Another one of my comments related to global warming just went into “awaiting moderation” status. Last time that happened, it was still there, after 2 days. AFAIK, it never had that status changed.

In anticipation of the same thing happening to my comment in Bill McKibben: Time Is Not on Our Side

Gee whiz, another McKibben piece, and not a word about CO2 production increases in the 3rd world. In 2011, e.g., Chinese per capita CO2 increased by 9%.

Both CO2 climate catastrophists, and so-called climate change deniers, agree that CO2 is “well mixed”. Certainly a physics respecting guy like McKibben agrees, does he not? Release CO2 in China, and it disperses, globally, in short order. Therefore, if you choose to believe that CO2 represents some grave threat to Mother Earth and its inhabitants, you really should be able and willing to connect the dots between global CO2 production, and what that says about whatever political effort McKibben is pushing for.

He ducks the issue (even given 1 sentence ‘devoted’ to it, on 350.org), and says nothing about the possibilites for zero carbon, dense forms of energy that could entice the 3rd world to drop their coal plant building program. What coal burning program is that?

From the Guardian: More than 1,000 new coal plants planned worldwide, figures show

India is planning 455 new plants compared to 363 in China, which is seeing a slowdown in its coal investments after a vast building programme in the past decade.

Not only doesn’t McKibben talk about 3rd world CO2 production, he has nothing to say about accelerating research into dense, zero carbon alternatives. Consider(from Wikipedia):

The Manhattan Project began modestly in 1939, but grew to employ more than 130,000 people and cost nearly US$2 billion (roughly equivalent to $25.8 billion as of 2012[1]).

130,000 people, while Eric Lerner, of Focus Fusion (which has beat the big hot fusion projects ito of a max temperature parameter) has a staff of 3. And he has to waste time and energy scrounging around for necessary funding.

The most exciting prospects, for near term zero carbon energy, may well be LENRs (so-called cold fusion).

There’s no Manhattan project sized effort for that going on, either. There are commerical interests pursuing this, but even if it’s developed, will it be allowed to be sold before the US population is harnessed to a carbon tax? Somehow, I don’t think Bill McKibben wants to explore either the state of LENR technology, nor the possibilities for accelerating progress, nor the financial interests that would oppose selling LENRS.

In short, I consider Bill McKibben to be a pied Piper for a Green Veal Pen. I wish him luck stopping the Tar Sands Goo Pipeline, even if I’m indifferent about a divestment program (because it will accomplish nothing, even if successful; quite the thing for a Veal Penner!). But if McKibben really believes his CO2 rhetoric, he should do much, much better.

Regarding his CO2 rhetoric, which he claims is “physics”, I don’t want to get into it, much. Here’s a good starter video, which touches on both the physics and the politics of CO2 climate catastrophism.

The HADCRUT4 data set released last year shows no statistically significant global warming in 16 years. You can learn more about the significance of that here (see also the comments by Monckton about ENSO related variations). McKibben is talking about
“continental” US temperatures being the hottest “ever” – oh God! See (e.g.): Watts, et. al. (draft) have shown US temperatures improperly corrected for urban head island effect, has exaggerated temperature increases by a factor of 2; research on Medieval Warming Period in North America; note that “continental US” may or may not include Alaska (see wikipedia), but McKibben links to a graph of contiguous US (48 states) temperatures: “In the first decade since 2000, the 49th state (Alaska) cooled 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit.”; China is currently experiencing coldest temperatures in 28 years; recent cold snap that killed hundreds in Russia in Eastern Europe.

I’m tired of digging up references, but here’s a last one. As per this data set, it was the 7th coldest year, WORLDWIDE, in the last 10 years.(Even as it was the 9th warmest in the last 34 years.) Yeah, that’s not nearly as significant as no statistically significant global warming in 16 years, but it puts the contiguous US temperature record, in a saner context. Recall, please, that the US land mass comprises less than 2% of the earth’s surface area (3,536,290 square miles / 196,900,000 square miles ) See temperature anomaly data below, which I sorted via Excel).

Ya see, Bill, while “Climate change denier” is the doublespeak meme of choice for people like you, those of us with a memory recall that it was global warming that preceded it.

2008 -0.009
2004 0.108
2011 0.13
2012 0.161
2006 0.186
2003 0.187
2007 0.202
2009 0.218
2005 0.26
2010 0.394

There was, BTW, and tangential reference to China, viz.,

It could care less whether putting a price on carbon slowed the pace of development in China, or made agribusiness less profitable

This completely fails to convey the magnitude of the current Chinese contribution to CO2….

Also, my quote of my post contains 1 correction (continental -> contiguous).