Saturday, August 06, 2016 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

Contamination of Olympic ceremony by climate alarmism is unethical

Megastructure: the world media talk about the new preprint saying that the intensity of the seemingly ordinary KIC 8462852 Kepler star corresponds to a piecewise linear, decreasing function (a very non-smooth function), with a few-percent decrease sometimes in a few months and sometimes in a few years. The aliens have clearly approved astroengineering – basically helioengineering – projects to gradually screen their star and to fight against global warming on Earth B. Or just some clouds or devouring of the star by some other objects in a certain state of motion. Or something really crazy.
Those who watched the opening ceremony of the Olympic games in Rio were forced to see this Gore-style demagogic video on the climate panic:



I haven't heard the narration – which was done by James Bond's female boss.

This is quite incredible. Rio was also the place where the 1992 Earth Summit took place. Many people blame this particular event for the subsequent rapid propagation of the global pseudoscience-powered environmental fascism and its most aggressive form, the climate hysteria. You could think that the Brazilian politicians should be more careful but they're not.




The worries about the sea level rise are stupid, of course. The sea level was always changing but in recent thousands of years, the rise was minimal.



You see that between 15,000 and 8,000 years ago, the sea level rose by 100 meters (from 110 below the current level to 10 below the current level). The average rate was about 14 mm per year or 1.4 meters per century. However, these days, it's just 3 mm per year or so or 30 centimeters per century.

Some 7,000 years ago, all the ice sheets that could have melted (especially those around the Arctic Circle) have already melted. What was left was several glaciers in the mountains plus mostly the Greenland and the Antarctica which require a vastly higher warming to melt. The ice that floats (and melts and refreezes) on the sea (e.g. Arctic Ocean) doesn't affect the sea level due to the Archimedes principle.

The main driver of the melting at the time scale of tens of thousands of years are the Milankovitch cycles – astronomical irregularities in the Earth's orbit that make the solar radiation coming to the Arctic Circle (a critical place for the ice age cycles, it turns out), fluctuate. So the bulk of the graph above has nothing to do with the human civilization.




So the sea level is always changing – but we happen to live in an era in which the sea level is changing relatively slowly and nothing seems to be changing about the rate.



I think that most people heavily underestimate how the maps have always been naturally changing due to the sea level rise (or drop). As the middle picture above shows, just some 10,000 years ago, the Doggerland and Doggerbank were connecting Britain and Denmark. The Brits weren't isolated from the Continental Europe at all. Brexit would have been much harder as recently as 7,000 BC.

This huge change of the map was possible because the North Sea is very shallow. This fact also affects the concerns of the Netherlands that are referred to in the video, too. The Dutchmen had to defend their country against the sea since they (the Dutch) were born, too, and it existed a long time before that moment. After all, that's the reason why the country is named the Netherlands – "low-lying territories" that become flooded if the sea level increases a little bit. Why would this old fact be highlighted at the 2016 Olympic ceremony in Rio, a completely different place of the globe? It's exactly as irrelevant for the event as the kangaroos or the oil in Kuwait.

The warming needed to melt a big chunk of the Greenland's ice (which would cause 7 meters of sea level rise) is comparable to 10 °C and the warming needed to melt a big chunk of the Antarctica (which would add 20+ additional meters) is comparable to 50 °C. You just shouldn't expect any of these things. The videosequences in the Olympic video – the flooding of Florida and other things – just won't happen because the temperature change they require is absolutely unrealistic in coming centuries.

Ludicrously enough, another Arctic expedition destined to prove that the global warming has destroyed the ice in the Arctic is basically stuck in ice, waiting whether their vodka reserves will last up to Christmas. Maybe, Russians love to say, we're told. I wonder whether at least one of these people feels how painful they have become.

I totally agree with the comment at the Daily Mail that the Brazilian lecturing of the world about the environmental issues is absolutely inappropriate.

Brazil hugely pollutes its water and the continuing deforestation of the Amazon forest is rather obvious. It's thankfully (approximately) compensated by the growth of forests at other places of the world. The Guanabara Bay which will be used during the Olympics was recently full of trash, human feces, and human body parts. Even this environmental problem should clearly be more important for the organizers and their political supervisors than the greenhouse effect.

But I find it surprising that they lack this sensitivity and introduce more dividing issues. The Rio Olympics are already struggling with a small budget – much smaller than in London 4 years ago; and with abstentions due to the Zika virus, injuries, and bans (e.g. for Russian athletes because of forbidden substances – I think that the Russians were punished more aggressively than analogous athletes from elsewhere). Why would they choose to antagonize another group of athletes?

Now, some 1/3 or 1/2 of the world's population would agree with me that the climate hysteria is mostly rubbish and that the world needs Clexit (I was honored to be included among the supporters of Clexit).

Most of athletes possess the peabrains of a mosquito and they surely allow this peabrain to be brainwashed happily because it makes their careers more comfortable. And the "brain infrastructure" around sports is probably formed by people who love climate alarmism and similar "causes". But there is still a substantial portion of the athletes in Rio who would disagree with this stuff – if they had the freedom to express their actual opinion at all – and who will find the politicized atmosphere in Rio unwelcoming for this reason, too. They will partly compete to highlight themselves and their countries – but now they will also feel that they also compete in order to strengthen the climate hysteria. Under these circumstances, I couldn't run 100 meters in less than 15 seconds. ;-)

Sports just shouldn't be politicized in this way. In Ancient Greece, wars were suspended during the Olympic games. City states were fighting and hating each other but they had enough respect to remove politics from their lives for a few days. Even Adolf Hitler largely avoided the temptation to insert straight political propaganda to the (spectacular) 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin. The organizers of the ongoing Olympic games seem to want the politicization to be maximal. I am closer to a non-fan of sports than to a fan of sports so it's not a big issue, anyway. But this was the last droplet that made me decide not to watch these Olympic games at all.

F*ck you, Rio. I wish the athletes to survive the games in good health, a nice journey to their home afterwards, and lots of money that the buyers will pay for their medals.

Add to del.icio.us Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (0) :