar to highland cattle, their blood is not antifreeze as claimed, they have no sebaceous glands, hair is long but sparse - even yaks being hairier, mammoth remains as far south as Mexico; that how can ice cores be an accurate record of the past if miles thickness of ice have supposedly melted?; that Milankovitch Cycles mean that the Southern Hemisphere is currently in the middle of it's Great Ice Age; that the hypothesis that burning of forest subsequent to Ice Ages resulted in warming is logically inconsistent as 'no new carbon' has been introduced into cycle this all being carbon already in cycle and in any case would be washed out almost immediately; that CO2 levels are at a geological low; that the oxygen cycle is intertwined with the carbon cycle and dependent on it; that life is carbon based and CO2 is essential; that a halving of CO2 levels would result in the extinction of nearly all plant species - problematic as it in turn means theorised measures of atmospheric CO2 during Ice Ages cannot be correct - contrary there was a proliferation of megafauna; that alarmingly, plants already struggle to get enough CO2 for growth which is why farmers will often increase CO2 in greenhouses to promote yields; that the so called 'proofs' showing CO2 is able to capture radiant heat energy only prove the opposite and how very minor this is - that atmospheric concentrations of 0.04% CO2 thermal effect would be far too fractional to even be measured; that comparisons to other planets eg Venus/Mars prove CO2 does not capture the proportion of energy claimed and maybe this is why these comparisons are done less and less; that in order to explain vastly higher concentrations of CO2 in the geological past the sun is deemed to have increased its output this despite losing solar mass (gravitational mass) as fuel, this in turn meaning that the orbits of all the planets are all moving away from the sun - such hypothesis where solar activity is used to exactly compensate for holes in the CO2 climate theory is to ignore other evidential explanations of stars such as the 'electric universe theory'; that the geological archive shows periods of millions of years when CO2 and temperature were heading in opposite directions... etc).
Please be aware of organized attempts to dismiss this comment including:
- Irrelevant questions and attempts to confuse. This will include misdirection to mainstream narratives.
- Closing-down questions and thought by deferring to 'experts'.
- Counter accusation.
- Contradictory statements that are not supported.
- Condescension, abuse and accusation.
I have put out this information because it is important. I am aware most will choose to dismiss it and be upset and angry to have beliefs challenged. I have no interest in arguing online. All the necessary info is there in my comment for others to confirm or reject.
@@doobidoo095 oops - "that means to warm the climate by just 1"c carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2,500"c of heat energy. " wrong in the first few words, CO2 does not hold the energy, it radiates it back to the ground and sea which keep the energy. you guys are idiots.
Brilliant! Great respect for sensible reasoned analysis. Thank you!
The thing is that Climate Alarmism is NOT about climate - it’s about politics...
Of course it is about politics. It does not matter that the "experts" in the pay of the fossil fuels industry are peddling misinformation about man-made CO2 and it's effect on the climate. They are not trying to convince other scientists, all they need to do is convince enough ordinary people to go along with their agenda and support politicians who are in hock to the fuel industry.
@@eckyhen Your paranoia is showing...
@@eckyhen Sea levels are rising! We're all gonna drown!!
The Obamas just bought a sea-front property in Martha's Vineyard. Only a few feet above the sea. They aren't very worried apparently - or maybe they're just deniers...?
@@thetraveller869 As I said the fuel industry does not need to convince scientists. They only need to convince enough ordinary people to swallow their lies as you demonstrate.
It's the Reichwingnutter Koch suckers who have made it political. The Rebooblicons actually used to agree with those of us educated about climate and habitat collapse. Until they needed a drum to beat and since the lefties and greenies were on board with making those who are killing the biosphere with all sorts of pollution stop or at least pay for the damage, they sucked up to the money bags and had something to prove they weren't anything like progressive or even truly conservative, since real conservatives conserve and defend the status quo.
Happer never said 400ppm Co2 would resultt in 1C rise, that was a hypothetical example used to explain the logarithmic saturation effect of increased Co2.
Probably the world’s greatest and smartest physicists alive, very humble, and a great sense of humour!
Increase in atmospheric CO2 has played a significant role in India's turn from a net food importer prior to 1990 to food secure by 2000 and then a net food exporter by 2005. There was a year, I think it was around 2009, that the grain harvest in India was so unexpectedly huge that they could not store it, nor was there much demand by other nations (cuz they had lots of food), so many huge piles....hills of grain just rotted in the open. After that govt of India built more grain storage. The beef export industry in India has boomed....even before 1990 India was the main source of beef for arid oil rich nations. There is so much excess grain and food in India now that they trade all that for oil from Iran.
