Trump’s Confusion About Global Warming and Climate Change.

30 thoughts on “Trump’s Confusion About Global Warming and Climate Change.

  1. It’s all very possibly a general confusion and certainly not just that of Donald Trump.
    Global Warming was a most misused term and has conveniently been replaced with Climate Change, coupled with the problem of big money in big science. We struggle with incoming scientific research results at my university as so much is conflicting and confusing.

    1. Alice – the problem is that global warming causes disruption to weather patterns. Some places get hotter, some warmer, some wetter, some drier and weather becomes more extreme. It is extremely difficult to forecast what is exactly going to happen.
      I do not think it was a convenient change. It was a more accurate way of portraying what is going on. Many people get confused when their area is getting colder.
      I think we need much more research and observation. It’s a travesty that Trump has pulled the plug on that.
      Which university are you referring to?

      1. Yes, thanks for clarifying what the subject matter is. I’ll just stick my Phd in the bucket then shall I?
        Uni of Exeter.

  2. I am confused here as to your understanding of relevant details of current study and the latest pan-global report findings. I am fairly certain that you cannot be up to speed with exactly where we stand. I made a mistake and mistakenly assumed you may have known something about the subject. Read on.

    1. Well so far you’ve said nothing, put nothing forward and contributed nothing. I’m sorry if my explanation confuses you. I can’t see why. I haven’t explained anything yet. Perhaps that PhD should be in the bin. If you want to put forward your view of the latest findings feel free because I’ve been looking at the steady warming, rising CO2 levels, rising sea levels and effects that’s been having on weather patterns, ice thickness and species distribution. It looks pretty conclusive to me.

      1. Nothing? Actually I said a lot is conflicting and confusing, which may or may not indicate that all is not what it seems. I also intimated big science with big money and if you cannot grasp the connotations of that then it’s going to be a very long night indeed.
        I always ask myself these questions.
        What have you been looking at? From where? Who were the sources? Who contracted them to make studies? Who Is paying them? Why were they contracted? Who gains from these reports? Who suffers from these reports? What length of time period are these studies conducted over? Are they seasonal reports?
        Every single time the TV media touches this subject they show ice walls collapsing into the sea. They never state what time of year this film was made.
        The public wouldn’t know if it’s the North Pole or the South Pole.
        The public also don’t know that when the North Pole naturally melts, the South Pole freezes and vice versa. The scare mongering tactics employed towards the general public are obtuse.
        We may be at the very outset of a natural cycle as in terms of the earth’s life span, where possibly (and I stress possibly) we have reached the very end of the last Ice Age and are now on an upward curve again. This had been an active possibility for centuries until the recent ingress of “socially aware politics” entered the scientific research spectrum. We now have journalists, politicians, school teachers and the hairdresser with an informed opinion.
        Most of what is read is speculative and predictive. We really need to become better informed than that. Lazy science could be our nemesis.

      2. OK Alice – I see that you are very cynical about science and scientists. I can see big business would use science that way but most of the scientists I’ve worked with have been very dedicated and objective.
        Reading about what is going on from scientific sources the view is extremely persuasive for me.
        It looks as if we were heading into an ice-age just prior to the industrial revolution. The CO2 levels thankfully reversed that. I do not think that is part of any natural cycle. It is due to human activity.

      3. OK Opher, I am very cynical about lazy science and money mongering scientists, most of whom are American and have been called a day upon by Donald Trump.
        The last thing any of us need are any more reports from the Institute of Bad Science for Your Dollars, California, and if anyone doesn’t understand that, too bad on them. Long term, Trump has done us all a very big favour as we can concentrate more on the wheat rather than the chaff.
        The dangers of big money in science is a danger in itself as we can in fact buy ourselves any results that we so choose. That is an extremely dangerous and highly irresponsible situation.
        When did you work with scientists? Your biog reads that you taught school level Biology to school children. I honestly do not think that we have any correlative connection in this instance. I have a PhD in Global phylo-epidemiology of Vibrio parahaemolyticus within a context of climate change – Biosciences. I’m looking to do another this year but haven’t decided yet as time is valuable with research.

      4. My research was on the Biostratonomy of Lake Windermere with London University. I was using chironomid larvae as indicator organisms and studied the evolution of lakes following the warming after the last ice age. I worked with scientists in England and Russia for 3 years. It was incredibly boring and I jacked it in and went into teaching.
        As your work is with bacteria that live in warm water you should have a very good idea of the warming in the seas that is currently taking place. I have been following it closely.
        As for Trump pulling all monitoring and downgrading science – no I don’t agree that is a good thing at all. In fact I think it is about the dumbest thing going. When it comes to crucial things like climate change I would rather have the views of experts who are monitoring the planet closely other than the opinion of an idiot who can’t read books and his distorted ill-informed views on what is happening. The very least we should be doing is pumping in more money to more closely monitor what is actually happening – not shutting it down. Trump is a fool who listens to evangelical nutcases rather than scientists.
        As for your concerns about big bucks driving a lot of science – yes I share your concerns. But this is not the way to deal with that. Shouting FAKE NEWS!!! loudly all the time does not mean that it is fake news.

