Of course, a proper evil terrorist mastermind would have a huge SF6 plant buried in their volcanic base-lair. Although the ransom demand would be tricky.
Best plan would be to secretly build a dam between the tip of South America and the Antarctic peninsular. Instant effect on the climate (I think), more easily reversible once your diabolical demands are met..
Dr. Connolley: Making global warming an exaggerated terrorist threat has been the agit-prop strategy (aging boomer hippies last huzzah) all along and it has failed udderly.
The problem is that the "terrorists" being sold as the existential threat source are either late middle aged overweight balding cigar chomping white males or western consumers in general (also the sales target of the sloganeering??? go figure).
To be effective, the fake threat has to be sold as coming from young, virile males with no leadership, no jobs, no hope and (most importantly) dark skin.
Here is an alternative thought experiment. What is the net effect of carbon emissions was a reduction in temperatures? What would the reaction be from politicians, scientists, and the general public be? We are conditioned to the notion that cold is bad and warm is good from a sociological perspective. Would the prospect of crop failures due to cold temperatures, freezes in May and June, shorter construction seasons, etc., cause people to feel differently about a changing climate?
Vice President Biden sort of answered your question at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government yesterday, arguing , I think correctly, that America faces "no existential threat" from violent extremism.
The Hill reports:
While counseling vigilance, he said terror does not fundamentally challenge "our way of life or our security."
"Let me say it again: We face no existential threat—none—to our way of life or our ultimate security," Biden said. "You are twice as likely to be struck by lightning as you around to be affected by a terrorist event in the United States."
People should heed the work of the brilliant 19th century physicist who was first to determine the size of air molecules. Josef Loschmidt was also first to explain (indirectly) through his gravito-thermal effect the answer James Hansen et al sought as to why planetary surfaces are hotter than radiating temperatures. We don't need Hansen's hypothesis about back radiation and the consequent (but necessary) garbage about the Second Law applying to a combination of independent processes. What is in this comment has profound consequences. Think on it!
[Don't you feel embarrassed by hiding behind "Physicist with 50 years experience"? If you're going to be anon, dont try to make status-based claims, because you can't possibly sustain them. I preferred you as "anything but CO2", it was more honest -W]
Of course, a proper evil terrorist mastermind would have a huge SF6 plant buried in their volcanic base-lair. Although the ransom demand would be tricky.
Best plan would be to secretly build a dam between the tip of South America and the Antarctic peninsular. Instant effect on the climate (I think), more easily reversible once your diabolical demands are met..
'Terrorist' Threat: "Meet our demands and the Earth gets it!"
Dr. Connolley: Making global warming an exaggerated terrorist threat has been the agit-prop strategy (aging boomer hippies last huzzah) all along and it has failed udderly.
The problem is that the "terrorists" being sold as the existential threat source are either late middle aged overweight balding cigar chomping white males or western consumers in general (also the sales target of the sloganeering??? go figure).
To be effective, the fake threat has to be sold as coming from young, virile males with no leadership, no jobs, no hope and (most importantly) dark skin.
Failed "udderly"? Please tell us more!
" a proper evil terrorist mastermind would have a huge SF6 plant buried in their volcanic base-lair"
a huge SF6 plant fed with uranium hexafluoride tails from ISIS secret enrichment plant in a cavern near Seattle...
Here is an alternative thought experiment. What is the net effect of carbon emissions was a reduction in temperatures? What would the reaction be from politicians, scientists, and the general public be? We are conditioned to the notion that cold is bad and warm is good from a sociological perspective. Would the prospect of crop failures due to cold temperatures, freezes in May and June, shorter construction seasons, etc., cause people to feel differently about a changing climate?
"What would the reaction be from politicians, scientists, and the general public be?"
The same. Political rationalizations are insensitive to the sign of predictions.
Vice President Biden sort of answered your question at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government yesterday, arguing , I think correctly, that America faces "no existential threat" from violent extremism.
The Hill reports:
While counseling vigilance, he said terror does not fundamentally challenge "our way of life or our security."
"Let me say it again: We face no existential threat—none—to our way of life or our ultimate security," Biden said. "You are twice as likely to be struck by lightning as you around to be affected by a terrorist event in the United States."
s.
Aliens work too
http://planetsave.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/If-Global-Warming-were…
People should heed the work of the brilliant 19th century physicist who was first to determine the size of air molecules. Josef Loschmidt was also first to explain (indirectly) through his gravito-thermal effect the answer James Hansen et al sought as to why planetary surfaces are hotter than radiating temperatures. We don't need Hansen's hypothesis about back radiation and the consequent (but necessary) garbage about the Second Law applying to a combination of independent processes. What is in this comment has profound consequences. Think on it!
[Don't you feel embarrassed by hiding behind "Physicist with 50 years experience"? If you're going to be anon, dont try to make status-based claims, because you can't possibly sustain them. I preferred you as "anything but CO2", it was more honest -W]
But what does The 2000 Year Old Physicist think ?
I believe I've come across the Republican response.