This has to be one of the dumbest arguments for correlation equaling causation I've seen. The biggest factor in agricultural output is investment and management, India already has abundant fertile soils. Even rainfall is a better predictor of good harvests.
There is the total harvest size and then there is the available food supply.... harvest minus loss. Then you need to relate that to the population. Due to the increase in population, the amount of food grain available dropped between the 70s and 2008, according to this graph.
dhruvinaik.blogspot.com/2012/10/food-grain-availability-in-india_28.html
@Chris Collins Higher heat gives drier conditions and less dependable rain. This gives LESS yield of grain, particularly rice and wheat, and the grain has less protein content and fewer micronutrients. So, that "idea" is a flop, try again.
@kim weaver Higher heat...well we're only talking about maybe 2 deg C, but regardless, higher heat results in wetter conditions...that's why the tropics are so wet. I was in Acupulco, Mexico, back around summer of 1985 and it rained a couple of times a day, though it was really hot. The S. Asian monsoon, which is quite a deluge lasting for many months, is a result of heat raising up water vapor from the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea, so much vapor that even while it is still summer the rains begin as the atmosphere can hold no more moisture. You're understanding of precipitation is a flop, try again.
@ Chris Collins I'm not sure if rice production in india has dropped but I'll take your word on that till I know more. But that's not a bad thing because rice is not a very profitable crop when compared to others. Myanmar which is still very poor produces a huge amount of rice and exports most of it....yet they are still poor. S. Korea consumes a lot of rice but only grows a fraction of what they produce cuz it's a no-money crop. S. Korean agri sector focuses more on high value export crops like premium tomatoes and strawberries....a lot of which are grown in hi-tech greenhouses.
Indians are getting fatter and fatter by the decade...no real food shortage there since 2000 or 2005 because they began decentralizing everything beginning in 1991 (end of hard socialism in India).
An excess of IT engineers in India and an economy that can't take them up leads to an outflow of engineers to the West and a cultural norm of corruption leads very competent individuals to take any job they can get in an air conditioned office. Gradually that will change....it's always gradual in India.
Thank you. This is an important debate.
When governments take no notice of someone as amazing and knowledgeable as this man it shows us how thick politicians are.
Most excellent.
So refreshing to listen to an intellectual speaking on a topic that he obviously is an expert on. You will never see him speaking to the U.N., their agenda is the Greta's of the world....."how dare you".
_"People are suffering. People are dying and entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction. ... How dare you!"_ -Young Greta before the UN
Refreshing to hear a real conversation.
"Any movement can be captured by thugs"
As a southern boy that most people would say don't know much, this is golden. Someone not being afraid to tell the truth, just a great thing to see. As a humble believer in the actual creation of this world, looks like the one that did create it , new what to do to keep it going. And that's just me. But I think that maybe somehow, and sometimes science has a way of pointing to that. Or if it just a boom and everything started up...there again science can help that position too. Knowledge is golden. And so very interesting to me to hear this guy explain things and be sincere and ,I think ,truthful. Thanks Mr. Happer for that.👍
Dr. Happer is spot on regarding group hysteria. It has to be most frightening of human characteristics.
what an honest no BS interview that was. i would love to know what his opinion is on the grand solar minimum.
but to these people the sun has no effect on earth weather. It all happens here by happenstance.
Mainstream science is to some extent kept in the dark matter or some sort of black hols as a result of a big bang of a forever expanding imagination that can run as a crisis of Cosmology that never actually means abandoning the Models that fail to predict or provide accounting for what is actually discovered. Its a circus for the mainstream mind that needs to keep its funding while operating a field of emerging technologism for insider marketising and weaponising. IE: a similar state of groupthink, overspecialised territorial fragmentation, and corporate capture under the mask of benefiting humanity.
But the Electric Universe as an emerging paradigm is a very exciting field in which particularly plasma physics is recognised as fundamental at all scales and in different ways through all mediums. IE: The Earth is within a Solar Electric Field and separated by a double layer of charge by our magnetosphere/ionosphere. Our atmosphere is a leaky capacitor with sky and earth being the two 'plates'. the nature of electrical systems in anture is of both charge separations and discharge equilibrium. While it is complex its underlying principles are understandable - and recognisable.Earth is NOT a closed system, and space is NOT a vacuum and electromagnetic communication is the underlying nature of all change.
