Richard Lindzen at International Conference on Climate Change

[propater]

"Richard Lindzen at International Conference on Climate Change"

the title of this video is misleading, the conference is organized by the heartland institute. This is not a scientific conference, there are probably no working climate scientist in the audience, prof. Lindzen is just paying lip service to the people who hired him for this conference.

I have not heard much solid substance in this talk and certainly no science (lots of whining though.)

[TheAutoChannel]

@propater

If you were you at the conference or had a list of attendees you wouldn't make this statement. But if you want to get a real feel for what went on, and what was said, then watch all the videos we present related to John Coleman. You should also visit The Auto Channel website and follow the links to the conference information.

But, you have to actually watch the videos and read the reports, you can't merely read the titles and then assume that you know what is contained in them.

[andyz0007]

@propater Dude...your is serious denial

[WingChunGeologist]

Anyone who thinks CO2 is a pollutant should stop exhaling it.

[jerbiebarb]

Mass extinction? 'Never said that. Many organisms can no longer migrate so we'll see..

Human activity didn't slow the recovery of the MWP or other warm episodes. That's what the concern is THIS TIME. That's why the MWP etc. are irrelevant.

[LordVigeous666999]

Slow the "recovery" from the MWP?

You mean the thing they call the "Climate Optimum"? A time, when food was plentiful, death by diesease was less, there was general expansion, mankind was relatively prosperous

Why would one WANT to "recover" from such a thing?

[jerbiebarb]

@LordVigeous666999 Because if human activities continue to prevent climate from recovering from warm episodes, all will be lost. The planet is vulnerable like our sibling planets, Venus and Mars. We need to learn about how rare the balances are on this planet, because the numbers say there's nothing like it in the rest of this galaxy. Are you aware of the latest findings?

[LordVigeous666999]

This all seems to be a mindset, that says this whole thing is so fragile, even a slight change in CO2, a weak green house, minor trace gas, that we are adding very little of, can destroy the whole thing

if you're worried about spiral feedbacks, we should be in an ice age or the world should already be boiling. If its so fragile one good volcano is going to take it out anyway. One good meteor shower, and its all over

Thank god this world is not that fragile

[jerbiebarb]

@LordVigeous666999 It is very fragile if we look at the fossil record of boom and bust, BUT these inevitable changes (inevitable because of system fragility) require a millennia or more, so to humans everything seems stable and safe. Only recently have humans become so damaging. The Permian die-off microfossil record shows that the disaster was a 20 C warming in 80,000 years. The most conservative forecast for our next few centuries will be far far more rapid warming than that!

[LordVigeous666999]

Yeah, and there are dozens of species of ant that are dying off in the rain forest every year too, just nature doing its thing, what is your plan to save them?

See, I just don't agree with this assertion, that animals dying out = bad. I mean, you bring up a time scale of 80,000 years, do you realize that the dominant species on this planet in 80,000 years, won't be us?

They might look kinda like us, they might have us in their genetic history, but they won't be us, does this concern you too?

[jerbiebarb]

@LordVigeous666999 I brought up the Permian because this planet is warming 60 times faster than during that greatest of all extinction events. The rate of warming should be in the debate about stability and fragility of systems of circulation. I'm a meteorologist, I don't know about saving species. It's rare to find an informed person like you who's not concerned about the web of life. We can't afford to invent and run machines that do the beneficial things that ants do.

[wetwingnut]

@jerbiebarb The web of life. Sounds like something mysterious and fragile. Except that the history of life on the planet shows it to be anything but fragile. Extinction, like climate change is a constant and natural process and "the web of life", far from collapsing - changes and adapts and always fills an available niche with new forms. The truth of the matter is that life is unbelievably resilent and persistent. And BTW man is a small part of it. The biomass of termites alone dwarfs us.

[jerbiebarb]

@wetwingnut What's relevant about life's resiliency over millions of years? We're living now. Continents and oceans change, our star changes, our orbit or interstellar medium. Many warmings and recoveries. They're irrelevant to AGW now, because humans only warm the planet.

No intelligent person wants more loss of diversity.

What's relevant about comparative biomasses? We've become more influential than termites and far more damaging to today's balances.

[algaefaece]

Where is his scientific argument in this?

[Mrreverendjim]

@algaefaece he is talking about science being coopted by political movements. that is the purpose of his talk. the fact that the science debunking global warming as a problem was being ignored. the fact is the world has warmed before. the world is still here. we have bigger problems. how about the problem of political movements coopting science for their own ends meaning to skin us financialy by carbon taxing. can u say corruption?

[jerbiebarb]

@Mrreverendjim

The Earth has warmed before? and many living things perished. Climate change probably forced us to evolve into hominids.  That was a long time ago. Climate change is not a good thing for organisms adapted to the current climate.

[Mrreverendjim]

the earth has warmed and cooled. organisms adapted. the hardy survive. the weak die. change happens wether you like it or not. the change that got rid of dinosaurs made way for the mammals. this little cycle of warming and cooling is nothing compared to that. and no matter what, cap and trade was about filling pockets, not fixing problems. all that being said, pollution needs to stop. but planet earth will do just fine. it will change. we will change with it or die. that is nature.

[jerbiebarb]

Those animals never had the knowledge about how to slow climate change, we do.

We should also look into trying to protect our atmosphere from a nearby GRB, but likewise, it would cost too much. Someday we will be willing to pay.

Talking about costs will seem silly after the fact, because the cost will be total. It probably won't be in our lifetime.. We'll just continue to scurry around as if we only have the priorities of lower animals.

[Mrreverendjim]

outside of cutting our pollution it would be foolish to mess with earths natural climatic cycles. in that regard we don't have the knowledge. as far as gamma ray burst go, we are at their mercy. sometimes i think "lower" animals have better prorities than humans... the humans that run the show , that is.

[Tacair1]

Tells it like it is.

Science, infiltrated and corrupted by politics.