by Summary:
This is a talk I gave to students at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam yesterday--where Richard Tol has a fractional appointment. It's probably the most impassioned speech I have given on this topic to date. The more I delve into mainstream climate change economics, the more ludicrous attempts I find to reach a pre-ordained view that climate change is no big deal. One of my patrons put this very well: "Tol and Nordhaus, in my view, quite obviously reasoned backwards from a minimalist conclusion and sewed up their data to make it fit. The IPCC did the same thing to create their risk evaluations." Minsky can be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/minsky/. The Minsky files used in this presentation are embedded in the Powerpoint file, which can be downloaded from
Topics:
Steve Keen considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
This is a talk I gave to students at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam yesterday--where Richard Tol has a fractional appointment. It's probably the most impassioned speech I have given on this topic to date. The more I delve into mainstream climate change economics, the more ludicrous attempts I find to reach a pre-ordained view that climate change is no big deal. One of my patrons put this very well: "Tol and Nordhaus, in my view, quite obviously reasoned backwards from a minimalist conclusion and sewed up their data to make it fit. The IPCC did the same thing to create their risk evaluations." Minsky can be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/minsky/. The Minsky files used in this presentation are embedded in the Powerpoint file, which can be downloaded from
Topics:
Steve Keen considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Michael Hudson writes A Concept of a Plan … for the National Interest
Sergio Cesaratto writes La nuova governance fiscale europea
New Economics Foundation writes Trapped behind the wheel
Peter Radford writes Election: Take Four
| This is a talk I gave to students at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam yesterday--where Richard Tol has a fractional appointment. It's probably the most impassioned speech I have given on this topic to date. The more I delve into mainstream climate change economics, the more ludicrous attempts I find to reach a pre-ordained view that climate change is no big deal. One of my patrons put this very well: "Tol and Nordhaus, in my view, quite obviously reasoned backwards from a minimalist conclusion and sewed up their data to make it fit. The IPCC did the same thing to create their risk evaluations." Minsky can be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/minsky/. The Minsky files used in this presentation are embedded in the Powerpoint file, which can be downloaded from https://www.patreon.com/posts/climate-change-33830124 |
The sun dictates climate change ironically, not CO2 as the corrupt UN IPCC pushes out for the UN's Agenda 21 program.
"The sun's energy has decreased since the 1980s but the Earth keeps warming faster than before."
https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
@Nhoj737
Pity the planet has not seen any warming over the past two decades, plus, please look up Mr John Cook, the cartoonist from Brisbane in Australia who like's to dress up as a nazi in his spare time who created the 97 percent of scientists lie who created the Skeptical Science blog you use as evidence.
@Nhoj737
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-Temperature-and-CO2-levels-over-600-million-years-Source-MacRae-2008_fig1_280548391
Pity climate alarmists never use long term data to show a more accurate picture.
“The IPCC report that the Paris agreement based its projections on considered over 1,000 possible scenarios. Of those, only 116 (about 10%) limited warming below 2C. Of those, only 6 kept global warming below 2C without using negative emissions. So roughly 1% of the IPCC’s projected scenarios kept warming below 2C without using negative emissions technology like BECCS. And Kevin Anderson, former head of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, has pointed out that those 6 lone scenarios showed global carbon emissions peaking in 2010. Which obviously hasn’t happened.
So from the IPCC’s own report in 2014, we basically have a 1% chance of staying below 2C global warming if we now invent time travel and go back to 2010 to peak our global emissions. And again, you have to stop all growth and go into decline to do that. And long term feedbacks the IPCC largely blows off were ongoing back then too.”
https://www.facebook.com/wxclimonews/posts/455366638536345
'Limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius will not prevent destructive and deadly climate impacts, as once hoped, dozens of experts concluded in a score of scientific studies released Monday.
A world that heats up by 2C (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit)—long regarded as the temperature ceiling for a climate-safe planet—could see mass displacement due to rising seas, a drop in per capita income, regional shortages of food and fresh water, and the loss of animal and plant species at an accelerated speed.
Poor and emerging countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America will get hit hardest, according to the studies in the British Royal Society's Philosophical Transactions A.
"We are detecting large changes in climate impacts for a 2C world, and so should take steps to avoid this," said lead editor Dann Mitchell, an assistant professor at the University of Bristol.