      5. Yes, that’s what I gathered – a long time ago, over 40 years. You people didn’t even have a fax machine. It must have taken 18 months to type a report, or find a secretary to type it up. It must have torturously slow with little idea as to what other findings by other study groups were. I don’t think you would recognise the methods and speed with which we work today.
        Where did you get the bit about Trump pulling all monitoring from? That’s complete fabrication. Where did you get all this Trump stuff? Why are you directing any of this Trump stuff at me?
        Trump has nothing to do with any scientific research that I know of or come into contact with and that includes America. As far as I know it always will include America as nobody from the US agencies that I deal with has intimated closure of anything of any kind.
        But Trump seems to be your entire focus of attention rather than the study programmes and I’m sorry, but I’m really struggling to fathom you out.
        Maybe another time when you’ve grown tired of moaning on about Trump.

      6. Alice – you think that I have not been keeping up with research level? I was teaching genetics and biochemistry to A Level with special subjects picking up the latest research papers thanks. No I am not unaware of latest techniques or modelling programmes.
        As you were working in an area related to global warming I am amazed that you don’t know anything about Trump’s activities in these areas. Boggling.
        I am not just moaning about Trump I am fucking furious that he should be so cavalier with environmental protection, science and climate monitoring. His plans to extend mining and fracking to national parks and offshore is as dangerous as is his attempts to block alternative energy (big tariffs), stimulate the fossil fuel industry and pull out of the Paris agreement. He is an environmental vandal.

      7. A level? Let me hold my horses on that!
        I think you might be a little bit short on the grand scopes. But, good for you all the same. I don’t think you actually realise that you might not be altogether correct with the assumption that you are ‘keeping up’. A lot of data is not released into the public domain and for very good reasons – reasons which involve large sums of financial profit and those that are detrimental to these profits.
        There’s so much and too much slight of hand and some trials are a palava.
        It should be said though for all the good some parties are attempting to implement, as long as China pollutes the atmosphere to the level of today, it really doesn’t matter what Trump does or doesn’t do as none of his actions will be any more than a drop in the ocean compared to China’s global vandalism. They are the vandals, not Trump. Not by any measure. But we can’t shout at China, so Trump seems to suffice. Save your breath for the evil clouds of doom floating our way from China.

      8. Alice it may have escaped your notice, in the condescending cloud you live in, that China has realised the ridiculous levels of pollution it has been creating and is doing something about it. It is now a leading exponent of alternative energy. Hopefully China will start to clean up its act.
        But please don’t crow about the US. They come in second in terms of most polluting. What they do has a big impact
        All the moves by Trump have been negative for the environment from opening up national parks and offshore for drilling and mining, removing environmental legislation, and actively supporting polluting industries to denying climate change and pulling out of the Paris agreement. The man is a stupid environmental vandal.

      9. I suppose your first post towards myself could not be described as condescending.
        In short – you have nothing to do with any incoming global reportage system reconfigured into composite data reports as managed by and published by Exeter University. Yet you seem intent on telling me, one who is actively and daily involved with and has been for some years, exactly what the score is. Don’t be daft old man. You had your time and it’s over with.
        Also please do not pretend to yourself that what you read is anywhere close to the reality. That link that you pleased yourself with – is this the level of your information source? No wonder to me that what you’re saying is so under par, so old news, so off the playing field. I don’t know where to begin with you.
        You only get to know what they want you to know. They play around with the obvious. Yes we can see people choking in China, so there’s a problem in China. And so forth.
        Do not be quite as satisfied with China as yet. Perhaps wait and see what they do with all their dozens of coal burning power stations that were installed in the last 5 years.
        A few glib words directed to the world at large does not make for ‘leading exponent’. Not yet anyway.
        Which leads me to remember that they have propaganda management of their propaganda. Such as the smog emission meters in Beijing, when levels exceed the prescribed acceptable allowance, suddenly all meters are removed for “technical adjustments” or simply covered up with large blankets.

        Germany should also be of great concern having only recently opened up several new coal burning power stations. The EU stood and watched, said nothing and did nothing. Germany wiped its backside with the Paris Agreement.

        It doesn’t take a genius to know that the bigger the country with the bigger the population, with the bigger the industries, with the bigger the carbon fueled transport, then the bigger the problems.
        This piece of paper, this Paris Agreement is camouflage of the most corrupted.
        Forget about it. It has as much clout as your ‘Free Beer Tomorrow’ voucher.
        You’re a prized dreamer.

