2019 Was The Year The World Woke Up To The Climate Emergency Or Something

The Cult of Climastrology has only been pimping it since the 1980’s, and it’s just now that the world is woke?

The year the world woke up to the climate emergency

Schoolchildren skipping class to strike, protests bringing city centres to a standstill: armed with dire warnings from scientists, people around the world dragged the climate emergency into the mainstream in 2019.

Spurred on by Swedish wunderkind Greta Thunberg — virtually unknown outside of her homeland a year ago but now a global star nominated for a Nobel prize — millions of young people took part in weekly demonstrations demanding climate action.

And, like harbingers of the apocalypse, the Extinction Rebellion movement embarked on a campaign of peaceful civil disobedience that spread worldwide, armed with little more than superglue and the nihilistic motto: “When hope dies, action begins.”

Although scientists have warned for decades about the risk to humanity and Earth posed by unfettered burning of fossil fuels, in 2019 — set to be the second hottest year in history — their message seems to have finally hit home.

So, the world is listening to an un-educated child who’s blowing off her education to scold people around the world, along with a group of nutjobs gluing themselves to streets and doors and walls? People can demonstrate all they want: most of them are failing to live the carbon neutral lifestyle they want everyone else to be forced to live. Yet again, Doing Something about ‘climate change’ is popular in theory, not practice. Most refuse to spend more than $10 a month of their own money to “solve” it. They aren’t giving up their fossil fueled travel, they aren’t giving up AC and heating, they aren’t giving up meat, they are growing their own food, they aren’t giving up most things.

But while society and particularly younger generations appear to have woken up to the threat of climate catastrophe, industry shows little signs of sharing their urgency.

True, because the same climate cultists are buying products from them.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

50 Responses to “2019 Was The Year The World Woke Up To The Climate Emergency Or Something”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    It’s interesting that right-wing loons attack a teenager as being brainwashed, being “used” by grown-ups, a “pawn” being fed cult information to spread (even though her positions align with science).

    Why do your feelings about global warming (i.e., it’s a global commie hoax) align with Trump, Hannity, Inhofe, Rush, Kochs, Crichton, American Thinker, Breitbart… it seems you’re being brainwashed and “used” by Conservative elites, are “pawns” being fed cult information to spread (even though their positions DON’T align with science). And why are there hardly any scientists supporting the global warming/commie conspiracy?

    • Jl says:

      Sorry, J, there is no science that there’s a “climate emergency”. Whatever that is….

    • formwiz says:

      It’s interesting that right-wing loons attack a teenager as being brainwashed, being “used” by grown-ups, a “pawn” being fed cult information to spread (even though her positions align with science).

      No, they don’t because your idea of “science” is a scam.

      Why do your feelings about global warming (i.e., it’s a global commie hoax) align with Trump, Hannity, Inhofe, Rush, Kochs, Crichton, American Thinker, Breitbart…

      We’re intelligent, just like them?

      it seems you’re being brainwashed and “used” by Conservative elites, are “pawns” being fed cult information to spread (even though their positions DON’T align with science). And why are there hardly any scientists supporting the global warming/commie conspiracy?

      Define irony.

      Somebody who tries to claim Conservatives project after they call him on his own projection.

      And there are plenty of scientists who don’t buy the scam. The founder of Greenpeace, f’rinstance, and these guys.

      Fact is, all your “scientific” predictions which were to have come to pass by now, haven’t.

      The only loons are the Lefties who believe this nonsense.

    • Bill589 says:

      “It is interesting that” left-wing loons brainwash and use this teenager.

  2. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    So, the world is listening to an un-educated child who’s blowing off her education to scold people around the world, along with a group of nutjobs gluing themselves to streets and doors and walls?

    The left have figured out that what they needed were celebrity and publicity; Miss Thunberg is an artificially pumped up celebrity now, and the loons who engage in traffic jam-ups and whatever are trying, successfully, to get publicity.

    People can demonstrate all they want: most of them are failing to live the carbon neutral lifestyle they want everyone else to be forced to live. Yet again, Doing Something about ‘climate change’ is popular in theory, not practice.

