Email Subscribe
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Peter Carroll on Australian Drought
- Oztruthseeker on Australian Drought
- Eric Simpson on Mass Climate Hypnosis
- Terry Shipman on Everything Looks Like A Nail
- Eric Simpson on Mass Climate Hypnosis
Archives
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
New Video : “Nobel Prize In Economic Ignorance”
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Another ace in the hole!
I don’t understand what all they’re talking about as they refute IPCC modelling except for they don’t use radiative transfer modelling. Anybody care to interpret the errors exposed? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbeAHMtOXSw
So then, by the prevailing climate logic, increasing corn yields make CO2 go up.
We should not plant any more corn to save the planet.
Except for popcorn… I mean that can’t kill us, can it?
Maybe meat-based popcorn. Yeah, that will work.
I’m not sure how you got that drawing of me at 0:41, but…I guess I’m ok with you using it. Another great video!!
Hi Tony,
Have you seen this? It looks rather ominous:
YouTube To Delete All Accounts That Aren’t “Commercially Viable” Starting Dec. 10th
ALL YOUTUBE HAS TO DO NOW TO SILENCE FREE SPEECH IS DEMONETIZE CHANNELS IT DOESN’T LIKE AND FORCE THEM INTO COMMERCIAL NON-VIABILITY
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what YouTube is planning to do once this policy change comes into full effect.
https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/youtube-delete-all-accounts-arent-commercially-viable-starting-dec-10th
I don’t know that it is true? Just a heads-up / FYI.
I believe Nordhaus simply uses IPCC results in his models. While it appears that Nordhaus supported a carbon tax on the basis that if done right; would result in a calculated net present value benefit of about $3 trillion. He has however, also come up with results that suggest climate change abatement costs greatly exceed claimed potential for damages from climate change. For example, he found that Al Gore’s proposals would for aggressive limits on CO2 would hurt economic output so much that net abatement COSTs over doing nothing about climate change was on the order of $21 trillion. Similarly, attempts to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C would still result in abatement costs that exceeded the claimed damages of climate change by about $14 trillion. So unless unlikely but catastrophic climate events occurred Nordhaus findings suggest that it was better to mitigate damages rather than attempt to reduce CO2. So money spent on attempting to stop CO2 based climate change was better spent elsewhere. Nordhaus findings are worth reviewing!
Hi Tony:
At around 1 minute in this video you observe corn yields have increased since 1940. This is true of other crops as well. You then suggest this is linked to carbon emissions.
It is true that CO2 is used as a fertilizer- and many greenhouses actually pump in CO2 to enhance plant growth. It is not correct to imply that the increase in crop yields is due to CO2 emissions. They would be influenced instead by the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This has been measured and you can see it has only increased at most by about 30-40% since 1940.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
This would not be enough to explain the increase in crop yields. The real reason crop yields have increased so much since the 1940s is the use of modern plant breeding techniques and biotechnology. Companies like Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, Dow and Bayer Crop Science have collectively spent billions of dollars developing seeds for higher yielding crops. Corn yields typically increase about 2-3% per year due to this effort. This really began in earnest in the 1940s when hybrid corn was introduced on a large scale and scientific methods were introduced to agriculture. Collectively this is known as the “green revolution” and it has enabled the ability for several billion people to live on Earth without famine. You can see a high level summary here:
https://www.thoughtco.com/green-revolution-overview-1434948