The 197-nation Paris climate treaty, inked in 2015, vows to halt warming at "well under" 2C compared to mid-19th century levels, and "pursue efforts" to cap the rise at 1.5C.'
https://phys.org/news/2018-04-degrees-longer-global-guardrail.html#jCp
“The new study suggests otherwise. In the Pliocene — and especially the mid-Pliocene warm period, when atmospheric carbon dioxide was at about the level where it is now, 400 parts per million, but global temperatures were 1 or 2 degrees Celsius warmer than at present . . . ”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/09/20/scientists-may-have-just-solved-a-riddle-about-antarctica-and-youre-not-going-to-like-the-answer/?fbclid=IwAR1Nm8lEv1OqGJdoPXxcbkWNkvgvborAD3sn5Dsybgelx-XI6YAaXznQqoA
Or.
“For earlier geological times, CO2 concentrations and temperatures have been inferred from less direct methods. Those suggest that the concentration of CO2 last approached 400 ppm about 3 to 5 million years ago, a period when global average surface temperature is estimated to have been about 2 to 3.5°C higher than in the pre-industrial period. . . . “P9-10.
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-full.pdf
Will there be change?
“Today’s global consumption of fossil fuels now stands at roughly five times what it was in the 1950s, and one-and-half times that of the 1980s when the science of global warming had already been confirmed and accepted by governments with the implication that there was an urgent need to act. Tomes of scientific studies have been logged in the last several decades documenting the deteriorating biospheric health, yet nothing substantive has been done to curtail it. More CO2 has been emitted since the inception of the UN Climate Change Convention in 1992 than in all of human history. CO2 emissions are 55% higher today than in 1990. Despite 20 international conferences on fossil fuel use reduction and an international treaty that entered into force in 1994, manmade greenhouse gases have risen inexorably.”
https://medium.com/@xraymike79/the-inconvenient-truth-of-modern-civilizations-inevitable-collapse-8e83df6f3a57
In the year 2019
“07:53 the atmospheric carbon dioxide increase
07:56 rate was the highest that it's ever been . . . “
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa13KrOvE2s&fbclid=IwAR1XUa8LUVGc9z-hA4G2e6pGy8_5-vZZz0IBu3VTYmYfHk1_fNbYRwK_Jao
What caused CO2 levels to be at 2,500 ppm 140 million years ago at a time over the past 600 million years CO2 levels has been falling to dangerously low levels at around 400 ppm today?
@Mark Warburton Science denier.
@Nhoj737
You deny the sun is the main driver of climate change ironically and can not answer my questions put to you, you Club of Rome groupie.
@Nhoj737
You deny the long term data that proves CO2 level changes has no bearing on earths ever changing climate cycles ironically.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Global-Temperature-and-CO2-levels-over-600-million-years-Source-MacRae-2008_fig1_280548391
https://youtu.be/M1VJtER2IUE
Do you deny the science?
Brilliant.
Wow not sure what to make if that. Try to be the change or just accept our fate and unrelenting consume til the bitter end.
Glad you mentioned Timothy Garrett (09:15).. His theory, IMO, means WASF.
Warning – @Mark Warburton, who takes up a lot of space here, is seemingly a sad climate troll who has bought into the fossil fuel corporations' climate denial shtick. I've never won an argument with a climate denier yet – they just double down and quote more cherry-picked information. Sad. Such a waste of good intelligence.
Guy Dauncey – I think the Mark Warburton here is the commentary called Rob on other YouTubes of ProfSteveKeen
0:49:39 – Milton Friedman lived on FANTASY ISLAND as does THE BIG DUMMY who still believes CHINA pays for the Tariff.
