global warming - fejj.net

I need to update the texts below to reflect this. However I keep coming back to one question on this topic :

By heat pollution I mean the heat we generate, for heating spaces, cooking food, transportation, industry, and so on. All energy consumed either turns into heat or is being stored in another form (potential energy, batteries, and the like). And even that eventually ends up as heat in the atmosphere, except the space garbage we shoot out, or other very minor exceptions.

And this heat is being almost all generated at the lowest level of the atmosphere.

This would seem to me to be the primary factor in global warming, climate crisis, whatever you want to call it.

But there is no mention in any texts I've read so far. It would seem to me, even if it is not a significant factor, that there would be mention of it, and that it is not a significant factor.

Even if it was a very minor factor, if there was serious concern that greenhouse gases are increasing the efficiency of the atmosphere to trap heat, then it would seem that there would be concern about reducing or hopefully stopping heat pollution.

Can somebody please share a link to information by climate scientists, explaining and showing calculations as to how heat pollution is not a factor?

Crazy side thoughts - until I understand why the heat pollution is not a problem or factor in global warming, it would seriously appear to be that there is a conspiracy to suppress the truth about how bad the situation is. For the sake of the economy of course. And - this is further evidence that this is not real reality, and I'm (or we're?) in an illusion or simulation or whatever. Why nothing about heat pollution? Of course once I understand why that is not a factor, then maybe this is real reality. (Still questioning that though...)

On the website for ns.nl a train system in the Netherlands, when you look up a trip, it used to give you some information about how much less CO₂ you pollute by taking that train as opposed to taking a car. Now it says no CO₂ because it's 100% wind energy.

First about when it compared to a car. The numbers never seemed right, and in fact were a lie. It looked like they were comparing the average pollution per person on a trip kind of a thing.

They were not comparing a train that is going anyway, gets a passenger adding a tiny bit of weight percentage wise, and that resulting increase of pollution, to a car that all pollution is due to that trip. This latter way would be fair, but more accurate would be to compare divided out from the pollution of the entire infrastructure system build and maintenance.

Now the wind energy claim. Well it's more complicated, and if I break it down, I don't think CO₂ pollution free.

But again, crazy thoughts above - why no mention of heat energy. If ns.nl cared, they would mention that and other pollution. And, well they do have some stuff about noise pollution from the trains somewhere.

I probably have a lot more comments elsewhere, maybe not public yet. But my main point is that it is not true. It is a label somebody paid for. The label provider makes certain promises, and allows the label to be put on products. The product manufacturer could care less, and just as much, if not more carbon laden pollution is produced.

Is the entire world living so deep in denial that these little labels on things is going to actually save the earth and us?

So this page is sort of a very limited version of a champion type page, mixed with my opinions.

Global warming is a term that refers to the concept of that the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere is rapidly rising.

This is significant because life on earth exists due to a very complex infrastructure of infrastructures, one of which is the atmosphere, it's temperature regulation ability, fresh water distribution, protection from harmful sunlight rays, but allowing less and not harmful sunlight through.

This sudden and large change will impact, and most likely eliminate life on earth. Now being referred to as extinction number (?) - 6, maybe 5. Different numbers depending on how you count them, and I have no information to base what I think would be correct. And I consider less important, as the fact life on earth will become extinct is the most important point to me.

At this point in time, 2023, there are large numbers of people who think this is not occurring, and this is some conspiracy and misinformation campaign.

The overwhelming majority of people either don't know or don't care. People I come across know and don't care, and in some cases are actually approving of global warming, as the climate where we are is cold in winter.

Not only most don't care, but some are so not caring that they are angry at people who consider the possibility. For example, meteorologists who mention climate change or global warming get hated, and even sometimes death threats.

For this document, it is assumed it is. Those who feel it isn't are briefly addressed elsewhere, but mainly should refer to www.fej.org/global_warming.

My opinion, and for this document, it is assumed we do not want it to. Similarly, those who do want it to, should refer to www.fej.org/global_warming.

