oldephartte (oldephartte) wrote,
oldephartte
oldephartte

Why do climate deniers deny climate change?

Why do climate deniers deny climate change?


Alistair Riddoch, studied Philosophy & Ethics at York University

The question “Why do climate deniers deny climate change” is logically flawed in that it falsely asserts a premise that is untrue.

Climate deniers much more typically say, the climate has always changed and always will change. The evidence of such is obvious, and typically not in dispute.


From the 1990 IPCC Full Report, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The introduction

And a graph showing the history of global temperature.


What so called “climate change deniers” think is funny, is that there are humans that believe they are capable of being the cause of change, when clearly, nature is very much more capable of changing the climate than humans are.

You know, “the Believers”. Also referred to by some as “the Alarmists”.


Typically, climate change “deniers” know more about the issue than “the Believers”.

They haven’t just listened to what they are told to believe and accepted it on faith.

They have researched the history of the claim, the politics, the financial influences, and the way the “narrative of belief” has changed over the years.


Not all, but many so called “climate change deniers”, are aware of the history of oil prices, the restrictions on production and embargoes by OPEC that caused two significant oil shortages and energy crises in the United States of America.

They know of OPEC’s raising of the price of oil from $3 per barrel to $42 per barrel through the 1970.

And they know of Jimmy Carter’s 1977 US Energy Independence Plan. A document that makes it painfully obvious to anyone with more than two neurons firing, that all of the objectives of climate alarmism are ACTUALLY the objectives of the US reacting to OPECs bullying, and working towards energy independence.

National Energy Program Fact Sheet on the President's Program.

To so called “climate change deniers” it is so painfully obvious that it hurts, when they see people who have taken the hook and actually believe that they contribute to alteration of Earth’s energy budget.

They feel really bad for the people that have, on faith, bought the narrative that the “world needs saving”. And even worse for the ones that are running around trying to convince others. So pathetic.


Let’s put some perspective on the issue.

What is the volume of humans?

Now, lets compare that to the Earth.

Yes, the numbers are correct.

Humans = One half of one single cubic kilometer.

Earth = One TRILLION cubic kilometers.


The Earth is one trillion cubic kilometers in volume and has an average temperature that is in the thousands of degrees.

And that heat is ALWAYS radiating upward and outward from the center, marching it’s way to the surface, through the atmosphere and dissipating in the form of radiation and lost kinetic energy at the perimeter of the atmosphere.

This has been going on for billions of years.

Humans aren’t even “the flea on the tail of the dog”. At 1/2 of one trillionth of the mass of the Earth, humans are the pimple on the butt of the flea that is on the tail of the dog.

Humans are, to put it bluntly, insignificant in comparison to the outward flow of Energy from the Earth.

Sometimes the dog turns left, sometimes the dog turns right. The flea jumps up and down and says “look what I made him do”. And the pimple on the fleas butt thinks “look what I made the flea do, jump up and down, and that in turn made the dog turn left and then turn right. The flea is wrong. The pimple on the flea’s butt (representing humans, this is a metaphor), is even more wrong.


“But, but, but….” say the alarmists. Those that have full faith in the narrative contrived and thrust upon them by the government sponsored and funded agencies, “we are trapping the heat from the Sun”.

Where did they get this idea from? From a lab test in a fixed volume experiment in the lab of a guy named Arrhenius back in the 1800’s.

But is the volume of the Earth “fixed”?

Absolutely not. It is in “hydrostatic equilibrium”.

And every once in a while, the atmosphere gets a kick in the ass from the Sun. The Sun has these things called “solar flares”. Solar flare - Wikipedia. They are twisted loops of magnetic energy that stretch out from the Sun by . Often these twisted loops “break”, and there is a “coronal mass ejection. Coronal mass ejection - Wikipedia. They are really big.

And when coronal mass ejections hit the Earth, they add a lot of energy to it, and temporarily the volume of the atmosphere expands. We know this, because the expansion of the atmosphere causes satellite drag.

So you see, there is direct, observed evidence that indeed the volume of Earth’s atmosphere is NOT FIXED. It fluctuates. At times, significantly. More information about that here, at NASA’s web page about satellite drag, NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center.


It is well known that temperature, pressure and volume are tied to one another. It is called the Ideal Gas Law.

Now it is time to connect the dots.

The volume of the Earth’s atmosphere is not fixed.

The Earth’s atmosphere is in hydrostatic equilibrium.

The fulcrum that balances the volume is gravitational energy opposing the pressure.

This produces what is called the “gravito-thermo effect”.

The gravito thermo effect is what determines the temperature of the various layers of the atmosphere.


Why don’t we know and understand the gravito-thermo effect better, you might ask, as an alarmist that is starting to wonder if perhaps they don’t actually know enough to support their belief that humans are changing the temperature of a multi-thousand degree, trillion cubic kilometer ball of mass (the Earth).

Well, consider this.

We don’t actually understand how gravity works. Not very well at all.

We have two best theories of how the universe works called “The Standard Model of the Atom (a.k.a. quantum mechanics)”, and “The Standard Model of Cosmology”.

The standard model of cosmology is based on general relativity. (Einstein stuff). This is from where we get our best guess at how gravity works, because so far to date, we have not managed to figure out how it works in relation to quantum mechanics.

Our best understanding of gravitational energy is applicable to CELESTIAL BODIES, using their center of mass at a distance. From Encyclopedia Brittanica:

The atmosphere does not have a “center of mass”. It is made of trillions of trillions of particles each with their own center of mass.

So we do NOT have an understanding of gravity that actually applies to and helps us with our understanding of what holds the atmosphere to the planet.

We are working on such an understanding. Attempting to unify the Standard Model of the Atom with the Standard Model of Cosmology. Attempting to put together quantum mechanics and general relativity.

So far there are two dozen CANDIDATE theories.

NONE of the theories are clear favourites. NONE are thought likely to be the right one, except by the individuals who think theirs is the best, and each of the theories has supporters.

There is no “consensus”.

And each of the theories has significant cracks in it.


So, back to the original question.

“Why do climate deniers deny climate change”

To summarize:


  • They do not. They know the climate does change.

  • They know there is strong political motivation to get people to believe that humans change the climate, in an effort to control the price and production of oil.

  • They know that Arrhenius’ experiment doesn’t actually apply to planetary atmospheres.

  • They know that the gravito-thermo effect balances and determines the pressure and temperature gradients within the atmosphere.

  • They know that alarmists have not done due diligence.

  • They know that government agencies have chosen to re-write history in order to attempt to make their case stronger, and such is documented in the series of IPCC reports.

  • They know that politicians are more than happy to “believe” in anything that will justify increased taxation. Money is power.

  • They know that politicians like to “look good”. And what can look better than “being a world saviour”.

  • And they know that some people will believe just about any story, if told to them by a person of perceived authority standing behind a podium.


Tags: atmospheric temperature, climate, uncertain certainty
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments