Debate on Human Impact on Climate Change

Global warming. This is one of those cool things where

there is not a shred of evidence,

and I'm, I'm, I'm not lying to you. I've been studying this for a

long time. I've read a lot of books about it,

and I've read a lot of the research

papers. There isn't a shred of evidence that human

beings have had any effect on this planet other than just

billboards. I mean, we, we put out a lot of billboards and

buildings and stuff. We haven't affected the climate, and the

CO2 has such a tiny effect.

Even the CO2 that's there, the bulk of which isn't our problem,

it, it just, it's always there. You know, and, and the, and the guys

that are now running that, like the people that got in trouble at

Hadley

Center, yeah, which is a, a uni-- like University of East Anglia

in England that got their, their emails all published,

and some of them

were kind of embarrassing. Th-those guys,

they're like computer jocks.

They're not climatologists.

In my opinion, climate is something that didn't start in nineteen

hundred.

You know? If you wanna know about climate

and climate change,

then you need to know things like when was the Eocene and

what was the weather like? The Eocene was like about forty million years

ago,

and the, the, the, the planet was pretty much

trees. The, there were gymnosperms because the, the, the

angiosperms hadn't happened yet, but there were trees from pole to pole.

And it was a fairly temperate time, and the CO2 levels,

and we know this all, all from proxy measurements and stuff,

but they're pretty

decent measurements, were twenty-seven hundred parts per

million.

The-- they're now three hundred and forty, which is a little higher

than two seventy, which is what they were historically before we

started supposedly polluting the atmosphere.

But there's a big difference between three forty and two-- twenty-seven hundred.

It probably had something to do with the fact that the

Earth in its orbit is not exactly always

pointed in the same direction. It's, it's, it's, it's, it's

precessing around its poles. It's nutating around

that, meaning it's accelerating and decelerating of that precession.

It's pointing in all different directions over long periods of time that can

actually be-- You can, you can predict them.

I mean, they're not like random things.

It's just like, yeah, it's a big, big top, and it's affected by all these other

planets and stuff. And, and you should be able to take

those, those things and make some sense out of them in

terms of climatology. Over the last couple million years,

we became quite successful as a species

because the, the climate was changing rapidly, and we were

able to adapt to it. That's the natural state of things here,

you know? And it isn't because of us that it happened.

It's because it happened that we're here.

And it's really silly for people to walk around saying, "Save the Earth,"

you know, from us. Like, we're, we're like the moss that

grows on the rocks here. We're not a very big part of

it. We really aren't. We've overblown our,

our presence here, and that is a foolish paradigm

that we have allowed to sort of permeate an int-- a whole field.

And, and all the real climatologists have been

replaced by these guys that

write global circulation models that say, "If this happens,

then this happens, then the temperature will go up by five

degrees within the

next..." In my opinion, climatology has become a kind of a joke,

but people that are real climatologists do think about things like

the, all the, the global epochs that the Earth has gone through

in our way of looking at it. But the, the guys that are getting the

headlines and stuff and that are meeting in Copenhagen

and deciding that

everybody's got to stop cooking over Sterno stoves in Africa or

whatever, I mean, those people don't know nothing.

They really don't. And, and if you-