All doomsday predictions of the first Earth Day in 1970 have turned out to be wrong

.
CP Snow was talking about people like ITN.

C.P. Snow’s discussion in 1959 of the two cultures suggests why it is the educated elite that is most vulnerable to the absurd narrative. Snow was an English physicist, novelist, government advisor.

Here is his description of the non-scientific educated elite.

“A good many times I have been present at gatherings of people who, by the standards of the traditional culture, are thought highly educated and who have with considerable gusto been expressing their incredulity at the illiteracy of scientists.

Once or twice I have been provoked and have asked the company how many of them could describe the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The response was cold: it was also negative. Yet I was asking something which is the scientific equivalent of: Have you read a work of Shakespeare’s?

I now believe that if I had asked an even simpler question – such as, What do you mean by mass, or acceleration, which is the scientific equivalent of saying, Can you read? – not more than one in ten of the highly educated would have felt that I was speaking the same language. So the great edifice of modern physics goes up, and the majority of the cleverest people in the western world have about as much insight into it as their Neolithic ancestors would have had.”

What C.P. Snow failed to note, I think, is that the group he describes is actually aware of their scientific ignorance, and this leaves them very insecure. This accounts for their need for simple narratives, however wrong. It allows them to believe that they actually do ‘understand’ the science, and, as we see, they become arrogantly proud of their alleged accomplishment. Of course, they forget that their ignorance extends to understanding what science actually is. They forget that the opposite of Science is ‘The Science’. The situation is compounded when one comes to climate where most scientists are also ignorant, but where their support for the narrative comforts the non-scientists. On top of all this, I suspect that in a long period of wellbeing, this elite feels the need to show that they too have met challenges – even if the challenges are purely imaginary. This seems particularly true for young people who are confronted with stories of the courage of the ‘greatest generation’.
Click to expand...

https://co2coalition.org/news/the-imaginary-climate-crisis-how-can-we-change-the-message/
 
BartenderElite said:
Nope. I wasn't a Trump supporter. The man lies every time he speaks.

But, I believe in science.
Click to expand...

You believe in The Science, not the same thing.


What C.P. Snow failed to note, I think, is that the group he describes is actually aware of their scientific ignorance, and this leaves them very insecure. This accounts for their need for simple narratives, however wrong. It allows them to believe that they actually do ‘understand’ the science, and, as we see, they become arrogantly proud of their alleged accomplishment. Of course, they forget that their ignorance extends to understanding what science actually is. They forget that the opposite of Science is ‘The Science’.
The situation is compounded when one comes to climate where most scientists are also ignorant, but where their support for the narrative comforts the non-scientists. On top of all this, I suspect that in a long period of wellbeing, this elite feels the need to show that they too have met challenges – even if the challenges are purely imaginary. This seems particularly true for young people who are confronted with stories of the courage of the ‘greatest generation’.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...-turned-out-to-be-wrong&p=5106798#post5106798
 
Last edited:
BartenderElite said:
I mean - are you paying attention to what's going on w/ the planet right now?

Cripes. Disappearing habitat, poisoned water & air, oceanic foodchain completely endangered, mass exctinction.

How are you missing all of this?

Some of the timeframes they had were off, but otherwise they were spot on.
Click to expand...

are you predicting that by 2070 all the predictions will come true?.....
 
11. “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
Click to expand...

to be fair, this happened in Washington just last week.....
 
Lionfish said:
Im not a biologist. What the people at Scientific American derived was, that the cleaner the air, the more violent the storms. Kind of ironic don't you think?
Click to expand...

That wasn't the conclusion.

It's amazing how hard people will fight for their ability to pollute. Future historians will just shake their heads.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
are you predicting that by 2070 all the predictions will come true?.....
Click to expand...

I'm actually saying that they weren't that far off in the '70's. Compare our environment now to how it was then.

What do you think...is our current course sustainable, given how significantly things have degraded in just a few decades?

We're a short-sighted species. But we can recognize that and try to compensate for it.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I know......I'm not sure why since they haven't happened in the last fifty years........so if you still think they are going to happen, when?.....2030?......2050?......2070?......2090?....
Click to expand...

I have a calendar that gives the highs and lows, snowfall, and rainfall records that go back as far as recorded history. Inevitability they will dip from the late 1800's to the present day. The tree hugging public seems to think they can outsmart and control mother nature by throwing dollars at her. Idiots all.
Meanwhile, the rich and powerful continue to build and buy on the beaches all across the country as they fly their private jets. John Kerry and al Gore are perfect examples.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I know......I'm not sure why since they haven't happened in the last fifty years........so if you still think they are going to happen, when?.....2030?......2050?......2070?......2090?....
Click to expand...

What "hasn't happened?" Our water is more polluted, our air quality is way down from where it was, the reefs are being destroyed at an alarming rate, we're in the middle of a mass extinction.

Yeah - those people warning us about all of that stuff sure were crazies.
 
BartenderElite said:
What "hasn't happened?" Our water is more polluted, our air quality is way down from where it was, the reefs are being destroyed at an alarming rate, we're in the middle of a mass extinction.
Click to expand...

dude....air and water quality are up......we don't have 100M people a year starving to death.....which prediction came true?.....
 