So the inheritances of a 'matter-centric' closed mind in physics are actively biased against to uncovering of a greater Field of Energy that pervades and informs our lives our world and our awareness of both as a coherent whole.
There are instabilities of the Earth's magnetic field during Solar minimum that in the past have been associated with very adverse conditions - that are always exacerbated by hysteria. However, the Universe is not clockwork and we do not know what the future holds. The Solar system itself moves through different regions of space - probably along a spiralling birkeland current. Humans are aware of their own impending death without necessarily understanding what life is apart from setting their model of it against death as part of our survival kit. But in some respects our fears actually bring on the very thing we seek to evade in innumerable ways.
Live this day well!
;-)
@@binra3788 Nice word salad.
A rational voice in a world of mass hysteria
Like, I get my information from a 16 year old from Sweden. She's like, really, like smart and stuff!
How dare you use sarcasm!
The same 16 year old who's message is to listen to the scientists?
Smarter than you. And a lot more interesting.
The Swedish Prime Minister has just said that we should back up Greta and that if we think we are smarter than the scientists ( the government sponsored ones probably) then that is our problem.
@@erikjansson4820 Yep, most Deniers think they are smart. They aren't, or are just deliberately ignorant.
Bravo Professor Harper, Alltough I think you know, just the following: The highest waterfall in the world of cold salty ocean water is in the Strate of Denmark, at about 600 meters of depth, a drop of 3505 meters of cold salty deep ocean water over the border of this waterfall, dropping cold salty artic ocean water to the atlantic ocean bottoms and this current is only surfacing back at the equator Atlantic Ocean close to the Northwest of Africa, being heated up alongside the equator and returning back from the equator at the Bahamas as the Warm Atlantic Ocean Gulfstream and crossing over the Atlantic Ocean towards England/Ireland/Belgium/The Netherlans/Denmark/Norway towards the Artic Ocean, towards this huge ocean deep Waterfall south of Greenland, a fall of 3505 meters at 600 meters deep in the Strate of Denmark.This is an important reason that western Europe along their coastal seesides in countries like UK/Ireland/Northern France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and even around southern Island never can freeze-up. This Warm Gulfstream vortex circulation current will never stop, due to the huge cold/salty waterfall of 3505 meters at a depth of 600 meter below the surface in the Strate of Denmark, south of Greenland. Could you Proffesor Harper agree with my thinking on the Warm Gulfstream Vortex circulation, keeping the coastal waters of western Europe allways at least 12 degrees Celcius warmer as the waters south of Greenland, due to this huge 3505 meter ocean deep waterfall.Also I estimate based on some research that the increase of 300 ppm vol. of CO2 towards 400 ppm vol. of CO2 has given Planet Earth only an additional temperature increase of only plus +0.27 Degrees Celcius and all the rest is due to more or less solar-activity since 1830 and as such less or more of Cosmic Rays Cloud Seeding Nucleïation and as such giving less or more cloud formation, I estimate about +/- 3 à 4 % more or less cloud formation worldwide on planet Earth. Another increase of about 100 ppm vol. CO2 from 400 ppm vol. towards about 500 ppm vol. will as per your thinking only give an additional Antropogenic CO2 temperature increase of about plus +0.15 Degrees Celcius and because our planet is now colling for about at least 35 years or possibly 200 years, our planet earth will be colder by about minus -1 Degrees Celsius in about 35 to 200 years from to-day 1-12-2019. Longterm cooling will be due to the Milankovitch Cycles. Thank God Ther is CO2!High Regards, Ronald Engels, Hulst, The Netherlands. E-mail: ron.engels@planet.nl
Steven Harper muscled in on it ? I tell you that guy is a non-quitter (and a colourful fruit).
Ronald, I believe that your calculations are about right. The issue is that the models are equipped with amplification factors based on water vapor. So your 0.15C becomes 3 times higher. The cooling due to solar activity decline is due to more clouds and not solvable by humans, indeed thank goodness for CO2
This is me happer say what the what what
@@andrewarmstrong8651
Andrew what is it you want to say? Regards Ronald Engels, Hulst, The Netherlands.
Thank you.
I use to donate to green peace never again
Not even the founder of Green Peace does.
