mightychurch.com

Media Watch returned tonight, and look at the fawning coverage of Lord Monckton, the latest self-styled non-scientist sceptic with a happy knack of making stuff up. How do otherwise sensible people get taken in by someone who thinks there’s a world-wide conspiracy afoot to establish a global communist government?

But what finally dawned on me is this: If the right-wing conspiracy theorists are right about a communist conspiracy, why are the ones in agreement with their climate change denial actual communists?

Why is it Western capitalists arguing for action on climate change, and the biggest communist nation on earth arguing against it?

Wouldn’t that make climate change denial the real communist conspiracy?

But what finally dawned on me is this: If the right-wing conspiracy theorists are right about a communist conspiracy, why are the ones in agreement with their climate change denial actual communists?

Why is it Western capitalists arguing for action on climate change, and the biggest communist nation on earth arguing against it?

Wouldn’t that make climate change denial the real communist conspiracy?

Or even more basic, if it’s a conspiracy, why couldn’t they finally agree on anything when they finally got together in Copenhagen?

Monckton is so bizarre I suspect he’s actually a counter-agent working for climate change awareness by tainting all Denialists as having his Dan-Brown sized conspiracy view of the world.

Say it with me: WORLD COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT!
Oh the humanity!

Haha yes, I was wondering if Monckton was actually doing high level satire too. Honestly, if Barnaby Joyce thinks you’re too extreme, you’ve really reached the next level.

What struck me about Monckton - beyond the climate-change debate itself - is that he claims mathematical expertise while denying that he’s a scientist. Every mathematician is a scientist! Therefore, why can’t he see that Earth’s climate is a Chaotic [i.e. non-linear] system, hence always subject to change? (I state this from the perspective of someone with BMus(Hons) + PhD degrees, who did 3 years of honours-level Pure Mathematics at USyd, and who is rather affected by wine at present.)

who did 3 years of honours-level Pure Mathematics at USyd

Woah, forget the wine, I wouldn’t go admitting something like this out in public forums like this! ;-)

(Said from the perspective of someone who, for various reasons, got ‘left behind’ in the Year 11 maths classroom. As the stuff snowballed into more advanced areas of geometry and calculus, I was kind of stuck back in earlier chapters thinking “What the…?” I ended up doing my English homework in maths. I still have bad dreams about it…)

With all the nastiness about Climate Change floating around, it seemed to me to be about time for Mighty Church to lead the way. Therefore , I have calculated the degrees C lowering of ocean temperature caused by the melting of Ice in the Antartica.
    It is over 50 yrs since I did Physics, so O&OE;.  Not one skerick of info comes from E-mails. Mostly Wikipedia.

    World Ocean Mass     3 x 10^15 MT
    Latent Heat of Ice       334 KJ/Kg
      Specific Heat of WAter     4.2 KJ/ Kg / 1 deg C

  MT= Metric Ton= Short Ton     KJ= Kilojoule

  Therefor Energy taken in by Ice= 334 x 30 x 10^14 x 10^3
                      =10 x 10^20 KJ

  Temperature loss of World Oceans (*T )
 
      Q= m c *T
    10 x 10^20 = 1.3 x 10^20 x 4.2 x *T celcius

            *T = 5.5 degrees Celcius

  This figure does not consider the atmosphere or the salty water of the oceans, but when you are worried about the failure of the planet, these , and other, shortcuts are quite OK. I was hoping for a drop of over 25deg. in temperature, then the planet would , for a short time, be a giant skating ring.  The Polar Bears would be saved!
    Alas, it would not last long, because without the moderating effects of water and ices’ high specific and latent heats, the planet would quickly warm up under the insulation of our CO2 rich Atmosphere.
    So perhaps we know now why there are some cases of the planet cooling, maybe even “Snowmageddon in parts of the USA. Can,t find any answers in “Revelations” But I,m sure Barnaby Joyce will sort it all out soon

Yes, freaky weather for sure! But again we have to be sure to distinguish between weather and climate.

The thing I find interesting about melting ice, as a non-technical amateur, is after talking with a science teacher activist I know, finding out more about the latent heat of ice or the “Phase change”. (Sounds like something off Star Trek).
Basically, it takes far more energy to get the ice to the melting point than people realise. So when the Antarctic ice starts melting into the ocean, it’s not representing cooling moving into the ocean but an ENORMOUS reserve of extra atmospheric energy that is moving into the ice to turn it into water… thinking about it globally.

Then the albedo changes kick in, where once the ice acted as a mirror reflecting 90% of the sun’s energy the darker seawater now ABSORBS 90% of the heat.

In other words, right now ice is already absorbing heaps and heaps of extra atmospheric energy, disguising some of the warming, and bouncing back sunlight before it can transform into heat energy, preventing some of the warming.

When it is gone, we have the double whammy of less ice to act as a “sponge” absorbing heat and less ice acting as a mirror to prevent the heat in the first place!

It’s just one of many feedbacks that make this a very serious proposition.

In other words, the faster it warms, the faster it warms. The last time Co2 was this high was 15 million years ago,

“The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” said the paper’s lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

“Carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas, and geological observations that we now have for the last 20 million years lend strong support to the idea that carbon dioxide is an important agent for driving climate change throughout Earth’s history,” she said.

UK Guardian: Utah delivers vote of no confidence for ‘climate alarmists’
“The US’s most Republican state passes bill disputing science of climate change, claiming emissions are ‘essentially harmless’”

Carbon dioxide is “essentially harmless” to human beings and good for plants. So now will you stop worrying about global warming?

Utah’s House of Representatives apparently has at least. Officially the most Republican state in America, its political masters have adopted a resolution condemning “climate alarmists”, and disputing any scientific basis for global warming.

The measure, which passed by 56-17, has no legal force, though it was predictably claimed by climate change sceptics as a great victory in the wake of the controversy caused by a mistake over Himalayan glaciers in the UN’s landmark report on global warming.

But it does offer a view of state politicians’ concerns in Utah which is a major oil and coal producing state.

The original version of the bill dismissed climate science as a “well organised and ongoing effort to manipulate and incorporate “tricks” related to global temperature data in order to produce a global warming outcome”. It accused those seeking action on climate change of riding a “gravy train” and their efforts would “ultimately lock billions of human beings into long-term poverty”.

In the heat of the debate, the representative Mike Noel said environmentalists were part of a vast conspiracy to destroy the American way of life and control world population through forced sterilisation and abortion.

By the time the final version of the bill came to a vote, cooler heats apparently prevailed. The bill dropped the word “conspiracy”, and described climate science as “questionable” rather than “flawed”.

However, it insisted – against all evidence – that the hockey stick graph of changing temperatures was discredited. It also called on the federal government’s Environmental Protection Agency to order an immediate halt in its moves to regulate greenhouse gas emissions “until a full and independent investigation of climate data and global warming science can be substantiated”.

As Noel explained: “Sometimes ... we need to have the courage to do nothing.”

ahahaha!

But it does offer a view of state politicians’ concerns in Utah which is a major oil and coal producing state.

Yeah, the climate scientists are riding the gravy train, sure, yeah, riiiiiiight!

Hey, don’t forget this is the same country that had Sarah Palin as VP on the ticket and who now works for “Fox News” because she values its unbiased portrayal of the truth!