      10. Alice – if people are rude to me they get rude back. As I said before you have offered nothing, no information what so ever. All you have are insults, arrogance and rudeness. I don’t find that at all impressive. Never mind perhaps you will move on from bacteria to bigger things.
        You talk about information and offer mere speculation. We are possible at the start of a new warming period – really? What is causing that then Alice? It couldn’t be the greenhouse effect could it? It couldn’t be manmade? Or is there some solar output or geothermal source that we don’t know about?
        If you put so much mouth into it then start talking substance because all I’m hearing is hot air and nastiness.

    1. That was sunset at Lake Garda Cheryl.
      Trump is ignorant. It is extremely dangerous and worrying that someone with his power should choose to ignore experts.

      1. I disagree with that. These very same “experts”, only ten years ago made a plausible case for filthy Diesel powered vehicles. Our UK hospitals have never been so busy with dealing with respiratory problems. Why?

      2. Alice – the case for diesels was made on their CO2 output and efficiency. They are less polluting in that respect than petrol cars. Then they started investigating the micro-particles and discovered the great harm they do. As our knowledge increases we have to modify our views.

      3. And you believed that? You’d only have to walk behind a bus or a lorry and know what a load of tosh that claim was.
        Modifying our views – my word, that’s the understatement of the year, so far!

      4. Actaully micro-particle research has been on-going since they dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We already knew the effects of diesel power, but again money talks. Sometimes we could not get more stupid and this was another of them.

      5. This is getting silly. I’m a 33 year old Supervisor in my team. This is what I do with my life. I have Professor level degree qualifications that I gained some 10 years ago. I now deal with all kinds of scientific research results data with only a portion immediately related to that of my initial degree course. I see a whole world’s worth of information that is accurate and relevant.
        Why do you treat me with such disdainful disrespect?
        I am extremely sorry that I came on board here and I will certainly never do so again. Not ever in any scientific or non-scientific domain have I ever received such plain bloody rudeness.

        Maybe some report that you may have read was recent, but not the study itself. Look it up and stop arguing with me. I work the results and have graphs and stats going back to around 1949/50, not that I stare at them all day.
        Started with post-bomb effects and Cancer research following the bombs.
        (You could very likely find some of the initial reports in old copies of Life Magazine)
        Why don’t you know this?
        Why are you pissing around arguing?

      6. Alice – for someone claiming your level of professionalism you should know better. You came on here with attitude and don’t like it when called out. If you had some contributions to make other than arrogance and rudeness I might be interested. You have to earn respect and being rude and bombastic doesn’t cut it with me.

    2. I disagree with your stance on the politics over science. Politics and propaganda by administrations does not enter my study report domain.
      OK, so you wanted to protect some form of intellectual ownership of the domain that was once yours. I can understand that, but perhaps allow others to do the same or continue to do the same.
      I did find your initial lecture following after I had told you what I did to be obtuse. Also that concerning micro-particle research a bit off and actually if memory serves it might have been some German scientists that started that back in WW2, but I’m not putting a wager on that detail. Who cares anyway.

      Opher, I am not completely at liberty on a public forum such as this to be discussing details concerning our incoming data research.
      Put your scientist hat back on and figure out what’s written between the lines. You’re not impressed because I don’t play truth or dare on a public forum on the internet on somebody’s blog. I will just have to live with that.

      I don’t focus on bacteria if at all now myself and that was my degree course years ago. As I already told you – we see almost everything.
      My particular focus this year will be the devastation peculiar to El Nino oscillation which is becoming more and more powerful and we’d like to find a reason for that. It could be just a lot of hot air and there was no pun intended! The situation of constant fluctuation of east to west and north to south wind power driving down temperatures with massive cold storms is simply crazy and impossible to predict. We only know when there is a dip in the jet stream by which time it’s by and large not enough time to give sufficient warnings on the magnitude of forthcoming storms – that’s the weather people’s job anyways.
      It’s not possible to count on temperature upward thrust to be monotonic and the many variable factors, except of course the ever present greenhouse gasses.
      The west coast increased water temperatures due to El Nino is of pressing concern, not least the devastation by tropical cyclone activity. No prisoners taken with that lot. Usually the graphs are all over the place and it’s mighty difficult making headway. We only know where it happens. We don’t really know when and we only know a little bit of the why. Lots to do here.

      That’s all I wanted to say (but my hand was forced as I don’t like having to explain). I have enough of this stuff in the office and don’t need any more of it on home time. Bye.

      1. Well good luck with your research on El Nino. That is what we need – much more monitoring and research. That is why I think Trump’s strategy to pull the monitoring and ignore what is going on is stupid and dangerous.

  3. On behalf of Earth Science 2018 Conference, I am pleased to invite you to participate in “International conference on Earth Science and Climate Change” that will be held at Zurich , Switzerland on September 6-7th, 2018. Kindly send your email so that we can send you the official invitation letter. Awaiting for your response.

I'd like to hear from you...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.