    The Kardashians have celebrity, but while they’re making a clear pile of money off if it, few women are going around half-dressed like Kendall Jenner. The warmunists are still stuck by what you have said: everyone wants somebody else to do something about global warming climate change, but don’t want to have to pay for it themselves, nor do they want to have their own lifestyles impacted.

    Ford and Chevy have cut way back on manufacturing smaller vehicles, because the American consumers have shown a preference for trucks and SUVs, even though the left have been pushing their concerns over fuel usage and pollution for decades.

  3. Kye says:

    You are incapable of independent thought which is why you blindly follow a brainwashed, semi retarded 16 year old goof. Our thoughts (not “feelings”) about climate align but do not blindly follow Trump or anyone else. As usual for your kind you project.

    The “cult” is that of unproven theories based on faulty graphs and models which since 1970 have predicted ZERO climate prognostications correctly. Not fuking one! Do you need us to print the list of failures once again?

    BTW, the job of true scientists is NOT to support ANY global warming conspiracy either for or against. Scientists jobs is science, not politics. At least until the left bribed scientists with billions in tax money to take a political stand on what should be a scientific theory.

    You may not have noticed but the vast majority of people supporting “global warming” are either full blown communists (like Greta’s parents and YOU) or elitist “socialism for everyone but me” white rich idiots with a great deal of personal guilt.

    Since the year 2000 China’s carbon emissions have INCREASED +208%, India’s INCREASED +155% but the United States saw a -10% REDUCTION in carbon emissions yet you commie dogs keep laying the blame at America’s feet. Your hatred for America, whites, Christians and Trump blinds all of you to the folly of your cult. And I think you like it that way because all you murdering commies have is hate, hate, hate!

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pxwBsIijVE8/XgP1p9x5JFI/AAAAAAACG4s/lNpsmWRtVqMPb7w3IIaqoJFxkrR7z_M6ACLcBGAsYHQ/s640/1_1_1r_b26ba33f9a9d2af12b1f6567a1563dc2_b26fef01_640.jpg

    Trump 2020 Keep Greta out of America we already have enough commies in the DemoCom Party.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Kye,

      Scientists are people, my friend. As such they have as much right to political positions as the uneducated right. They may be worth listening to.

      You are wrong, as usual, regarding right-wing “feelings” vs science. Why are no scientists on your side concerning the commie global warming conspiracy? It’s why the right argues conspiracy and not science.

      Are you finally ready to deny your feelings that global warming is a commie conspiracy? Until you do, you’re on thin ice.

      The vast majority of global warming denialists are right-wingers who accept the propaganda of right-wing elites (Trump, Rush, Hannity, Koch Boyz, GOPhers) and ignore scientists. YOU’re the useful idiots of your right-wing authoritarian elites who are conducting the slow-motion coup of America.

      YOU violent Trump kultists are the threat since all you have is hate.

      • formwiz says:

        Scientists are people, my friend. As such they have as much right to political positions as the uneducated right. They may be worth listening to.

        Only if they aren’t pushing some Lefty scam.

        You are wrong, as usual, regarding right-wing “feelings” vs science. Why are no scientists on your side concerning the commie global warming conspiracy? It’s why the right argues conspiracy and not science.

        Plenty of scientists are voicing their objections to the nonsense. It’s like the Baby Boomers, you listened to Fake News, they were all hippies and Lefties and nothing was further from the truth.

        And it’s a conspiracy because all levels of the Left are pushing it.

        The vast majority of global warming denialists are right-wingers who accept the propaganda of right-wing elites (Trump, Rush, Hannity, Koch Boyz, GOPhers) and ignore scientists. YOU’re the useful idiots of your right-wing authoritarian elites who are conducting the slow-motion coup of America.

        Tell it to Walter Duranty.

        You love those sweeping generalities. Too bad we just go for the facts.

        YOU violent Trump kultists are the threat since all you have is hate.

        Which is why Snippi Longstocking wants to put us up against the wall.

  4. Kye says:

    A MAGA Christmas to ya.

    https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/12/IMG_4490.gif?resize=330%2C440&ssl=1

    As Fredo and Li’l John sing “I’m dreaming of a multi-culti Festivus” with their families before The Airing of Grievances which kicks off the celebratory burning of the Trump effigy they will be reminded that their illegal coup is still unfulfilled. Trump remains President. God bless his Orange Ass.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      As Dildo and The Wiz celebrate Santa’s birthday by burning a cross they will be reminded that their Big Orange Savior, The Lord Don, is still only the third president to be impeached, and for trading taxpayer money for electoral help from a foreign nation.

      Lock Up The Don: Treason’s Greetings!

      • formwiz says:

        Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court

        For somebody who whines about how his iniquities are unjustly broadcast on the Interwebz, you project all over the place.

        If there’s treason, prove it (that’s right, you don’t believe in proof). And, since you accuse Kye and me of burning a cross, which is arson, and, this, a felony, you’d better have evidence.

        Actually, he hasn’t been impeached until the articles make their way to the Senate and the only government official who traded taxpayer money for electoral help from a foreign nation was your girl, the Beast.

        Now we’ve got Pelosi Galore talking more hearings, hoping to find a real crime. Maybe she’ll keep this going all the way to election day.

  5. Jl says:

    Another good one -“hardly any scientists supporting…”. It still only takes one .

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Can you name one real scientist who thinks global warming is commie plot to take over the world?

      • formwiz says:

        Again, the founder of Greenpeace.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Greenpeace denies that Patrick Moore was a cofounder, although he claims he was. Moore has spend the last decades lobbying for the nuclear industry and logging interests, coinciding with his denialism.

          In an interview Moore was asked about the safety of the herbicide glyphosate (Roundup). Moore told Paul Moreira that one “could drink a whole quart of it” without any harm. When Moore was challenged to drink a glass of the weed killer, he refused, saying “I’m not an idiot” and “I’m not stupid” before ending the interview.

          Can you prove that Moore believes global warming is a commie plot?

      • Bill589 says:

        I choose to believe the science before the politicians.
        And here is another demonstrable scientific fact:

        “Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for global socialism.” – Margaret Thatcher

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Are you claiming that it’s a fact that Thatcher said it? Or are you claiming it’s a fact that it’s true?

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      And let us get this straight… your understanding of science allows you to believe a single crackpot with no evidence, denying the scientific basis of a theory, can invalidate that theory?

      • formwiz says:

        Coprnicus.

        Galileo.

        It’s happened before.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          And who is today’s Copernicus or Galileo amongst denier scientists? Roy Spencer? Sean Hannity?

          The modern Christian church understands global warming while Galileo suffered under the Church for his “heresy”.

      • Kye says:

        Can you name one commie scientist who does not earn his living by promoting global warming?

        And let us get this straight- your paltry understanding of climate science allows you to believe retarded 16 year old commies with NO EVIDENCE. You believe non-scientists like Al Gore who have made predictions NONE OF WHICH PANNED OUT. So they are either wrong or liars. Which is it?

        Denying the political motivation for a scientific theory can and does invalidate that theory. Scientific theories based on political lies are not theories they are propaganda.

        BTW, once again you accuse me and by extension the rest of us as denying global warming. We all believe in global warming…..and cooling. That IS a scientific FACT. What we don’t buy is the contribution called “man made” to the science. We don’t buy the degree of effect nor do we buy the ability for man at this point technologically to control the climate without economic catastrophe. You IGNORE all of that to make a point about which we do not disagree. That’s the problem with you brainwashed leftists you cannot abide the SLIGHTEST disagreement from your “official” narrative. That’s why you murder babies even when they’re born.

        https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fa.disquscdn.com%2Fget%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252F4.bp.blogspot.com%252F-lJd3yxo2MAE%252FUb6k7vFjm_I%252FAAAAAAAALUs%252FAcPSF3quz5s%252Fs1600%252Fzzzzzzzz.jpg%26key%3DV0b4U5739Di6JVIDibRopQ%26w%3D600%26h%3D590&t=1577374887&ymreqid=d1981f21-fcf0-6f7c-2fd0-bf004c010000&sig=t3uu_lumrXTEOTX.k5h5SA–~C

        Trump 2020 Keep it real.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          You and your cult DID deny the Earth was warming until recently, when you finally accepted the overwhelming evidence. Today you deny that greenhouse gases are responsible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. You’ll accept the role of CO2 in a year or so, but you’ll still argue that it’s not worth “fixing”.

