Climate change as a tool of tyranny

[Subduction Zone]

LOL, Yes... it is hard to admit you are wrong.

Wow! You still do not understand your error even after it was explained to you. There were two categories of global warming deniers in that article. You cherry picked only one of them. Yes, the number of outright loons might be the same. That makes sense in a way. It should make you feel a bit better about the country. But you still ignore the very high number of science deniers that we have here. Perhaps you are one of them and do not see that as a bad thing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Name me one problem the Government has solved, and then got rid of the useless bureaucracy, that solved the problem? Government creates problems so it can have an excuse to grow. The war on poverty is over 50 years old and it grows each year. They either have to be the most incompetent people on the planet, or their mission is not to solve the problem, but to milk the problem, forever. This is also about job creation and sustainability.

You contradicted yourself in your own demand.

 

[wellwisher]

You were the one that proposed false information. An immense volcanic explosion of that sort would actually cool the Earth. One cannot just put water into the atmosphere. It needs to be stable water vapor. A volcanic explosion would not have the accompanying warming needed to for that increase of water to be permanent. It would form clouds, which reflect energy out during the daytime. Such events cause a drop in temperatures historically. Though that is probably due to the sulfur that accompanies such explosions. At any rate such events have caused a drop in temperatures. Not a rise. One country could not lie about that.

If a volcano erupted, under the ocean, the atmospheric cooling affect of sulfur and dust is scrubbed by the ocean water, giving you just an ocean warming affect that can cause CO2 to be released. The crust is much thinner under the oceans, allowing the plates to move easier and heat to seep from the mantle.

Is everyone aware that there a place under the Atlantic Ocean where the earth's mantle is exposed without any crust covering it.

Mission to Study Earth's Gaping 'Open Wound'

There was another discovery of oceans of water, under the crust, in the upper mantle, below SE Asia and USA.

Huge 'Ocean' Discovered Inside Earth

New Evidence for Oceans of Water Deep in the Earth

I put these two discoveries together; mantle exposed and the upper mantle water, to speculated that a large breech in the crust, caused hot mantle water to pour into the Atlantic, creating that exposed scar.

The earth is integrated and climate science is not fully addressing the affects of the balance of the water in the atmosphere, the oceans and in the inner earth. El Niño and La Niña are both ocean water affects, that can determine whether California gets a lingering drought or too much rain from an atmospheric river of water. This has little to do with CO2, but manmade gets all the credit.

El Nino was first observed in the 1600's by fishermen. This is connected to a warming and cooling of ocean water at reoccurring place.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If a volcano erupted, under the ocean, the atmospheric cooling affect of sulfur and dust is scrubbed by the ocean water, giving you just an ocean warming affect that can cause CO2 to be released. The crust is much thinner under the oceans, allowing the plates to move easier and heat to seep from the mantle.

Is everyone aware that there a place under the Atlantic Ocean where the earth's mantle is exposed without any crust covering it.

Mission to Study Earth's Gaping 'Open Wound'

There was another discovery of oceans of water, under the crust, in the upper mantle, below SE Asia and USA.

Huge 'Ocean' Discovered Inside Earth

New Evidence for Oceans of Water Deep in the Earth

I put these two discoveries together; mantle exposed and the upper mantle water, to speculated that a large breech in the crust, caused hot mantle water to pour into the Atlantic, creating that exposed scar.

The earth is integrated and climate science is not fully addressing the affects of the balance of the water in the atmosphere, the oceans and in the inner earth. El Niño and La Niña are both ocean water affects, that can determine whether California gets a lingering drought or too much rain from an atmospheric river of water. This has little to do with CO2, but manmade gets all the credit.

El Nino was first observed in the 1600's by fishermen. This is connected to a warming and cooling of ocean water at reoccurring place.

Oh please, stop. If you do not understand something ask questions. The "oceans of water" are stuck there. They are not even what most people would call water

Here is a very serious question: Are you familiar with dry wall?

 

[Pete in Panama]

But this doesn't address the OP, which you said "Yes, yes, yes" to. The question is how a country could cause climate change, so just pushing disinformation about climate change that happens doesn't address it. At this point, we should probably assume that Shaul was using hyperbole and that no country has actually caused any climate change in order to push a political agenda. So now the discussion is over whether anthropogenic climate change, which he stipulated to was real, could be used to push a desired agenda.

What is that agenda? Just political control? Using scare tactics to take advantage of a bad situation? You used the situation of an exploding volcano, but you thought that would cause the climate to heat up. Actually, in the past, that has caused the climate to cool temporarily as the ash blocks and reflects heat away from the Earth. But that isn't anthropogenic climate change, and the exploding volcano wasn't caused by a government. So you are still way off base in terms of your analogy.