@@richb313 yes everyone should check out Patrick Moore
Ouch I feel your pain. ;o) I would keep that a secret.
Who is green peace never again ? Is he like The Artist Formerly Known As Prince ?
Do you mean Greenpeace?
"Professor Happer, as you will see in this interview, firmly believes the impact of CO2 has been misrepresented." Well Happer is a proven serial liar, isn'' he.
I think the climate will one day, become different enough to pose an adaptation issue but we should be able to adapt and survive. I think we should turn our eye to predicting how to adapt to potential changes as they happen, try to reduce pollution, and scrap any notion that we can change the climate. The first CO2 scrubber I see will be the biggest worry and if they go through with the plan I have recently heard to seed the atmosphere with ash to block the sun we're doomed. Both those scenarios should be fought hard against and even stopped by any means if implemented.
A real scientist talking sence. God bless him
This interview took place several years ago. I would like to hear a current view from Mr Happer.
You are in luck! He recently spoke at a Heartland Institute function.
ruclips.net/video/j8KxVQFoyT0/видео.html
Wondering if he might have caved to the climate alarmism mafia machine?😁
@@lovelyjubbly7456 No I trust him.
Show me a single prediction from him about the climate today that in hindsight proved correct. Just one.
@@TheTEDfan Every thing he has said is correct
The only thing I didn't like about this video is that it was too short.
There are so many other "climate change" topics to dig deeper into.
The Climate alarmist, used the Polar Bear and when that was proved as bunkum they have moved on to Elephants as if there hasn’t been a drought in Africa before
I heard something about the yesterday on one of the leftists radio talk back stations.
Don't forget the hurricanes. Hurricanes are used as "proof" of climate problems all the time. Every time there is a hurricane, anyway.
This will all go away when we figure out how to control the weather, or will it?
Funny enough, they have left elephants alone for the last 40 years and now there are TOO MANY OF THEM! That's why they are having issues. They are sucking up all the water holes and impeding on each other. Elephants made a much larger comeback than the Polar Bear has. Look up the numbers. Also remember the rain forested Sahel region in Africa (just below the sahara) has flourished because of CO2, it has stoped the expansionists of the Sahara and is starting to grow north by a few miles a year! Thank goodness for CO2!
@@johntheherbalistg8756 , Alarmists predicted more and larger hurricanes as a result of global warming. Didn't happen. Over the past 100 years there is a slight and steady DECREASE in numbers and strength. Same with tornados - decrease in number and strength.
This should go mainstream, to stop those climate changing deadbeats
.... but it wont be allowed to... too much money to be made by individuals AND governments... 🙄
The most renowned scientists always talk in language a child could understand because their passion is science and the communication of science. They are not interested in self promotion & self justification. They feel no instinct to impress. Contrast with the AGW ‘scientists’ such as Mann. There’s a real lesson there.
It is easier to fool society than convince them they are being fooled.
It was deeply moving to listen to such a smart and honorable man. Thank you very much for sharing!
William Happer is refuted by 99.9% of the world's publishing climate scientists, the IPCC, the over 170 major scientific institutions that publicly endorse the consensus position, and the empirical evidence gleaned from over a quarter of a million scientific papers.
Happer is not a climate scientist. His expertise is OPTICS. He did, however, work on behalf of the fossil fuel industry when he directed the CO2 Coalition and received funding from them to encourage the use of MORE fossil fuels. Food for thought, friends.
Thank you for the truth ❤️
We have to be practical and relistic. Work on the environment, reduce and remove plastics, cleaning up and process our wastes and don't panic!!
Not to panic is a lot cheaper.
We might be smarter to focus energy on other environmental issues, such as pushing that diesels pollute less- a lot less.
But they produce less CO2...! That is why we were encouraged to buy them a few years back.
You cannot buy a diesel today that doesn’t burn clean. Not in the US anyway.
@@davekyarbro VW and other manufacturers sold "clean diesels". Turns out that they had to lie to the regulators about the exhaust output. Software was installed in test vehicles that allowed very low emissions in idle an low speed/accelerating mode during tests. It cost them billions in fines and got the diesels banned in the US. In fact, davy, you can't buy a "clean" diesel in anywhere in the world.
@@kimweaver3323 Lolz...One manufacturer lies about theirs to save R&D dollars and you equate that to no clean deisels?