          The Earth is warming, CO2 increasing from burning fossil fuels, ice sheets and glaciers melting, oceans warming, ocean acidity increasing, flora and fauna redistributing…

          That reducing CO2 emissions will cripple economies is a belief, a feeling, and propaganda promoted by the right.

          “Tough” guys bullying a teenage girl, slurring her as “retarded”, and her response is a “fuk you” which enrages right-wing men. The outrage of a female telling a “real” man what to do. And a teenage girl at that. LOL

          A young girl that understands the climate better than your Pompous Orange Savior (POS). What a riot! Of course Trump and his worshipers are outraged and jealous of her attention.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            Yawn!
            Nothing here.
            Get some new material…

            Lolgfy little sissybitch https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • formwiz says:

            You and your cult DID deny the Earth was warming until recently, when you finally accepted the overwhelming evidence.

            We did? When was this?

            Today you deny that greenhouse gases are responsible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

            Because the same overwhelming evidence is still faked.

            The Earth is warming, CO2 increasing from burning fossil fuels, ice sheets and glaciers melting, oceans warming, ocean acidity increasing, flora and fauna redistributing…

            Actually, they’re not, but who pays attention to facts?

            That reducing CO2 emissions will cripple economies is a belief, a feeling, and propaganda promoted by the right.

            It will cost money to do that and then prices will go up so only your overlords will be able to afford stuff.

            That’s basic economics.

            “Tough” guys bullying a teenage girl, slurring her as “retarded”, and her response is a “fuk you” which enrages right-wing men. The outrage of a female telling a “real” man what to do. And a teenage girl at that. LOL

            In a lot of places 16 is an age when women are married and have kids. She wants to get in the grownups’ faces, she better to be able to take the heat.

            And the only LOL (other than the one you can stick in your pussy) in this is that a pampered little princess wants to tell people how to live their lives.

            A young girl that understands the climate better than your Pompous Orange Savior

            She does? Trump’s been right a lot more than she has, but I understand your desperation in trying to change the subject from the disaster the Demos have made of impeachment.

            Of course Trump and his worshipers are outraged and jealous of her attention.

            The only one giving her attention is you.

            Her 15 minutes are long since up.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            The truth does seem repetitive.

            The NuCons have to make up new stories since their tales are based on feelings, wishes, magic and lies.

      • Bill589 says:

        Elwood: “And let us get this straight… your understanding of science allows you to believe a multitude of crackpots with no evidence, etc.?”

        Climahypocrite

  6. Nighthawk says:

    Hilarious that Ellie can’t figure out why we don’t buy into the AGW BS.

    The reason is quite simple. The LIES. From the 97% consensus lie to climategate to the hockey stick to all the failed doom and gloom predictions that have failed to materialize.

    They tell us that hurricanes are getting stronger and more frequent. They tell the same about tornadoes, floods and wild fires when, in reality, all of these are less frequent and weaker/less intense.

    They point a glaciers as some sort of canary in the coal mine thing but fail to mention the glaciers that remain constant or are growing.

    In 2015 I went on a cruise of Glacier Bay National park. They passed out a very interesting brochure. In this brochure it shows the glaciers and where they extended to and what year. around 1780 or so the bay did not exist as it was completely covered by a glacier. By 1794 that glacier had receded by 10 miles. By 1845 by another 15 miles. By 1860 by another 12 miles. By 1880 by another 20 miles. That is one HUGE glacier and a LOT of ice to have melted to make that glacier recede by around 60 miles in less than 100 years. All BEFORE the industrial period began. Of that one huge glacier, 10 small glaciers remain. Of those 10 since 1960, 5 have remained constant, 4 have grown and only ONE has shrunk.