Primavera said:
Into the Night said:
It's not possible. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You can't make energy out of nothing.


You've said the same fucking thing umpteen times, I've also said you need to do a thermodynamics 101 course and some basic physics and chemistry.
Click to expand...

The 1st law of thermodynamics:
E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. There is no work being performed, so E(t+1) = E(t). You can't change that, no matter how you want to insult someone. You can't create energy out of nothing. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics:
e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. You cannot decrease entropy for any reason at any time. You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas, no matter how you insult people. No gas or vapor has the capability to reduce entropy. You cannot trap heat no matter how you insult people.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law:
r = C * e * t^4 where 'r' is radiated light per square area in watts, 'C' is a natural constant, 'e' is a measured constant known as 'emissivity' or how well a surface radiates (or absorbs) light, and 't' is temperature in deg K. You cannot trap light no matter you insult people. You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

No Magick gas or vapor has the capability to ignore or set aside these theories of science. It is YOU that is making the same mistake every time. Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that is ignoring science.
You cannot change these theories of science. They are what they are. They operate all the time. There is no time that you can suspend any of them. All of these are falsifiable theories. You haven't falsified them. You only deny and discard them.
Click to expand...
 
Primavera said:
Ignorant twat, if you haven't heard of the CLOUD experiment at CERN then that's your fault not mine!
Click to expand...
Not an experiment. A random number generator or type randU.
Primavera said:
CERN’s colossal complex of accelerators is in the midst of a two-year shutdown for upgrade work. But that doesn’t mean all experiments at the Laboratory have ceased to operate. The CLOUD experiment, for example, has just started a data run that will last until the end of November.
The CLOUD experiment studies how ions produced by high-energy particles called cosmic rays affect aerosol particles, clouds and the climate.
Click to expand...
Clouds do not need particles to form. Cosmic rays are not ions.
Primavera said:
It uses a special cloud chamber and a beam of particles from the Proton Synchrotron to provide an artificial source of cosmic rays.
Click to expand...
No such thing as artificial cosmic rays.
Primavera said:
For this run, however, the cosmic rays are instead natural high-energy particles from cosmic objects such as exploding stars.

“Cosmic rays, whether natural or artificial, leave a trail of ions in the chamber,” explains CLOUD spokesperson Jasper Kirkby, “but the Proton Synchrotron provides cosmic rays that can be adjusted over the full range of ionisation rates occurring in the troposphere, which comprises the lowest ten kilometres of the atmosphere. That said, we can also make progress with the steady flux of natural cosmic rays that make it into our chamber, and this is what we’re doing now.”

In its 10 years of operation, CLOUD has made several important discoveries on the vapours that form aerosol particles in the atmosphere and can seed clouds.

Although most aerosol particle formation requires sulphuric acid,
Click to expand...
Clouds do not need sulfuric acid to form. Sulfur is spelled with an 'f', not a 'ph'; unless you're in the UK.
Primavera said:
CLOUD has shown that aerosols can form purely from biogenic vapours emitted by trees,
Click to expand...
Buzzword fallacy. There is no such thing as 'biogenic vapors'. 'Vapor' doesn't have a 'u' in it, unless you're in the UK.
Primavera said:
and that their formation rate is enhanced by cosmic rays by up to a factor 100.
Click to expand...
Clouds do not need cosmic rays to form. All you need is a moisture source and convection. You are obviously not a meteorologist.
Primavera said:
Most of CLOUD’s data runs are aerosol runs,
Click to expand...
Random numbers are not data. Argument from randU fallacy.
Primavera said:
in which aerosols form and grow inside the chamber under simulated conditions of sunlight and cosmic-ray ionisation.
Click to expand...
Random numbers.
Primavera said:
The run that has just started is of the “CLOUDy” type, which studies the ice- and liquid-cloud-seeding properties of various aerosol species grown in the chamber, and direct effects of cosmic-ray ionisation on clouds.

The present run uses the most comprehensive array of instruments ever assembled for CLOUDy experiments, including several instruments dedicated to measuring the ice- and liquid-cloud-seeding properties of aerosols over the full range of tropospheric temperatures. In addition, the CERN CLOUD team has built a novel generator of electrically charged cloud seeds to investigate the effects of charged aerosols on cloud formation and dynamics.

“Direct effects of cosmic-ray ionisation on the formation of fair-weather clouds are highly speculative and almost completely unexplored experimentally,” says Kirkby. “So this run could be the most boring we’ve ever done – or the most exciting! We won’t know until we try, but by the end of the CLOUD experiment, we want to be able to answer definitively whether cosmic rays affect clouds and the climate, and not leave any stone unturned.”

https://home.cern/news/news/experiments/cosmic-rays-clouds
Click to expand...
Sorry, dude. Using random numbers of type randU as data creates the argument from randU fallacy.

Clouds form from convective heat and a source of moisture. No radiation is needed. No particles are needed. Any time humidity is at 100%, a cloud will form. As temperature drops due to increasing altitude, humidity tends to increase. That's why clouds tend to have flat bottoms. It all happens at the same altitude. Even if there were no cosmic rays at all, clouds would still form the same way. Even if there were no particulates in the air at all, clouds will still form the same way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top