Its plastic pollution thats the big problem and unmanaged forest removal. Not this Co2 nonsense.
Agreed.
Yea the plastic pollution I wish I knew more on that to make a evaluation I just don't see it but I hear it all the time. science.sciencemag.org/content/358/6369/1367.summary watch out for bad info. Oh and did you know trees make allot more NO2 than we thought in a new study. We don,t know what we don,t know.
The focus of the Media ought always to arouse curiosity.
Environmental guilt is a key factor in hacking into ordinary people's minds.
But by far the most of pollution is best addressed at Source.
Like why not establish 'return anywhere' Unibottles and jars of re-usable glass.
Why not use bio friendly packaging.
There are INNUMERABLE solutions that are blocked or given no support because they do not serve the profit-making convenience and so we are dumped with mainstream crap as the consumed and fed upon - with less and less of a voice while the Corporates draw up 'deals' that effectively transfer power to offshore courts and lawyers - who seem to be able - for their fee - to be able to undermine anything true - and in respect of ever greater plunder, privatising Nature. (See 'Banking Nature' on YT)
Absolutely right
It's all three, and about fifty other things.
Brilliant and long overdue. George Wiegers
6:28 "I know a lot about CO2... *compared to most climate scientists"* ha ha so good. So good.
Your ignorance is voluminous. He knows more about CO2 than all the climate scientists combined.
@@barnespiper1133 Except that this is propaganda... what you are watching here has nothing to do with science and everything to do with money paid by Koch brothers and energy conglomerates. Did you search who this guy is? Did you search about the "CO2 Coalition"? Don't, so you can continue be fed lies by Big Energy. Science can be found in peer reviewed scientific articles - exactly what this guy cannot produce. Just look at this pathetic paper he wrote: "Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most
Abundant Greenhouse Gases"
@@barnespiper1133 Apparently he doesn't even know as much as an Irish scientist in the 1850s. Or a Swedish scientist in the 1890s. Or the physics teachers at your local high school. The Air Force and Navy can explain it to you, since they are well versed in the science as they have to target enemy craft using infrared technologies. They are also on the forefront of climate science. The Navy is already preparing a plan for their facilities, including Naval Station Norfolk.
Don't you guys realise the argument goes both ways? As a peasant I can't trust neither of the teams. So I gonna go with my guts and my engineering degree and believe (because it looks that nobody knows, especially not a peasant like me) the side that seem the less hysteric.
@@MrSolsolsol Yeah, there are two sides of a scientific question and one is correct and one is not. They are NOT equivalent. The case for habitat collapse due to human activity is incontrovertable now. And deniers are just that...... whiny infants with their fingers in their ears.
john stossel hosted a debate at the heartland institute, but couldnt get a single climate alarmist to come. it really says something, though, it was fun hearing real scientists talk for a couple hours.
Dr. Happer, you need to speak with Mr and Mrs Thunberg, their daughter is under a lot of stress and is absolutely miserable over this.
I have to share this. You won't see this on the fake media or talk radios
Yeah, not even THEY would sink this low.
Makes the earth greener
Which makes the Earth darker and absorbs more heat.
Light green not dark green.
More CO2 makes pot grow better. Are you going to vote for less pot?
More opium
I’m quite suspicious whenever I hear “ the science is settled”. In my view, that’s an oxymoron.
Not only is Prof Happer a brilliant and courageous scientist--an independant thinker in an age of run-away mass hysteria---but he is more; a true humanist. On and on through recent years he continues with infinite patience to explain the complex truth to people with much simpler minds.
To hear the views from such a great mind is so illuminating.
I always enjoyed my email exchanges with Professor Happer.
If the world is not dying and we are not at each others throat's the shit stirrer's and doom monger's lose there power influence and job's ,its plainly a racket.
All species will eventually disappear, either by being victim of changing environment or being out-competed for their niche in the habitat, the specific set of circumstances and the array of supporting species that make said species viable. We have run about 4 million years........ that's pretty average for a given species of hominid to last. We have changed the environment first to suit us, but then we allowed the changes to overwhelm us. Death by unintentional consequences.
Ok, so where is the profit?
Fantastic Interview.
Excellent interview. Very much appreciated his honest thoughtful responses with REAL science!!
Great to hear someone tell the truth about climate change instead of the usual fear mongering nonsense
The ultimate control mechanism controlling the air you breathe.
Good video glad I watched it, thank you.