    THIS is what real observations tell us.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Nightie relies on brochures!

      The Arctic, Greenland and Antarctica must not have read the brochure.

      Anyway Nightie, we know why you deny global warming and could care less about persuading the likes of you about anything.

      • Bill589 says:

        Righties rely on truth.
        It is the Left that so often gets caught in ‘hockey stick’ lies.

        Wake up. Stop being a hypocrite.

      • Nighthawk says:

        Information put out by the US Government with historic information provided by scientists studying the area is NOT reliable according to you? OK, here is the map that was included. Please Mr. expert, point out where it is wrong.

        https://www.nps.gov/images/Glacier-Bay-Inset-Detail-Map.jpg

        And, since you brought up those other areas, you do know that the same is happening there as well. Some glaciers are receding, some are staying the same and some are growing. That’s what glaciers do. Of course you know this but to admit it would be to admit that your cult is wrong.

        In case you failed to notice, we live on a dynamic planet with a dynamic and chaotic climate. Things change just as they always have and always will. But nitwits like you expect things to stay static and get all pissy when they don’t.

        And again, I do NOT deny global warming. The climate is changing just as it always has. What I DISAGREE with is causation. This has been pointed out to you numerous times yet you ignore this just so you can keep up your false narrative. You really need to improve your act.

  7. formwiz says:

    The truth does seem repetitive.

    The NuCons have to make up new stories since their tales are based on feelings, wishes, magic and lies.

    How would you know anything about the truth? All you have are lies.

    And we keep hitting you with facts and you keep running away, but, then, the Left’s tales are always feelings, wishes, magic and lies.

    • Bill589 says:

      Elwood would fit well on CNN. As a matter of fact, it appears that is already where he gets most of his ‘information’.

  8. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    One fact this is agreed upon is the any warming occurs before elevations in CO2. That would would be logical and fit the science. And it mean that CO2 is not responsible for warming and that we don’t need to destroy our country.

    • Nighthawk says:

      But according to him, the CO2 now is magical and works completely different than it did in the past.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        As far as is known, the physical laws of the universe do not change, so CO2 would have absorbed infrared radiation many thousands of years ago, just as today.

        What IS different is the source of the CO2. Note that today CO2 is higher than at any time in the past 1,000,000 years, and the increased CO2 today is derived from fossil fuels (based on isotope ratios of C).

        Some 19,000 years ago at the onset of the current interglaciation, the Holocene, slight changes in the Earth’s orbit triggered warming, and CO2 was released from the warming southern* ocean waters amplifying (positive feedback) the effects of orbital change. The right’s bete noir, James Hansen, 30 years ago predicted that warming would precede CO2 at the glacial-interglacial boundaries.

        The ice cores from Antarctica show warming preceding CO2 while Greenland ice cores show CO2 preceding warming.

        • formwiz says:

          As far as is known, the physical laws of the universe do not change

          The idea of physical laws died with Louis XVI. Everything is presumed a theory because you never know when something is going to blow it out of the water.

          See relativity, evolution.

          Note that today CO2 is higher than at any time in the past 1,000,000 years, and the increased CO2 today is derived from fossil fuels

          My God, what drivel.

          Couldn’t be from all those people exhaling, could it?

          The ice cores from Antarctica show warming preceding CO2 while Greenland ice cores show CO2 preceding warming.

          The Hell they are..

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            My god, what drivel. The stupid is great in this one! You’re a lying idiot.
            Do you think the speed of light will change? Absolute zero? Pi?

            According to you, we can never know anything. That works out great for anti-science, fact-hating Cons. You can make up anything!

          • gitarcarver says:

            Do you think the speed of light will change?

            The speed of light is constant, or so textbooks say. But some scientists are exploring the possibility that this cosmic speed limit changes, a consequence of the nature of the vacuum of space.