If you want to argue that climate change isn't anthropogenic, that is too much of a goalpost shift and should probably be the topic of another thread. I can see an argument where a government might conspire to push misinformation about natural climate change in order to manipulate people, although I don't think that is what is happening. The consensus among climate scientists is that anthropogenic warming and consequent climate change is both real and catastrophic. So what should we do about it? It doesn't look like our government or any other one is actually doing much at all to stop it, since all of the proposed solutions so far have no chance of stopping it. In fact, climate change is unstoppable now, so mitigating its effects is what the public dialog has been about.

What I'm beginning to see is the climate shtick is a kind of group-think, or "cognative tribalism as they say in the phsyc biz.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What I'm beginning to see is the climate shtick is a kind of group-think, or "cognative tribalism as they say in the phsyc biz.

Yes You are right. Just like gravity. We really do not need to fall down. That is really a personal choice.

 

[Kenny]

No, we do know. We know about rain. We know that at best it would be temporary.

What is temporary? 1yr? 5yrs? they are estimating 10 years. It's never happened before so we have no rule of thumb

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is temporary? 1yr? 5yrs? they are estimating 10 years. It's never happened before so we have no rule of thumb

Just drop it. Your example failed. The title alone should have told you.

 

[Kenny]

Just drop it. Your example failed. The title alone should have told you.

wow.... I really think you should take your own advise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

wow.... I really think you should take your own advise.

That is only because you have no clue as to how badly you failed Now you are just striking out blindly. When you do not understand politely ask questions and people will help you.

 

[wellwisher]

Oh please, stop. If you do not understand something ask questions. The "oceans of water" are stuck there. They are not even what most people would call water

Here is a very serious question: Are you familiar with dry wall?

The oceans of water in the upper mantle are connected to a phase of water called super-ionic water. This phase of water comes after the supercritical or hydrothermal water phase, in terms of increasing pressure and temperature. Super-ionic water is an even more aggressive form of water, than supercritical water, and will dissolve into the upper mantle mineral phases, like a water into a sponge. There is more mineral than water in this composite phase so it more like a sponge soaked with water, than salt dissolved in water.

On the phase diagram of water, there is a phase boundary between supercritical and super-ionic water, at the lower crust and upper mantle. Any sudden loss or gain of pressure is able to shift the phases above or below the phase boundary. When super-ionic water suddenly decreases pressure, due to a lifting of a crustal plate boundary, it explodes like TNT; rapid entropy increase, as it reverses back into supercritical water. This helps the plate sliding process, while the sudden lowered solubility of water, in the mineral sponge, due the entropy increase, releases the water.

Climate science has its head stuck in the clouds, so to speak, and does not look in the basement. The casino science black box is not useful for these extra variables.

For example, the tilt of the earth has change. This is being attributed to the pumping of ground water for the needs of civilization. It take time of the underground aquifer to replenish itself, thereby shifting the weight of the water closer to the surface. The affect is like placing some gum on the surface of a spinning top; wobbles more. This is another water affect that is adding new variables.

CO2 is sort of a one trick pony which may be why it is preferred by most scientists.

 

[Kenny]

That is only because you have no clue as to how badly you failed Now you are just striking out blindly. When you do not understand politely ask questions and people will help you.

You did bring me a chuckle... You don't know how many times I have seen this applied in some form or fashion towards multiple people by you. It's a sign.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The oceans of water in the upper mantle are connected to a phase of water called super-ionic water. This phase of water comes after the supercritical or hydrothermal water phase, in terms of increasing pressure and temperature. Super-ionic water is an even more aggressive form of water, than supercritical water, and will dissolve into the upper mantle mineral phases, like a water into a sponge. There is more mineral than water in this composite phase so it more like a sponge soaked with water, than salt dissolved in water.

On the phase diagram of water, there is a phase boundary between supercritical and super-ionic water, at the lower crust and upper mantle. Any sudden loss or gain of pressure is able to shift the phases above or below the phase boundary. When super-ionic water suddenly decreases pressure, due to a lifting of a crustal plate boundary, it explodes like TNT; rapid entropy increase, as it reverses back into supercritical water. This helps the plate sliding process, while the sudden lowered solubility of water, in the mineral sponge, due the entropy increase, releases the water.

Climate science has its head stuck in the clouds, so to speak, and does not look in the basement. The casino science black box is not useful for these extra variables.

For example, the tilt of the earth has change. This is being attributed to the pumping of ground water for the needs of civilization. It take time of the underground aquifer to replenish itself, thereby shifting the weight of the water closer to the surface. The affect is like placing some gum on the surface of a spinning top; wobbles more. This is another water affect that is adding new variables.

CO2 is sort of a one trick pony which may be why it is preferred by most scientists.

No, just no.

When you do not know ask questions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You did bring me a chuckle... You don't know how many times I have seen this applied in some form or fashion towards multiple people by you. It's a sign.

