Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation
webfact

The myth of melting ice and rising seas

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

Marxism was essentially framed as a power struggle between the Victims (the proletariat) and the Oppressors (the bourgeoisie). There were no individuals, just warring groups. No negotiation, just opposition and struggle.

 

By the 1960s, even Marxists couldn't hide the piles of hundreds of millions of corpses created by Marxism in the hands of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and others. It could no longer be held up as the Utopia-to-be.

 

So they performed a sleight-of-hand, recasting Marxism — still as a power struggle between Victims and Oppressors -- but with new categories - white oppressor v black victim, male oppressor v female victim, Christian oppressor v Muslim victim, and so on in every grouping you could think of. This is what is known as identity politics, no individuals, but just opposed groups.

 

When this toxic attitude invades the culture, it is sometimes called Cultural Marxism.

 

This is the attitude the Green/Left brings to the climate issue. No debate or negotiation is possible, because they see this is simply a power struggle between the Oppressors (capitalists, white people, men, conservatives) versus the Victims (everybody else plus the biggest Victim of all, Gaia).

 

Their stance resembles Marxism in its rigidity — anyone who disagrees even slightly with the climate orthodoxy is branded as a  heretic (or, in their charming phrase, a "denier"), and is subject to harassment and sanction by the Cultural Marxists.

It looks like you are attempting to take the science out of climate science and recast it as another front in a political struggle.  Sorry, I'm sticking with the science stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Thongkorn said:

Having lived on the East coast of Britain for the last 45 years, I can honestly say the North sea has not risen one inch, How come when a bottle of milk freezes it expands and when thor's it goes back to its original level, So would it be safe to say the water will not rise.

But several island nations are having problems.  One, the Marshall Islands, has already lost 2 of their islands.  Rising seas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thongkorn said:

No fact the sea has not risen one inch , Freeze a bottle of water or milk then defrost it, the  contents expand then retracts to its original level,  the world was flooded years ago, so its reached its maximum level already.

Yes, water expands when it freezes.  I know.

 

Here's an experiment for you; put several ice cubes in a shallow dish and let them melt.  Watch the water overflow from the dish.  That is what happens when the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets melt.

 

Regarding your experience at the coast, you must have been taking very accurate measurements for 45 years to know the sea level hasn't risen one inch.  However it is possible.  There are land areas in the northern latitudes that are still slowing rising after having sunk under the weight of the ice sheets during the last ice age.  In addition, due to gravitational effects (gravity isn't perfectly uniform over the earth's surface), temperature differences, geography and other factors, sea levels aren't rising uniformly all over the globe.  Scientists haven't said sea levels are rising uniformly all over the globe.  They have measured and concluded that average sea levels are rising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, heybruce said:

It looks like you are attempting to take the science out of climate science and recast it as another front in a political struggle. 

That's exactly what it is.

 

They admit it themselves — publicly. In fact, they seem proud of it.

 

Here's Ottmar Edenhofer, a leading member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), being interviewed a few years back.

 

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

 

The policy is taking money from Oppressors ("the owners of coal and oil") and sending it to the Victims (everyone else).

 

I could provide many more sources of politicians and bureaucrats saying that this has essentially nothing to do with climate science, but everything to do with political agenda.

 

The science is used as a convenient figleaf for political action.

 

If climate were a mainly scientific question, it would be conducted in a much more polite fashion. The vitriol and abuse routinely thrown around demonstrate that it is a political power struggle.

Edited by RickBradford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, heybruce said:

Yes, water expands when it freezes.  I know.

 

Here's an experiment for you; put several ice cubes in a shallow dish and let them melt.  Watch the water overflow from the dish.  That is what happens when the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets melt.

 

Regarding your experience at the coast, you must have been taking very accurate measurements for 45 years to know the sea level hasn't risen one inch.  However it is possible.  There are land areas in the northern latitudes that are still slowing rising after having sunk under the weight of the ice sheets during the last ice age.  In addition, due to gravitational effects (gravity isn't perfectly uniform over the earth's surface), temperature differences, geography and other factors, sea levels aren't rising uniformly all over the globe.  Scientists haven't said sea levels are rising uniformly all over the globe.  They have measured and concluded that average sea levels are rising.

 The North sea never existed a few years ago,  it was flooded , there is a finite amount of water on this planet on land or in vapour,  Global warming is a myth the world is actually cooling. all about Money and taxes,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Thongkorn said:

 The North sea never existed a few years ago,  it was flooded , there is a finite amount of water on this planet on land or in vapour,  Global warming is a myth the world is actually cooling. all about Money and taxes,

I've been around for more than a few years and the North Sea was around all that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, heybruce said:

I've been around for more than a few years and the North Sea was around all that time.

 Get real   in near History a few hundred years ago,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

That's exactly what it is.

 

They admit it themselves — publicly. In fact, they seem proud of it.

 

Here's Ottmar Edenhofer, a leading member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), being interviewed a few years back.

 

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

 

The policy is taking money from Oppressors ("the owners of coal and oil") and sending it to the Victims (everyone else).