            The definition of the speed of light has some broader implications for fields such as cosmology and astronomy, which assume a stable velocity for light over time. For instance, the speed of light comes up when measuring the fine structure constant (alpha), which defines the strength of the electromagnetic force. And a varying light speed would change the strengths of molecular bonds and the density of nuclear matter itself.

            A non-constant speed of light could mean that estimates of the size of the universe might be off. (Unfortunately, it won’t necessarily mean we can travel faster than light, because the effects of physics theories such as relativity are a consequence of light’s velocity). [10 Implications of Faster-Than-Light Travel]

            Two papers, published in the European Physics Journal D in March, attempt to derive the speed of light from the quantum properties of space itself. Both propose somewhat different mechanisms, but the idea is that the speed of light might change as one alters assumptions about how elementary particles interact with radiation. Both treat space as something that isn’t empty, but a great big soup of virtual particles that wink in and out of existence in tiny fractions of a second.

            https://www.livescience.com/29111-speed-of-light-not-constant.html

            Light travels in waves, and, like sound, can be slowed depending on what it is traveling through. Nothing can outpace light in a vacuum. However, if a region contains any matter, even dust, light can bend when it comes in contact with the particles, which results in a decrease in speed.

            Light traveling through Earth’s atmosphere moves almost as fast as light in a vacuum, while light passing through a diamond is slowed to less than half that speed. Still, it travels through the gem at over 277 million mph (almost 124,000 km/s) — not a speed to scoff at.

            https://www.space.com/15830-light-speed.html

            Now we see that the left hates actual science.

            After all, all the left has is hate.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Good copy and paste job, but nothing you copied refutes that the speed of light is a constant. It says as much in your copy.

            Of course, mass can change the velocity of electromagnetic radiation, for example infrared radiation interacts with CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere slowing the journey of heat into space! You do believe that don’t you? More CO2, more heat in the atmosphere.

            X-rays are blocked by bone, visible light is blocked by sheets of paper! UV wavelengths are slowed by glass! Microwaves are intercepted by water molecules!

            Here’s a primer on the electromagnetic spectrum from gamma rays (short wavelength, high energy) to radio waves (long wavelength, low energy).

            https://leadertechinc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Electromagnetic-Spectrum.png

            Speed of light in a vacuum: 299,792,458 m/s (commonly 186,000 miles/sec, which is one of those constants were knowing). So it takes about a second for light to reach the Earth from the moon. Some 7 minutes for light to reach Earth from the Sun. If the star Proxima Centauri were to “go out” we wouldn’t see it “go out” on Earth for some 4 years.

            We wish that all the right has was hate, but they also have ignorance.

            Don’t believe what gitarcarver tells you, he has an agenda to mislead. The Wiz is much worse though.

          • gitarcarver says:

            Good copy and paste job, but nothing you copied refutes that the speed of light is a constant. It says as much in your copy.

            Try learning to read.

            The idea is that the speed of light is not a constant and there are scientists that believe it has sped up or slowed down over time.

            Perhaps you need to realize what the word “constant” means.

            Another source:

            No matter where you examine it, it’s always the same temperature, -454 Fº (-270 Cº). If that’s the case and light travels at a constant speed, how could it have made it from one edge of the universe to the other? To date, scientists have no idea, other than to say, some peculiar conditions must have existed in that early “inflation field.”

            The idea of light slowing down over time was first proposed by Professor João Magueijo, from Imperial College London and his colleague, Dr. Niayesh Afshordi, of the Perimeter Institute in Canada. Their paper was submitted to Astrophysics in late 1998 and published shortly thereafter. Unfortunately, the proper instrumentation necessary to investigate the CMB to search for clues supporting it, wasn’t available at the time.

            Magueijo and Afshordi eliminated the inflation field altogether. Instead, they argue that the intense heat that existed when the universe was young, ten thousand trillion trillion Cº, allowed particles—including photons (light particles), to move at an infinite speed. Light therefore traveled to every point in the universe, causing a uniformity in the CMB that we can observe today. “We can say what the fluctuations in the early universe would have looked like,” Afshordi told The Guardian, “and these are the fluctuations that grow to form planets, stars, and galaxies.” An experiment the following year lent credence to Magueijo and Afshordi’s theory.