Yes, I do tend to argue with the ignorant and get frustrated when they refuse to learn.

Please note, I argue with those that others will not even bother with. There is a reason that others totally ignore your nonsense. For example just look at the previous post that I responded to. Instead of answering my reasonable question that was designed to help him to learn he posted a wall of total science salad.

 

[Shaul]

I have no doubt that you had a clear idea of what you meant, but you gave no example of a country that actually changed the climate for such a purpose, nor did you explain how a country could bring about such a change. Sorry, but we know enough about your politics to see that as some kind of veiled attack on the US government, and you still haven't explained how a country could change the climate in order to terrorize its population.



As has already been pointed out, you keep shifting the goalposts. The OP was about a sinister plot to bring about a climate change in order to control a country's population. To terrorize the population. Now you are talking about climate change that happens to affect countries differently and how some countries might use that happenstance to their own selfish advantage. Again, you consciously steer us away from an actual example of any country that is doing this, although it seems that you do think you are making some kind of point about political behavior. If you aren't being vague and coy, you sure give the appearance of it. Why don't you give us a real world example of what you are talking about? Climate change is real enough, so you should have some countries in mind. Right? Russia? How about using Russia as the example?

I purposefully chose not to make it about any particular country, with good reasons. If you insist we could, but if you try to twist the discussion from the general concept to be about the particular country you will only prove my reasons for demurring to do so were quite valid.

Having said that, here might be such an example. Let's take as a given that production of CO2 harms the climate. So any country that purposefully produces more CO2 based on mere putative self interests would be an example. Also let's agree that coal fired power plants produce more CO@ than alternatives. Then a country such as China which is building new coal-based power plants as fast they can is an example of a country ignoring climate change in favor of its own perceptions of its self interests.

 

[Shaul]

I'm failing to see the relevance to my point. 97% of all climate scientists from every country, whether they are from countries who are our allies or our adversaries, are saying that our current climate predicament and future projections are due to man made causes. The consensus is telling a very consistent story all across the planet

Sure, some countries may be effected more than others or governments/corporations can spin whatever they like about the narrative, but if it's different than what 97% of the majority of what climatologists are saying, then chances are it's very easy to spot who is trying to manipulate who

The science tells a very black and white story when it comes to this topic. The only grey areas are the ones people are weaving using that black and white data

Yet some countries are ignoring the problem if that interferes with what they perceive as their country's self interests.

 

[Copernicus]

I purposefully chose not to make it about any particular country, with good reasons. If you insist

It is hard to have a discussion with you when you refuse to clarify what you are referring to. You claim to have good reasons for remaining vague on a number of issues that I have raised and you have ignored. You still have not given a clue as to how you think it is possible for "unscrupulous governments to change the climate in ways that will tyrannize populations and control them." Now you seem to have changed the subject to another issue--that of a country using the fact of global warming/climate change to pursue its own selfish interests, which I suppose is what you originally meant by "tyrannize populations and control them". Surely, you can think of some concrete examples of this kind of behavior to help us focus on the issue you are trying to discuss here. Climate change is certainly on the minds of the leaders of every country on the face of the Earth these days, and all of them are thinking about their national interests. What kind of "tyranny and control" are you thinking of? What form does it take?

 

[Pete in Panama]

It is hard to have a discussion with you when you refuse to clarify what you are referring to. You claim to have good reasons for remaining vague ...

What my understanding is that some of us (you included?) say that the climate is changing in a dangerous and sever manner because of man made CO2. My thinking is that since the rest of us are not making this claim then it is up to the Climate advocates to explain the claim, not the rest of us. Am I missing something?

 

[Shaul]

It is hard to have a discussion with you when you refuse to clarify what you are referring to. You claim to have good reasons for remaining vague on a number of issues that I have raised and you have ignored. You still have not given a clue as to how you think it is possible for "unscrupulous governments to change the climate in ways that will tyrannize populations and control them." Now you seem to have changed the subject to another issue--that of a country using the fact of global warming/climate change to pursue its own selfish interests, which I suppose is what you originally meant by "tyrannize populations and control them". Surely, you can think of some concrete examples of this kind of behavior to help us focus on the issue you are trying to discuss here. Climate change is certainly on the minds of the leaders of every country on the face of the Earth these days, and all of them are thinking about their national interests. What kind of "tyranny and control" are you thinking of? What form does it take?

You wanted an example. I provided one. My OP did not talk about "sinister plots"[sic] I wrote that some countries could chose to ignore climate change issues in favor of pursuing their own perceived self interests. Some do.

 

[Audie]

Oh please, stop. If you do not understand something ask questions. The "oceans of water" are stuck there. They are not even what most people would call water

Here is a very serious question: Are you familiar with dry wall?

Or concrete. Don't tell anyone. Some darned tourist
will start drinking the colloseum.