About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

5 Replies to “Lord Moncton debunks a number of barely-memorable climate scares”

  1. As far as the blurb goes: Acid rain has been solved to a large extent by VASTLY tightening emissions standards (to extremes in some cases). Ever look under a modern diesel pickup truck like a Ford PSD or GM Duramax? Diesel particulate filter with particulate burn-off, exhaust gas recirculation system, catalytic converter, urea/selective catalyst NOx reduction, requirement for ultra-low sulfur fuel etc. Cars also have much tighter standards (cat, electronic engine controls, improved fuel injection stratagies, EGR, advanced combustion chamber design, etc.). All of this greatly reduced the compounds responsible for acid rain. Nuclear winter? No nukes have gone off yet, so that one will have to wait (a few months, perhapse?)… Ozone hole has been reduced by elimination of CFC containing refrigerants. Since there is no longer any persistant free chlorine, the ozone is recovering.

    All of these are “scares” to the uninitiated because actions where taken to prevent them from actually coming to fruition. Hypothetically, with any luck, people will remember the “Militant Islam” scare and sneer at those who say it was really an issue. The hypothetical “scare” will only be a scare if actions are taken to prevent Islam from having its way.

    Seems when people are confronted with something they dont understand or dont like, the default position is to dismiss it, and look for confirmation bias from quacks such as the bug-eyed chap above. While LM’s arguments sound convincing, many are misrepresenations of the truth. Sure, the lefts approach to “fixing” global warming is ruinous. But, rather than point out the hysterical and ideologically loaded methods of these far left enviromental groups, people instead attack the science. Doesnt fix anything, and makes conservatives look pig ignorant.

  2. Nuclear Winter was a phrase used by David Suzuki and other crypto-enviornmentalists to describe how modern (then, the 1970s) industry was producing so much soot that it had the effect of a Nuclear war and would therefore bring on a new ice age as all that pollution would block out the sun. It had nothing to do with nuclear war except by analogy.

    But even if it did you are still wrong. Add together all the tests of nuclear weapons even up to the multimegaton range and it should have caused it by the reasoning of the day.

  3. Adam acid rain was caused by the burning of high sulfur coal in power plants, the sulfur in the smoke combined with water and a couple of other things and became mild sulfuric acid, better scrubbers in the coal plants removed this problem.

    Once the computer program that predicted nuclear winter was looked at by honest scientists if was proven to be so flawed it is a wonder it didn’t crash the computers.

    The Ozone hole was and is caused by gases released by a volcano in Antarctica.

    I remember when all of these were being pushed as things that will destroy the earth, they were like global warming, a means of attacking the west in an attempt to destroy our economies.

  4. Richard,

    Its not just coal. ALL Fossil fuels have sulfur in them.. Gasoline, Diesel, and Coal. Since it forms from living matter, it by default has sulfur in it. If you’ve ever smelled the “rotten eggs smell” in your car when someone accelerates hard in front of you, thats the sulfur being converted to hydrogen sulfide by the catalytic converter. Yes, Im aware of the fact that coal plants are also a source of sulphur (and in the past where the majority emmiters of it). Industry is another source. I think it breaks down (or used to break down) to roughly 65-75% from coal and industry, and the remainder from automotive, truck, and ships burning gasoline and diesel. NOx also plays a role in the formation of acid rain, and the more serious problems such as smog, which is why efforts are made to control it as well. The truck example was just ONE example of whats been done to solve the problem.

    It was not meant to be an exhaustive list, and I dont know why people always assume the comments should be. Do we REALLY want to fill the comment section up with long technical, political, and science papers?

  5. Vlad,

    First, I didnt say it DID. Go back and re-read my comment. “No nukes have gone off yet, so that one will have to wait (a few months, perhapse?)…” Its a facetious remark that we will have to wait for evidence that it does or doesnt when Iran decides its going to run its first nuclear tests in Tel Aviv.

    Second, Ive never heard any legitimate scientist put the reduction in solar energy from combusion particulate and smog as a “nuclear winter”. The idea that nukes could do it is unprovable at the moment. But, it has been observed in nature when large volcanoes erupt that the particulate will cause a temporary reduction in global temperatures. The extent of the effect is up for debate as large amounts of suphur, CO2 and other constituants are released as well. The “little ice age” was likely due in part to vulcanic activity, and recent observations do support the theory that particulate in the very upper atmosphere does reduce global temperatures temporarily, but it conversly warms the very upper stratosphere where it increases radiation absorption.

    No credible climate scientist has proposed that soot in the lower atmosphere could have the same effect on the scale observed with volcanos. It directly heats the troposphere. Suzuki is a biologist, and I have never listened to him on climate other than maybe his musings on global warming and other topics. Calling it a “nuclear winter” is a complete misapplication of the term. Ive never heard it applied that way, so it must be a Canada thing since he’s not real promanent in the US.

    Watching LM’s stuff is like watchning someone do brain surgery with a hatchet and a ball-peen hammer. I don’t know about you, but watching material from a proven liar is tedious. He may be right on some things, but its just too much effort to pick out whats true and whats not. Really hes just like Al Gore. He has NO experience in the field whatsoever, and is selling a view point to make a quick buck. Its a cheap and contemptable.

    At any rate, even if global warming is WRONG, the method of trying to stop the ruinous policies put forth by the left by trying to dance around in the “gaps” of science like religious creationists do is a fools errand. Lord Twaton does broach this subject in the video of it being of marxist nature, but he always falls back on the science being “wrong” without properly doing any sort of analysis. If he just stuck to the facts of why the left latches on to the global warming and what effects it has on our economies, then I could respect him. But he doesn’t, so I don’t. Nuff said…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*