            [….]

            A discovery in 2001 also lent credence to the variable light theory. The eminent astronomer John Webb made an observation while studying quasars in deep space. Quasars are luminescent bodies billions of times as massive as our sun, which are powered by black holes. Its luminosity comes from an accretion disk, made up of gas, enveloping it.

            Webb found that one particular quasar when nearing interstellar clouds, absorbed a different type of photon than would’ve been predicted. Only two things could explain this. Either its charge had changed or the speed of light had. In 2002 an Australian team, led by theoretical physicist Paul Davies, found that it couldn’t have changed polarity, as this would’ve violated the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

            https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/is-the-speed-of-light-slowing-down

            In essence, you are demonstrating exactly what people who aren’t sure of AGW have been saying all along – that you are so wedded to a theory that no matter what the science and the data takes rational thinking and scientists take you, you won’t go there because,well, because you hate real science.

            That’s how the hate the left manifests itself to the point where no amount of data and science will dissuade them.

            Hate is all the left has.

  9. formwiz says:

    Do you think the speed of light will change? Absolute zero? Pi?

    According to you, we can never know anything. That works out great for anti-science, fact-hating Cons. You can make up anything!

    No.

    If you understood science the way you say you do, you’d know principles proven in the 18th century or earlier are called laws because the scientists who discovered them believed the universe ran on laws (get ready) created by God and were immutable.

    Since then, science has forsaken the Deistic view of the universe (for better or worse) and has taken the view that anything can change under the right (or wrong circumstances).

    Lots of third and fourth year high school physics students have found the hole in relativity and Darwin himself conceded there were holes aplenty in evolution, some of which have been plugged and some not.

    As for the speed of light, absolute zero, or Pi, the first 2 definitely could be altered. Pi is a constant on Earth, but elsewhere may be another matter.

    But I love it when you get all mad and everything when reality is explained to you.

  10. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Relativity and evolution are theories not laws.

    • formwiz says:

      You said light speed and absolute zero are laws. Why not relativity and evolution?

      Unless, of course, I’m right.

  11. formwiz says:

    Good copy and paste job, but nothing you copied refutes that the speed of light is a constant. It says as much in your copy.

    Of course, mass can change the velocity of electromagnetic radiation, for example infrared radiation interacts with CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere slowing the journey of heat into space! You do believe that don’t you? More CO2, more heat in the atmosphere.

    X-rays are blocked by bone, visible light is blocked by sheets of paper! UV wavelengths are slowed by glass! Microwaves are intercepted by water molecules!

    Here’s a primer on the electromagnetic spectrum from gamma rays (short wavelength, high energy) to radio waves (long wavelength, low energy).

    Fact is, we have no idea what conditions may exist to modify those values. So all your copy and paste is just bull.

    You want light speed to be a natural law, but evolution must be a theory.

    Speed of light in a vacuum: 299,792,458 m/s (commonly 186,000 miles/sec, which is one of those constants were knowing). So it takes about a second for light to reach the Earth from the moon. Some 7 minutes for light to reach Earth from the Sun. If the star Proxima Centauri were to “go out” we wouldn’t see it “go out” on Earth for some 4 years.

    You assume that. You know what happens when you assume.

    We wish that all the right has was hate, but they also have ignorance.

    No, you wish we’d agree to all your little canards, but science doesn’t work that way. The science is never settled. Any real scientists will tell you that.

    Don’t believe what gitarcarver tells you, he has an agenda to mislead. The Wiz is much worse though.

    Yeah, I tell the truth.

  12. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    You copy and paste parts of articles describing hypotheses and theories supported by less evidence than greenhouse gas dependent global warming. Why?

    It’s not surprising that the group wants to change the subject from global warming.

    Quantum theory hypothesizes that paired electrons separated by light years could instantly detect each others state, information that would have to travel much faster than the speed of light. Again, this does not refute that the speed of light in a vacuum is a constant.

