Some of you, my online readers, have successively suggested that I resume my original plan about climate change. I thus discussed with my daughter Elaina and her husband Jeff.
- Elaina: Their request seems urgent. Why did you cancel this part of the content?
I was in hesitation and thought this should be a clear matter.
- Elaina: But many people still believe the claim that humans are making global warming. Even white house is returning to Paris Agreement.
Many important scientists have clarified the issue. Where are the scientific advisors of the White House? This is ridiculous.
- Jeff: Perhaps the advisors do not agree with you. So, you’d better back to the original plan, at least partially. You can recommend some important academic references.
He seriously provided relevant literatures week later. So did Elaina. Their referrals apply to some new research on the planet’s cooling. We then consult to Daniel, a professor of climatology, via online gathering.
- Elaina: I suppose you’ve got the links. One of them, published on Nature, seems important.
- Daniel: Yes, it’s about the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). That is one of major ocean circulation systems, so that is a major mechanism for heat redistribution on our planet. Nowadays, there is evidence that the AMOC is slowing down. People see it as a new sign for a coming ice age.
- Elaina: The paper, after acknowledging such evidence, argued that global anthropogenic warming caused it as predicted by climate models. It’s odd.
- Daniel: This kind of logic is indeed absurd. But even in today’s academia, it is not surprising at all. One can predict opposite possibility technically by another model.
- Elaina: Really?
He is right. It depends on how people modeling. For the entire planet, the climate system interacts with the atmosphere, the ocean circle, the biosphere, and the lithosphere. Climate change is a complex subject involving many scientific fields. Therefore, the climatological models are more complex than the models I did that mainly based on thermodynamics. Their model can be very flexible, as Daniel pointed.
- Daniel: Complexity of the task does not mean that climatologists are smarter than the others. Besides the general problem in a parameterized process, your principles about the quality of original data and the error propagation in geochemical calculations are important as well.
Forty years ago, I had lectures in the Beijing Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. One of my fresh courses called ‘Physical Chemistry of the Natural Environment’, and Daniel was one of the first group of students. We knew each other.
Those principles are very simple.
- Daniel: You made them simpler. Some climatologists accepted such statistical theories, but some did not even understand them. These facts easily damaged the completeness, correctness, and resolution of the climate model. The paper we read now may also be a deliberate quibble to protect the hypothesis they preferred. Joining the chorus of global warming can guarantee funding sources for the writers.
- Elaina: This is shameful.
Relative to the ugly hidden behind the noise of ‘climate change’, even some academic cheating would be a piece of cake. The people behind scene have a lot of money so that can manipulate the ‘scientists’ who are modeling. Ironically, American taxpayers have paid to them a lot pushed by radical leftists. They can easily make a tremendous noise of ‘climate emergency’.
- Elaina: But people should clarify the problem first.
Yes, but not first to discuss serious academic issues like we do. We should help the entire society clarifying the chaos first. It took me too long time realizing the point. Actually, my original plan for the issue still had too many academic contents that might be unnecessary. I have been too nerdy.
- Daniel: The people behind the curtain do not care about scientific evidence at all, they only care about how to force people to believe their fallacies. In the current case we discussed, facing the evidence that the earth could get cold, they interpret it as ‘from global warming’. In their propaganda, the forest fires on the west coast are ‘from global warming’; the cold currents in the east have originated ‘from global warming’. They deliberately confuse the basic concepts of weather and climate everywhere.
They further confuse people by changing deliberately their claim of ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’. This is a usual trick of the CCP, which has changed the meaning of many Chinese words with political conspiracy. Then the entire culture changed in China. Such tyranny of language chaos has entered the United States silently. The twisted meaning of the word ‘climate change’ is just an example of such a trick.
- Daniel: Their propaganda has no science, even no simple logic at all. They are frantically peddling their fallacies.
If you object to their fallacy, they criticize you for not understanding science. If you are a scientist and oppose their fallacy, they will attack you for being politically incorrectness.
- Elaina: If you agree with their fallacy, then everyone would be happy. Right?
That is not necessarily true. In their hearts, they despise the masses manipulated by them. They are elitists who think they are the master who control everyone and the entire earth. This is a group of perverts with certain knowledge but lack of culture and morality.
Similar fallacies and language chaos have occurred in other fields as well, and the more are coming. They want to change the entire culture, eventually. Mao’s cultural revolution has already sneaked into America silently. Lies about climate change are part of environmentalism that does evil using people’s good wishes of protecting the environment. Basic common sense of relevant phenomena will surely clarify the language chaos and expose the logical sophistry made by the radical leftists(see next part).
To my online readers:
This is the first post triggered by your emails. It will be the guideline to implement your suggestion, relevant contents will emerge into chapter 5. Your further comment is very welcome.
(03/03/2021)