Climate Change The Real Story

A Production of the Ultimate Homeschool Podcast Network.

Sharing is caring!

Climate Change | We want to be good stewards of our environment, but the climate change advocates keep changing the definitions. So, today I have a noted scientist, Dr. Jay Wile who will take some of the mystery out of climate change and explain it in a way that we can understand!| #podcast #climatechange #globalwarming #globalwarmingtruth #truthglobalwarming #truthclimatechangeClimate Change – The Real Story with Special Guest Dr. Jay Wile ~ Episode 25

We want to be good stewards of our environment, but the climate change advocates keep changing the definitions. So, today I have a noted scientist, Dr. Jay Wile who will take some of the mystery out of climate change and explain it in a way that we can understand!

*One main point near the end of the broadcast will shock you!

Dr. Jay Wile has a Ph.D. from the University of Rochester in nuclear chemistry and a B.S. in chemistry from the same institution. He has won several awards for excellence in teaching and has presented numerous lectures on the topics of Nuclear Chemistry, Christian Apologetics, Homeschooling, and Creation vs. Evolution. He has articles on these subjects in nationally recognized journals and has authored or co-authored thirteen award-winning science textbooks designed to be used in a homeschool setting.  Books by Dr. Jay.

Climate Change Articles – Search Climate change of Dr. Jay’s blog – here is the search results.

Scientists created computer models of climate that were predicting warming. And as they were tracking the warming of the globe the models did not show this huge increase as per predictions and scientific models. The theory was as the years progressed the computer models and data collection would show definitely that the earth was indeed warming and it would be a huge problem for people on earth. The problem was the globe has not warmed much, so it’s been hard to convince people that it is a problem. The greatest warming took place before the 1970s.

Here are some things we know about global warming. The globe has not warmed enough so in essence the science now focuses on a new term, “climate change.” The theory is the carbon dioxide is not warming the planet but due to the carbon energy it is trapping it is causing the extreme weather we are seeing. There is evidence that the earth has warmed a little bit since the mid-1800s. Long before the build-up of carbon dioxide. The question is what has caused it, and scientifically we really don’t know. We do know that carbon dioxide traps heat.

The big question is the “equilibrium climate sensitivity” and that is a question we will address in this broadcast. It is the single most important piece of data related to climate change, and therefore the question that should be asked and is often avoided or even unknown by many of the politicians campaigning on this topic.

What is it? In Dr. Jay Wile’s own words: “Equilibrium climate sensitivity is defined as how much will global temperatures increase if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles.” And that question is completely unanswered. It is somewhere between zero degrees and 3.5 degrees. There is no trend! Some studies show a very very low equilibrium climate sensitivity so we could easily double the carbon dioxide and nothing significant would happen other studies produce a very large climate sensitivity which means everything gets really hot and bad things to happen.

The most recent studies show no one agrees. If that single more important question what is equilibrium climate sensitivity can not be answered scientifically then you can’t say scientifically that global warming is a problem. You just can’t!

Anything we do in the short term can’t produce a long term effect. It will be making a minor difference. That is just standard scientific reasoning. I can’t take a short term action and produce a significant long term effect. For example Paris climate accord. Everyone agrees in this accord that if every country followed the Paris Climate Accord the average temperature of the earth would drop by .01% and that is if every country agreed–which we know they won’t or can’t.

Extrapolated data that scares children and gloom and doom. “Anxiety caused by people who are afraid of climate change,” is actually a thing. Dr. Jay says this is not reflected in the scientific literature. If you do a search on all of the scientific literature on climate change you will find virtually no scientific literature that expects a catastrophic outcome. And for the ones that talk about a catastrophic outcome, it is an outcome for certain regions of the world.

There is nothing in the scientific literature that says the world is going to end due to climate change, not even the most radical proponents. Things published in the scientific literature are peer-reviewed and they know they can not publish something that is just conjecture.

We have weaponized science. 

That is taking science and weaponizing it to fit a political agenda. And, this is done all of the time in various ways including philosophical arguments. It just doesn’t work if you look at the true scientific findings and not extrapolated data.

Dr. Judith Curry is a favorite climate scientist. NASA climatologist for years. She had to resign due to craziness in the field of climate scientists. When reporters talked to her she told the truth. She pointed to the scientific literature. Reporters were shocked and contacted others and she would get punished for telling the truth to these reporters. She has a blog, Climate, etc. it is a balanced approach to climate science.

We have to realize this science has become ridiculously political. There are some whose livelihood depends on everyone believing there is a crisis and if there was not a crisis their job would be in trouble. Some people probably do believe there is a crisis. Dr. Jay says read both sides of the issues. And, contrast how they are looking at the data.

What we are seeing is the extrapolated data presented. We have three ways of measuring global temperature. But is the data unbiased? Dr. Jay explains the way that temperature is tracked today?

  1. We have thermometers scattered across the earth that take the temperature and those numbers are averaged.
  2. We have satellites that are constantly orbiting the earth tracking the microwaves and are constantly tracking the temperature of the earth.
  3. We have weather balloons that use radio waves that determine the temperature.

All three ways come up with different answers. And what is bad is thermometer data is shown because they show the greatest change. What scientists don’t realize is that data is constantly “tweaked.” Even the data from the early 1900s is changed in the present. In order to do these averages, you have to be able to do a model. Every time the model changes all the past data changes as well. The scientific data is “changed.”

Blog post-2018- Does anyone really know how it is? It shows the raw data and the currently adjusted the early temperatures.  Tweaked the data to show their hypothesis.

When people look at data through the lens of assuming that global warming is happening. Climate scientists don’t even know how this data is adjusted on the fly. You never see the raw data. You see only the massaged data.

The argument is that the Paris accord is the first step and that makes sense, but unless you give me a plan to make a greater change than .01% — if you are going to make gasoline and electricity more expensive I won’t make the sacrifice. No one in the scientific literature can tell the answer. No one knows climate sensitivity.

Some changes are good: Forced auto manufacturing to put catalytic converters get rid of carbon monoxide (most of it), to pre-industrial levels but it had a good outcome.

Climate Change: we don’t’ talk about what the outcome is going to be. Every time you raise prices on electricity prices people die. 

If I know the increase the electricity prices will cause people to die because they can not afford their electricity, the correct question is: “How many old people are you willing to kill to stave off something that may not happen!” If we don’t even know it will happen — the changes — then how can we make these ridiculous (ed. emphasis here) assumptions that can cause death?

Bullet train fiasco in California – cost billions.

2020 prediction that the Glacier National Prak would disappear. Well in 2019 the sign was removed when Dr. Jay and his wife visited because they knew it was nowhere near disappearing. Also Al Gore and his false predictions that the North Pole would melt in 5 years – it has been over 10 years since his prediction and the North Pole is still incredibly icy.

The fact that the globe is warming right now still shows cooler temperatures than we have seen in the past. The Northern hemisphere was warm during the medieval period. It has been significantly hotter in the past. Studies show that in every major region the temperatures are due to a natural cycle.


Speak Your Mind


July subscriber planner freebie opt in
Share via
Copy link