    “Since “nothing” is just empty space or vacuum, it can expand faster than light speed since no material object is breaking the light barrier,” said theoretical astrophysicist Michio Kaku on Big Think. “Therefore, empty space can certainly expand faster than light.”
    This is exactly what physicists think happened immediately after the Big Bang during the epoch called inflation, which was first hypothesized by physicists Alan Guth and Andrei Linde in the 1980s. Within a trillionth of a trillionth of a second, the universe repeatedly doubled in size and as a result, the outer edge of the universe expanded very quickly, much faster than the speed of light.”

    Based on what you’ve learned today about the electromagnetic spectrum and how the photons/waves can interact with matter you no doubt accept that infrared radiation from the Earth can be absorbed by gas molecules in the atmosphere.

    • formwiz says:

      You copy and paste parts of articles describing hypotheses and theories supported by less evidence than greenhouse gas dependent global warming. Why?

      It’s how science works, hotshot.

      Science is rarely sure and it is never settled.

      It’s not surprising that the group wants to change the subject from global warming.

      No, you’re the one who wants to change the subject from the disaster impeachment has become for you, not to mention Governor Blackface’s attempt to crate a fascist state in VA.

      That stuff will cost you the election.

      Quantum theory hypothesizes that paired electrons separated by light years could instantly detect each others state, information that would have to travel much faster than the speed of light. Again, this does not refute that the speed of light in a vacuum is a constant.

      How would you know? You spent the last few hours hunting for something to back you up.

      And actually, it does.

      Do you know most credible scientists believe the universe is still expanding?

      Based on what you’ve learned today about the electromagnetic spectrum and how the photons/waves can interact with matter you no doubt accept that infrared radiation from the Earth can be absorbed by gas molecules in the atmosphere.

      No, because you’ve just blathered out some meaningless contentions that have nothing concrete to do with anything.

      In all point of fact, you’ve proven nothing.

    • gitarcarver says:

      You copy and paste parts of articles describing hypotheses and theories supported by less evidence than greenhouse gas dependent global warming. Why?

      I posted articles saying that the speed of light is not a constant as you stated categorically.

      Why do you ignore science?

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Nonsense.

        • gitarcarver says:

          Nonsense.

          Well, there you have it. You think that science that disagrees with you is “nonsense.”

          That’s how deep your hatred of science goes.

          All the left has is hate.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Don’t take it personally, but you spout nonsense. As per your norm, you changed the subject, posting “science” of which you have little understanding.

            If you believe that the speed of light in a vacuum is not a constant than you also believe a meter is not a constant. The meter is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second (SI).

            All you and your ilk have is hate. And projection. And ignorance. And a desire to misinform.

            You don’t know anything, yet you want to argue about it. And you confirmed that CO2 absorbs electromagnetic waves in the infrared (IR) region! What’s the speed of infrared “light” in a vacuum? LOL. (Hint: 299792458 m/s). But CO2, water vapor or methane slows it down!

            Well done. (Pelosi clap)

            Note that human eyes have evolved to respond to a narrow band of the spectrum, what we call “visible light”. Some insects (e.g., bees) see wavelengths in the UV range, as do some birds. Interestingly, animals have evolved infrared “receptors” in skin! Some snakes can “see” heat, but not with their eyes (this was elegantly demonstrated in pit vipers in the early 1950s by Bullock and Cowles). BTW, the late 40s and early 50s were the heyday of electrophysiology – certainly you’ve read Fatt & Katz, J Physiol. 1951 Nov 28; 115(3): 320–370.

            Here’s a primer on the electromagnetic spectrum. Enjoy.

            https://schroedingerscat.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/the-electromagnetic-spectrum_thumb.jpg

            Here’s the absorption spectra for green chlorophylls a and b. Note they DON’T absorb much in the green region (green “bounces” off and excites the green cones in the retina, and that’s why we see green plants as green!).

            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Chlorophyll_ab_spectra-en.svg

            Finally, don’t let your desire to “win”, block your pursuit of truth.

Bad Behavior has blocked 11516 access attempts in the last 7 days.