I agree for many technical reasons. Good show!
Happer is refuted by 99.9% of the world's publishing climate scientists, the IPCC, the over 170 major scientific institutions that publicly endorse the consensus position, and the empirical evidence gleaned from over a quarter of a million scientific papers.
Happer is not a climate scientist. His expertise is OPTICS. He did, however, work on behalf of the fossil fuel industry when he directed the CO2 Coalition and received funding from them to encourage the use of MORE fossil fuels. Food for thought, friend.
My favorite climate scientist!
He is a very charming man and I can only imagine he is a very decent human being. He obviously knows what he is talking about!! The same can be said for Tony Heller. Check him out on RUclips and "realclimatescience.com"
@@les8182 Tony is more active in his pushing back than Happer.
He is presented as a climate scientists but the fact is that he has no training in that field. These videos target those who are highly unlikely to look critically into his personal connection with the climate science field.
William Happer
www.desmogblog.com/william-happer
Schmitt and Happer manufacture doubt
www.skepticalscience.com/schmitt-happer-wsj.html
Linden, Happer, and Cohen Wall Street Journal Rerun
www.skepticalscience.com/lindzen-happer-cohen-wsj-rerun.html
Yes Happer and Spencer, Global Warming Continues
www.skepticalscience.com/happer-spencer-global-warming-continues.html
@@vernonbrechin4207 CO2 levels have risen during the past 20 years by around 11%.
Temperature hasn't!
Discuss...
@@thetraveller869 - The 11% figure is a cherry-picked factoid without any context. I would assume you have no understanding about the range of tolerance that the current bio-system, that serves as a human life support system, is adapted to. Like most people in denial you've sought out information sources in a quest to reinforce your deeply entrenched worldview. Those sources have claimed that the temperature has not increased during that time period. You've bought into that because that is what you've wanted to believe in. That is not part of the mountains of evidence provided during the last half-Century by a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines studying Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD) effects around the globe.
Obviously, you didn't bother looking at the many sources of information I provided links to. That is completely understandable given that the denier community has been convinced that all information that clashes with what they already believe in is corrupted. You've simply repeated what your idols have convinced you is the real truth. You are in the company of millions of other people engaging in the same self-protective process.
This Graphic Puts Global Warming in Full Perspective
public.wmo.int/en/files/spiral2018wmolargegif
The global climate continues to warm rapidly
skepticalscience.com/ipcc-global-warming-pause.htm
Evidence for global warming
skepticalscience.com/evidence-for-global-warming.htm
Human activity continues to warm the planet over the past 16 years
skepticalscience.com/no-warming-in-16-years-intermediate.htm
Satellite measurements of warming in the troposphere
skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm
Does CO2 always correlate with temperature (and if not, why not?)
skepticalscience.com/co2-temperature-correlation.htm
Is the long-term trend in CO2 caused by warming of the oceans?
skepticalscience.com/warming-co2-rise.htm
Watch 26 Years of Arctic Ice Disappear in Seconds
ruclips.net/video/fo1Boie7mtI/видео.html&sns=fb
Key indicators of Arctic climate change: 1971-2017
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aafc1b/meta
Antarctica loses three trillion tonnes of ice in 25 years
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44470208
Antarctica is losing ice at an accelerating rate. How much will sea levels rise?
ruclips.net/video/YRe1ymYR45k/видео.html&feature=share
‘Extraordinary thinning’ of ice sheets revealed deep inside Antarctica
www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/16/thinning-of-antarctic-ice-sheets-spreading-inland-rapidly-study
Loss of Arctic sea ice impacting Atlantic Ocean water circulation system
news.yale.edu/2017/07/31/loss-arctic-sea-ice-impacting-atlantic-ocean-water-circulation-system
Melting Permafrost Is Turbocharging Climate Change
europe.newsweek.com/permafrost-greenhouse-gases-global-warming-465585?rm=eu
Satellite data confirms globe is warming rapidly
www.axios.com/satellite-data-confirms-globe-warming-rapidly-43fefd37-5b38-455d-985c-c97c2701c677.html
The Threat of Global Warming causing Near-Term Human Extinction
Temperature, carbon dioxide and methane
arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/threat.html
CO2 Concentration - Last 800,000 years
scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/co2_800k.png
Climate change 'tipping points' too close for comfort
phys.org/news/2019-11-climate-comfort.html
Climate emergency: world 'may have crossed tipping points’
www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/27/climate-emergency-world-may-have-crossed-tipping-points
A Horrifying New Study Found that the Ocean is on its Way to Suffocating by 2030
www.theinertia.com/environment/a-horrifying-new-study-found-that-the-ocean-is-on-its-way-to-suffocating-by-2030/
'Goodbye, Earth': A Story for Grown-Ups
www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000006406221/climate-change-march-goodbye-earth.html
-----
The thinking error at the root of science denial
theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-at-the-root-of-science-denial-96099
It takes doubling of the CO2 level to raise temperature by a single degree. From 400 to 800 to 1600 to 3200.
