Discussion about this post

User's avatar
JohnG's avatar

I work with a lot of PhD meteorologists and about half are skeptical. I would engage the other half and all but two, when presented with geologic time/temp facts, would say, "I'm not an expert in the field of climatology."

One that continued engage after I pointed out that carbon was many times higher in the past, as in the Jurassic, then asked, "do you want to live in a climate like that?"

I engaged the other, a cosigner of the IPCC, and that person claimed that methane is the real issue and that if Greenland's ice sheet melts, the release of methane could cause a temperature runaway effect leaving the Earth like Venus. I then asked, then why didn't we have a runaway in all the previous times the ice sheet melted? I never heard back.

I contend their knowledge is neither broad nor deep...just narrow and myopic.

Expand full comment
FLR's avatar

Here is a column from 2008 by Friedman of the NYT, who is a far left climate nut. He visited Steffensen's camp. Note that the Danish climate minister and Pauchari from IPCC were visting the camp. So already by 2008 the research theme was that "instability" is a threat that could make CO2 emission very risky. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/opinion/03Friedman.html

I should also point out that Hedegaard is/ was a member of the "Conservative Party" in Denmark. What a joke. She was a huge climate zealot and then got an EU role as a climate czar later in the 2010s.

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts