Tea Partiers Smarter than Democrats

[I am reposting  entry from a more general blog.]

The dumbest criticism the Democrats' media sheep make of Tea Party members is that Tea Partiers don't accept the global warming nonsense that most Democrats and their media sheep have fallen for.     

Most Tea Party members aren't  climate experts, but they are smart enough to recognize a political con when they see one.   In business cons,  police  warn that if something sounds too good to be true it probably is.  In political cons, if something sounds too bad to be true it probably is too bad to be true.

Like most con artists, the people attempting to  continue Enron's global warming scam try to oversell  their claims.  The global warming scammers are essentially saying that if we don't stop producing the "evil"  gas carbon dioxide  God will flood the world like he did in the time of Noah.

 Supporters of Enron's  global warming scam falsely claim that carbon dioxide (CO2) possesses some magical power to increase the temperature of the atmosphere by interacting with low energy infrared radiation (IR).
 
In the 90's Enron paid  scientists and so called environmental groups to claim that an increase in atmospheric CO2  would cause significant temperature changes  even though CO2 comprises less than 0.04% of the atmosphere.    Enron even wrote the Kyoto Accords for the  Clinton administration.

Enron wanted the opportunity to make a fortune by trading what the company called "carbon credits".    Enron had previously made a fortune trading sulfur dioxide credits under a program set up to allow northeastern power plants to continue  producing the pollution associated with acid rain. 

People who are unfamiliar with science don't understand that western science has long been infected with con artists. In the Middle Ages "Alchemists" obtained money from wealthy nobles by claiming to be working on a method of turning a base metal like lead into gold.

Some of the more popular science scams today involve miraculous medical treatments and machines that use little or no energy.

Today's scientists don't trust each other to be truthful.  Science journals require "peer review" of articles to discourage writers from publishing phony results that seem to support their theories.   Attorneys in court often question whether  a scientist witness has been paid to testify a certain way.

Scientists who have trouble getting money for legitimate research may feel they have no choice but to adjust their research and statements to conform to the desires of the businesses or political organizations that offer them money.

Many of the global warming "scientists" who call themselves "climatologists"  lack the qualifications for making such claims.  The only qualifications most of them have are for predicting short term weather.

Understanding the way climate changes over time requires a background in astrophysics and the operation of earth's complex energy system as well as an understanding of weather patterns.

The Milankovich cycles are the primary factors causing  climate.   Changes in the earth's tilt on its axis determine how temperatures change from one season to another.   Changes in the sun's output affect short term changes in air temperature   .    

Those familiar with thermodynamics know that physicist R.W. Wood disproved the claim that greenhouses and the atmosphere stayed warm by reflecting IR.

Those who support the claim if global warming don't talk like scientists. 

Real scientists don't use terms like "settled science" or "consensus" when talking about their theories.  "Consensus" is a political term not a scientific term   Scientists don't rely on consensus because the consensus view has been wrong before.  In 1895 the consensus among physicists was that atoms were the smallest particles of matter.  The consensus was proved wrong  when Sir J.J.Thomson reported his discovery of the electron.

Priests  suggest  their statements  represent matters that are "settled".  Real scientists qualify their claims and look for additional tests to make to see if they have missed something.  Scientists who believe they may have an accurate model of the nucleus of atoms are using the Hadron Collider to determine if they might have missed something.   

I learned in high school that when scientists conduct experiments, they should  mention conditions that could reduce the accuracy of results.     Those who claim global warming ignore the likelihood that the  0.25% change in temperature during the 20th Century might indicates nothing more than the use of different equipment.   

Real  scientists use mathematically rigorous methods.  The people who claim global warming rely on the mathematically meaningless term called "average global temperature". 

Priests use terms similar to "denier" and "contrarian" to describe heretics who question their statements.   Scientists provide.the results of experiments and observations to refute critics.
 
Contrary to the statements of President Barack Obama and various energy companies, there is no such thing as clean energy.  Large wind generators kill birds and many believe they  are visual pollution.  The companies that produce solar cells in China are heavy polluters.  Using solar energy to heat water to produce electricity requires large amounts of water.  

Carbon dioxide is the most essential molecule in the atmosphere.  Plants need it to convert  solar energy into the  bonds that hold complex carbon molecules together.  Humans and other animals then use those carbon molecules for food.

Animals than return part of the carbon to the atmosphere as CO2 to be used by plants to complete the carbon cycle.  Unfortunately, humans remove large amounts of plant carbon from the cycle by using plant products for items like clothing and paper   in which the carbon isn't returned to the atmosphere.  Some unused portions of food products are put in landfills instead of the carbon being returned to the atmosphere.   We actually need to use fossil fuels to replace the carbon that we remove from the carbon cycle.      
 
I have various posts on this blog  exposing  flaws in the global warming scam.  I also have a  Global Warming, Not Blog that primarily only has global warming type posts.    

Introduction

I have numerous blog posts dealing with the so called global warming, but they are scattered in other blogs.    I  plan to gradually consolidate them in this blog which will emphasize how the claims  about global warming / climate change have more in common with religion than science.    I won't have time to update all of them so I will try to list the date of original publication in the older posts.   I won't be checking the links for now so some of them may no longer be on the web.

I'm a polymath and generalist with a background in physics as well as the social sciences.   This background helps me understand how some people can believe something as absurd as the claim that a gas that comprises less than 0.04% of the atmosphere can have a significant impact on atmospheric temperatures.

Their are two basic types of professionals in science fields.  Scientists conduct research to learn new facts about the physical world. Technicians apply this knowledge to actual situations.  The vast majority of doctors are technicians as are most meteorologists and climatologists.

I have a lot of respect for meteorologists and climatologists.    Meteorology in some ways is one of the most difficult science fields because it is so chaotic.   Doctors must possess much more knowledge as well as physical skills they use to detect medical problems.   However, medicine is relatively predictable.   Doctors know what will happen most of the time when they prescribe treatments.

Often the best meteorologists can do, for example, is say that certain conditions will produce rain  20% of the time or maybe 50% of the time.    They can tell a major snow storm will occur but the predicted  track of a major snow storm can be off by 50 miles one way or the other.

Meteorology and climatology are highly specialized fields.    Meteorologists and climatologists are only qualified to deal with the distribution and interaction of heat and water (the primary components of weather).   Climatologists are not qualified to deal with the overall heating and cooling of the planet earth unless they have had training in astrophysics or thermodynamics.   The process of molecules absorbing and re-emitting radiation involves quantum physics rather than meteorology or thermodynamics.   

As an undergraduate in the sixties I switched from a math and physic program to a study of human behavior because politicians didn't seem to understand how to find solutions to social problems.  I have 100 hours of study beyond an M.A. in  U.S History in a half dozen fields.  My course work in physics includes a class in light.    Like many residents of tornado alley I have an interest in weather.   I am interested in the subject of other dimensions of physical reality and quantum physics.  I'm an amateur gardener who has had some success keeping cold sensitive plants alive during winter by using creating my own "greenhouses".