So the whole concept of a fatal tipping point and runaway is a fake.
scsirob yes, the sun controls earths climate, the sun has stages when off high and low periods, and what controls the sun is the clock cycle .
@@thomaspersson688 planetary alignments control the sun Cycles
scsirob .... this is obvious because the planet started off with up-to 50% co2 in our atmosphere. Much of the co2 has been dissolved into the sea and converted into limey rocks and chalk and the rest has been converted into biomass as life evolved and some of that is trapped in the ground in the form of fossil fuels. All of life evolved when co2 was at much higher levels therefore if the tipping point theory was valid the runaway effect would have occurred long ago.
unless the tipping point is the release of methane for example. This isn't a primary school level of complexity so either grow up in your thinking or stop with the arrogance. In the case you are just worshiping your own ego, your projection onto me that I am an alarmist is only projection. I am looking for understanding. Give it a try rather than looking to feel right.
@@michealcherrington6531 That mouth of yours should get to a mirror, or record itself and playback.
This needs to go viral
A solid analysis of a very dangerous topic, grateful to Stuart and Dr. Happer for their courage in bringing true science out of groupthink ignorance (which continues 4 years atter).
I watched this clip when it was originally uploaded to RUclips, and reference it often (coincidentally just a couple days ago). It would be interesting if you can re-interview the Professor in light of the upcoming IPCC summary report (due to be released in 2022) which corroborates his opinion that humans have little impact on climate. The consensus will be found that it is due to solar forcing. Another thing for him to discuss would be the work of Professor Zharkova - a form of peer review of her work.
Hi David, I reached out to Professor Happer about the work of Professor Zharhova. He was cautious about what the impact of what the solar minimum might be because it is not his field of study.
I'd happily go back to interview Professor Happer again, however, we are a very small team with a small budget. The cost of going back to see him is beyond our means.
We're endeavoring to improve the quality of our online interviewing systems to ensure we can produce a level that is higher than a Skype interview. Once we get that worked out, I will reach out to him and see if we can do a follow up Conversation.
@@ConversationsThatMatter It is a testimony of his scientific acumen to withhold judgement: any taxi driver would have given an opinion. Please continue with your work on providing a truly Academic approach to discussion on hot button topics. I have been disappointed in the university system in general since we now seem to be in an age that feelings are considered more important than the truth.
@@ConversationsThatMatter don't people lose their credibility when sharing ideas like this?
@@wannabecarguy The truth doesn't fear investigation.
The science was settled in 2004, but the first climate science graduates will not even graduate until 2022.
William Happer just amazing 🙂👍🌸🍀🌻
At last we are getting informed and knowledgeable people voicing and sharing their views instead of ignoramuses and panic merchants suffering from myopia.
Models that are created from inputs so flawed and so erroneous as to make anyone laugh with ridicule.
Anyone who is not a rabid anti-Capitalist using the Climate as an excuse, yes.
Its a job that has a paycheck.
@FA Until you, whoever or whatever your are, and your friend learn the difference between weather and climate you will make ignorant assertions such as this.
Would you be willing to bet me $1,000 that I can make an good climate prediction for six months from now at any spot on the globe you pick?
Easy money for me if you fall for this.
@Richard Abbott I think the alarmism industry is simply an out of control gravy train with many many hangers oners with their snouts in the trough. Things started getting very crazy when pure propagandists entered what was already a circus and started the whole BS "settled science" and "deniers" memes of purely vacuous propaganda. Scientists who should know better didn't firmly call out that rank idiocy. I guess it further cemented their careers to remain silent.
even sulphur is plant food, if you make a balanced fertiliser solution for liquid feeding it may be five percent or sulphur as sulphate
sulphur, what makes onions onions and not suggar roots.
