- All true, Ian. But are those data about the long descent of CO2, and the ancient temperature fluc Archived Message
Posted by Rhisiart Gwilym
on February 27, 2020, 6:38 pm, in reply to "total industry shill"
|
-tuations, clearly having no visible relationship with the CO2 variation, actually true? And isn't it also true that the the climate - and all the other ongoing long-term geophysical processes - are exceedingly complex, to the point where sussing out what has happened in the past is feasible, but predicting what's going to happen in the future is simply beyond any honest science; at this time, and maybe forever? If these things are true, they can't just be brushed aside because they're uncomfortable for devotees of the climate-panic narrative. I quite agree that Patrick is obviously a tainted source, because of his paid affiliations to manipulative gangster-capitalism outfits. But - messenger/message - are the assertions that he makes true despite his own personal iffyness? I haven't seen any conclusive rebuttals of either the idea of the long - and ultimately disaster-threatening - descent of ambient CO2, or the complete disjunct between what it's been doing, and what the long-term temperature variations have been doing over the same period, sometimes a whole lot hotter than now, and with considerably higher CO2 levels, yet life thriving mightily even then. The whole thing begins to seem to me so baffling that it feels unwise to adopt any Gretarian angry-dogmatism about it. Dmitry Orlov doesn't make references to the material which Patrick publicises, coming at it from a different perspective, heavily research based, which feels pretty persuasive, to me.(He's living permanently back in Russia now.) Lately too he has begun to make supportive comments about closed-fuel-cycle nuclear innovations which are in development in Russia - about which I suppose we Westerners will get no honest account until Vlad announces them in a reprise of his famous 1 March speech when he unveiled the utterly game-changing new generation of Russian weaponry that is now in operation. As several Russian-originated commentators have been pointing out lately, Russian culture is different; not really Western-style at all. They are thinking for themselves and following their own lines of investigation. Can't help wondering whether some equally game-changing development with civil nuclear energy may be in some little-known Russian hitech-research pipeline right now. My long-time instinct has been against nuclear of any kind, for many years. But otoh, objective reality has to be acknowledged, on both the climate and the nuclear issues. A true servant of the classic scientific method commits to being able to say 'We were wrong about this' whenever the facts demand it. So what about those alleged facts sketched at the top of this post? IS there something in them? |