 

I could provide many more sources of politicians and bureaucrats saying that this has essentially nothing to do with climate science, but everything to do with political agenda.

 

The science is used as a convenient figleaf for political action.

I don't know who Ottmar Edenhofer is, but the statements of individuals with individual agenda's don't reflect the stated policies of the UN.  Also, you can quote as many politicians and bureaucrats as you want, their words don't change the science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thongkorn said:

 Get real   in near History a few hundred years ago,

 

So the Vikings were hiking to Britain, not taking ships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Yes, water expands when it freezes.  I know.

 

Here's an experiment for you; put several ice cubes in a shallow dish and let them melt.  Watch the water overflow from the dish.  That is what happens when the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets melt.

 

Regarding your experience at the coast, you must have been taking very accurate measurements for 45 years to know the sea level hasn't risen one inch.  However it is possible.  There are land areas in the northern latitudes that are still slowing rising after having sunk under the weight of the ice sheets during the last ice age.  In addition, due to gravitational effects (gravity isn't perfectly uniform over the earth's surface), temperature differences, geography and other factors, sea levels aren't rising uniformly all over the globe.  Scientists haven't said sea levels are rising uniformly all over the globe.  They have measured and concluded that average sea levels are rising.

The ice cap theory only applies to ice that was formed on land. Sea ice that thaws does not add depth. The ice around Antarctica is mainly sea ice. Some of it is from glaciers, but so far not much of that has moved into the sea.

Should the Antarctic warm up, it will start to snow there, which would remove water from a liquid state and retain it as new ice.

 

There are explanations for island or land loss other than sea level rise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I don't know who Ottmar Edenhofer is, but the statements of individuals with individual agenda's don't reflect the stated policies of the UN.  Also, you can quote as many politicians and bureaucrats as you want, their words don't change the science.

Edenhofer is not an "individual" with an individual agenda. He was at the time, co-chairman of the UN's IPCC, and an important policy setter for the IPCC. Not only do his views reflect the policies of the UN, in many cases his views created the policy of the UN.

 

The words don't change the science, but they completely dominate what policies are enacted on the basis of that science. And without government policy, climate science is irrelevant. That's why they hold these enormous gabfests every year (Conference of Parties) to try and thrash out global climate policy.

 

If you think that climate matters are unrelated to politics, then you are being very naive.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

That's exactly what it is.

 

They admit it themselves — publicly. In fact, they seem proud of it.

 

Here's Ottmar Edenhofer, a leading member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), being interviewed a few years back.

 

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

 

The policy is taking money from Oppressors ("the owners of coal and oil") and sending it to the Victims (everyone else).

 

I could provide many more sources of politicians and bureaucrats saying that this has essentially nothing to do with climate science, but everything to do with political agenda.

 

The science is used as a convenient figleaf for political action.

 

If climate were a mainly scientific question, it would be conducted in a much more polite fashion. The vitriol and abuse routinely thrown around demonstrate that it is a political power struggle.

You are putting Ottmar Edenhofer's quote in an inaccurate context. He was saying that climate policy will redistribute the value of various assets such as oil reserves current value in an oil based economic systems versus a high wind swept plateau in a wind powered system. If you read the entire quote it is obvious he was not speaking in a Marxist political fashion.

 



(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Ottmar-Edenhofer-the-UN-IPCC-official-say-We-redistribute-de-facto-the-worlds-wealth-by-climate-policy-”-when-discussing-climate-change

TH 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I see....

 

Even though communist countries tend to be closed, socially repressive, isolationist and opposed to the free exchange of goods and ideas (Communist China abandoned communism when it staked its economic future on free trade), you think Marxism espouses the ideas of free trade, globalization, free immigration and cultural liberalism. 

 

I don't think Marx or Marxists would agree with you, especially on cultural liberalism.  Communist/Marxist societies are not known for openness to dissent.

 

Your second paragraph shows that you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist (I hate to dignify them with the name "theorist", I think "conjecturist" is more accurate) who sees a bogeyman behind every idea that challenges your comfort zone.

Marxism is at its root an ideology of jealousy and ingratitude. All Marxism is good for is revolution. Once that is accomplished the pipe dreams of the Communist manifesto are immediately pulled from the grasp of the useful idiots who fought for it. What happens instead is a tightfisted super controlling paranoid elite that turn the country into a police state.

 

Ordinary Marxists don't intend this effect, it is simply the nature of humanity that once stripped of any moral compass a power group will appear and quickly subdue the weak.

 

For your second point,  I do believe that men of great power are continually engaged in conspiracy. I believe it has always been this way. A brief survey of history will show the rise and fall of many empires, and the machinations of greedy men behind the scenes. It is what humans do.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Thongkorn said:

No fact the sea has not risen one inch , Freeze a bottle of water or milk then defrost it, the  contents expand then retracts to its original level,  the world was flooded years ago, so its reached its maximum level already.

Um. Unfortunately for your theory it's all about the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps. If they melted, the sea level would rise significantly.

However, that may never happen during human existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 14 December 2017 03:48
Sponsors
×