So is ammonia. Scatter some of that around your house, sit back and enjoy. IT'S PLANT FOOD. I'm sure your spouse will be thrilled.
Professor Happer has a brilliant mind. Time to get true professionals on the case.
....so all is great. very comforting.....
As your local government agent, I find this video guilty of Crimethink and sentence everyone watching to be reeducated.
What you saw was the light from Venus reflected off a weather balloon and refracted through swamp gas...
Co2=Plant food and helps us breathe
This is absolutely fascinating
I'm so plese to find this professor.
Thank god for some balance at last. There’s a climate insanity on the march which is like the mass mindless embracing of a new religion. Thank you.
Brilliant Man, great interview! I learned something very important from listening to him again. He speculated the reason all the climate models are wrong is due to the group-think among the modellers, they adjust all their models to agree with each other (perhaps subconsciously) and that could be why they're all so horribly wrong.
Could be to ensure funding.
Yes and we have for over 1000 years
Thanks so much
Its just another tax!
It's global socialism, imho. I'd say you're off by a lot -- by so much you'd have to plot it out on a logarithmic scale...
@James2 N101 And they are back to burning coal because the windmills are too ineffective . it is also I believe 'brown coal' which is the most polluting variety.
A tax on breathing ... the dream of all rulers since the first serfdom.
@James2 N101 Name one project with "women in power" in Germany that is successful?
One of Trumps best appointments !
Amen! God Bless President Trump!
@@KenJackson_US You're nuts. Gawd TAKE T-rump. NOW!
William Happer has a great insight into the way we should be looking at the environment and the science related to it as a whole. These climate models are looking to come up with a result that fits with the (Scientists) opinions or what's being pushed by government that fund them, along with MSM cancelling anyone that has a different result to the woke climate ideology. Science isn't about looking for results that fits our opinions / ideologies / thoughts but is about doing the science by exploring all parameters we know at that time and whatever unbiased outcomes we can arrive at, this is the best answer we can give until something new can be added to improve the result even further. Science is never fully settled and is about trying to improve on what we know.... It's an ongoing process.... Irish viewer...!
Finally some truth and not hysteria.
I❤️C02
Hawaii right after the volcano went off 400 per per million
"Why is atmospheric CO2 measured in Hawaii?
In 1957 Dave Keeling, who was the first to make accurate measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere, chose the site high up "on the slopes of the Mauna Loa volcano" because he wanted to measure CO2 in air masses that would be representative of much of the Northern Hemisphere, and, hopefully, the globe."
That seems to be an inaccurate location to measure global CO2 since a volcano is potentially erupting more CO2 than the planet is globally. .for example China and India which are major polluters.
So good to hear an eloquent other side.
What he is talking about has been textbook biology for decades. I am so frustrated by the amount of actual science being ignored by so many. Frustrated because I am supposed to teach biology and scientific principles and yet the institution almost demands that we fall in line with the climate paranoia. And I like my job.
so worst case is 1°C per doubling CO2. Without Watervapour feedback no "climate crisis". More Watervapour cant be measured by now. more Water vapour would possibly mean more cooling clouds... so wheres the problem ?
@Pouty MacPotatohead so i also know that more heat in the atmosphere triggers more water vapor. After clausius clapperon 7% more water vapor per °C warmer atmosphere. Then does more Water vapor more warming, more warming more water vapor etc pp. Its like a never ending perpetuum mobile. if this is really happening on earth i think there wouldnt be life here. we had much warmer phases in earth history and we didnt went venus by additional water vapor feedback. clouds do in sum cause cooling.
@Pouty MacPotatoheadyeah maybe we cant tell, but i think its totally overestimated. maybe 0,5°C per dobbling. i recently saw several papers how solar wind modualtes the atmosphere. and there are several other sun factors (Flares, CMEs, Magnetic field, modulation of cosmic rays). These factros modulate several earth oscillations like PDO for example and they lag in time. Andthey are missing in current models of IPCC. and we schouldnt forget that we saw till the 2000s a modern Grand Maximum in sun activity. so all these factors were pushed to a certain limit and send more energy to the earth. here are some examples for only solar wind scholar.google.de/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=solarwind+climate+&hl=de&as_sdt=0,5
Thank you
One factor that is contributing to global warming is overlooked by most climate watchers is the effect of contrails consisting of water vapors accumulating at heights where they cannot form clouds and rain down.