_________ Wait, Did Milton believe China pays for the Tariff? Is Milton hiding his bald head under the orange wig? LOL
China does pay for the tariffs which is why they don't like them. Donald Trump is in good company.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txFXmONXlS0
0:08:00 – Philip Mirowski
0:10:38 – Economic Blindspot in Economics
0:12:11 – Production with Energy 0:12:50 – 0:13:47 – 0:14:52 –
0:15:00 – 0:15:12 – Shaikh The Humbug Production Function https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BeWBy8gYHA .
http://anwarshaikhecon.org/index.php/publications/aggregate-production-functions/44-1974/87-laws-of-production-and-laws-of-algebra-the-humbug-production-function
0:17:50 – Piero Sraffa https://www.hetwebsite.net/het/profiles/sraffa.htm
0:18:03 – LOL – The Solar Residual https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/where-is-solars-emilio-estevez
The Solow residual is a number describing empirical productivity growth in an economy from year to year and decade to decade. Robert Solow, the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences-winning economist, defined rising productivity as rising output with constant capital and labor input.
.
0:19:08 – search for : A Note on the Role of Energy in Production
By Steve Keena & Russell Standish of Kingston University London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
And by Robert U. Ayresb of INSEAD, France
Teaser : ABSTRACT Energy plays no role in the standard Cobb-Douglas Production Function (CDPF), and a trivial role in a three-factor CDPF where it is treated as a third input, independent of labour and capital. Starting from an epistemological perspective, we treat energy as an input to both labour and capital, without which production is impossible.
Ecological Economics 157 (2019) 40–46
0:19:32 – Production With Energy : The Goodwin Model
Nature is going to appoint an economics editor with a view to joining the trend of economists working with people from other disciplines to help solve humanities problems. They seemed to be mostly talking about neo classical economists. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00532-4
Try looking at the real Science with Concrete Foundations. ..The Sun and the Universe dictate the changes in our Planet. The massive increase in the Pole movement coupled with similar decrease in our Planets Magnetic strength. At the rate the North Pole is moving it will hit the 40 degree mark in around 3 years time..This intersection is along the lowest lines of Magnetic Flux. If the ROA increases we are in big trouble very quickly.
We now have an F4 layer only just discovered. Planet will be fucked well before F4 is even in there Models…LMAO.
So here's the Kicker….Right now we are at a Solar Grand Minimum, we have at nice level of very high Sun Activity in May 2020. You will see a Quake at least 8.5 around that time. The coronavirus is Gang Banging us with the Universe right now. The God Worshipers are having a field day with it.lol
Maybe shit economists don't have a disease of the mind; perhaps, they're shills. In fact, I'd bet money on it after reading Dr. Shalom Wald's papers and books.
Recent events have me thinking of you, professor. I hope we hear from you soon.
08:29 – Nephologue http://nephologue.blogspot.com Exploring the interplay of thermodynamics, economics, and climate
Tim Garrett : As a professor of atmospheric sciences, my research mostly focuses on the complex interplay between aerosols, clouds, precipitation, radiation and climate.
This blog discusses another complex system, the global economy.
.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.3554 . (Submitted on 15 Jun 2013) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1306.3554.pdf .
.
Also by Tim Garrett : https://un-denial.com/?s=Garrett%3A .
0:49:36 – Assumptions in Economics
_________ Is it valid to criticize a model for its assumptions?
0:49:55 – 0:50:19 – 0:50:49 –
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/nov/16/post650
Milton Friedman: A Study in Failure By Richard Adams
. . . And Friedman's one success? In 1942, during world war two, Friedman actually went to work for the US government. While there he helped design the payroll tax that in Britain is known as PAYE, Pay As You Earn, and in the US as withholding tax, the system that allows the government to administer the taking of income tax directly from salaries and pay packets. Unlike everything else he argued for, withholding tax has withstood the test of time and is in use all around the world. It was the best thing that Keynesian-style government could ever have wished for, and Friedman bitterly regretted it.
0:51:17 –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDp1tiUsZw8 . Hammer & Feather
0:59:20 – Earth Temp
w/o greenhouse gas formation = -15 deg C (-0.4 deg F) w/greenhouse gas formation = +15 deg C (+59 deg F)
1:09:43 –
1:29:30 – 1:29:49 – 1:30:04 – 1:30:15 – Simulate with Minsky Open Source Software
That was very enlightening, is there any paper I can refer to in this new model?
This should be the "Exponential Economist meets Finite Physicist" piece mentioned in the talk:
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/
Let's hope the gsm [Grand Solar Minimum] pontiffs try bring a datapoint set o value across and to bear eh? Nothing as gracefully grounding as John D Hamaker tinkered with in the 70s/80s but it's our last hope at this point.