unsupported pieces of consensus that the IPCC continues to coyly intimate to the public. Given the reptile brain i want you to wash your hands plague doctor shirt response individuals have, the most sinister motives of those using climate change as a political tool appear apt. But there is no observational support for any change in disasters despite the
i want you to wash your hands plague doctor shirt
can be very different from one community to the next, the kinds of measures that can successfully reduce climate risks will also depend heavily on the local context. There are a number of CDR methods, each with different potentials for achieving negative emissions, as well as different associated costs and side effects. They are also at differing levels of development, with some more conceptual than others. One example of a CDR method in the demonstration phase is a process known as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage , in which atmospheric COis absorbed by plants and trees as they grow, and then the plant material is burned to produce bioenergy. The COreleased in the production of bioenergy is captured before it reaches the atmosphere and i want you to wash your hands plague doctor shirt stored in geological formations deep underground on very long time scales. Since the plants absorb COas they grow and the process does not emit CO, the overall effect can be to reduce atmospheric CO. Also, please stop positing nonsense of the evidence on the impacts of anthropogenic climate change on polar bears. I get that’s part-and-parcel with your contrarianismdenialism, but it’s annoying to those of us who bother to read reputable, scientific sources. In , Merkel was appointed federal minister of the environment. Her overall ambition was to combat anticipated climate change.
She organized the first U.N. conference on climate, COP in Berlin in April . Both Merkel and Helmut Kohl spoke in their introductory statements about carbon dioxide as “climate poison carbon dioxide.” As a Ph.D. in physics, she should have known that carbon dioxide at levels of ppm is not a poison. Only at concentrations of greater than is it toxic. WASHINGTON The National Academy of Sciences has selected Maurice F. Strong to receive its most prestigious award, the Public Welfare Medal. Established in , the medal is presented annually to honor extraordinary use of science for the public good. The Academy chose Strong, a Canadian and the first non-U.S. citizen to receive the award, in recognition of his leadership of global conferences that became the basis for international environmental negotiations and for his tireless efforts to link science, technology, and society for common benefit. So consensus as I see it in climate science represents those falling in-line with the majority status quo position, having little basis in their investment other than superficial association. Only the minority elite can drive their investment long-term based on actionable evidence; short-term the charlatans ,. media can play their games to drive the market, creating volatility. But the minority elite represent the ones with the most power who can “move markets” on the short or long side, long-term. The vast majority, the consensus, will always be followers; it’s these who make market driven irrational exuberance possible. So the amount of volatility in AGW is a measurement of the number of scientists outside climate science representing the majority; who have vested interests in politics, monied interests or hype from perceived threats; it’s these who make up the vast body of the consensus. TE, I’ve considered the same question and believe climate science consensus building is somewhat unique, but maybe more so to science. Consensus building en masse is often exercised through a volatile exchange as a process of working through ideas, and it doesn’t necessarily deliver as expected by a majority. On myriad levels climate science consensus building is very much like the process of determining valuation in the stock market. The metaphor is useful, the way I would describe it in relationship to climate science is that, as in financial investment, ideas can be carried beyond rational valuations by the masses when in a fit of irrational exuberance consensus builds upon itself for all the wrong reasons. When masses of investors pile on an issue, the issue then becomes an investment to protect. Much of the time individual stocks are not fairly valued at any given moment in time, nor are the markets overall fairly valued on a relative basis; if they were then there would never be volatility because one would simply invest based on a guaranteed future, which is of course preposterous. Volatility is an important creative catalyst, it’s when irrational exuberance takes hold that a consensus valuation becomes dangerous. And of impacts? There is no evidence to support changes in fires, droughts or tropical cyclones. These are
Click to buy i want you to wash your hands plague doctor shirt and hope you like
See more in here