This is over simplified, as is how most people view it. More correctly would be to view it this way : is mankind a factor in this, and if so, how; and if naturally occurring - whether partially or completely the cause - how?

For all the causes/factors - how do we change these? For those we cannot change, how can we compensate?

For me it seems the obvious question is : should we do things like burn fuel, on top of dramatically increasing the population, without first considering the possible unwanted effects? The answer is no. But everyone chooses "yes", "who cares?", "let's go out full scale".

And as far as global warming - the question is : how can it not? We know the atmosphere traps heat in, and then we burn fuel and other activities producing heat not normally there. And a lot of it.

A lot of media coverage about whether CO2 is causing global warming. As if it was the only factor. Then also some mentions of Methane and other gases but nothing about the heat we generate, or limiting that. Of course it is significant if we are increasing the atmosphere's ability to trap heat, especially if we are generating so much, and will continue to increase that.

The bottom line -

Consumers will continue to consume, fully aware of, and most not caring about, the environmental damage they do. Those who maybe care a little, still do nothing different.

People keep making more people, especially in areas where we damage more per person.

Nothing is being done to try and counter the situation and preserve mankind, other than trying to fly to Mars and colonize there, maybe, but I think that is intended more for tourism than permanent colonization. Further there is nothing that I can find. I keep looking though.

NOTE: this is old text. I will be updating my predictions and maybe more guesses at things. Mostly I am going to go through and find predictions in the information I've gathered and list here. Including hopefully those mentioned here.

I have not found much about clear predictions, but there are some. All reputable information I have found only indicates global warming exists and is a huge disaster.

I will post links later when I run across them, but there are 3 things on my mind. First, the most intelligent human being on earth (Stephen Hawking, until he died recently), who studied planets, atmospheres, and the like, predicted the earth will be uninhabitable within 30 years, and that prediction was made shortly before 2020. Thus, by 2050, the earth is "dead" as I think of it.

Two other groups were busy with predicting how many people will still be alive in 2050. One was 20%, the other 50%. I will be looking into those as i am curious as to their predictions of how people will be surviving then.

Of course this is purely guessing. I am thinking it might play out like this... By 2030 the majority of people will accept that global warming is real, and there will be plenty of evidence of that. Various regions will be slowly evacuated, but those staying behind will only live with air conditioning and many difficulties. More and more people will start dying. I expect on the news will slowly come maps showing areas that have become uninhabitable, and maps showing deaths figures around the world.

By 2040 then the super rich will desperately start planning to colonize earth like they would Mars or some other planet - that is live only inside of contained climate controlled areas, and outside only with special suits (like used on the moon basically, but less complex). I am guessing that the only solution is to use nuclear power, especially since due to the unpredictability, solar energy can not be counted on. But resources at this point are almost gone, as what has not yet been used up will be hoarded, as it will not be much. People will be able to calculate how long they can survive further. If well done, people may be able to survive on the now dead planet earth for decades if not centuries. I am guessing the colonies will be underground, but maybe some in the oceans. Hopefully they will be built well enough to survive huge earthquakes and any other resulting "natural" disasters.

One possible big problem is there may be an outbreak of wars, for resources including colonize-able areas, but mostly for the nuclear power plant fuels and materials. Possibly for food if areas where food is cultivated become unusable too quickly. Of course just as today there is always a possibility that some small wars will escalate to the point

We can stay hopeful, but my guess-predictions on colonizing other planets is that we will fail. Maybe not initially, and things may look like they are good, but eventually, just like colonizing earth, the resources will probably run out. Maybe not on Mars, because there will probably be enough solar energy. The needed technology for these things is too fragile. Sooner or later one little mistake can destroy everything. We have endless examples of that already here on earth - just living normally. Under extreme conditions, I expect the chances are much greater something goes wrong.

Please enter the URL of a page with information relevant to this one as outlined in the page share, if you wish.
Submitting a link here is giving us permission to post and distribute as we desire.

A valid URL begins with http:// or https:// and then has a valid domain.

There will be no confirmation. After you click the button, it is quickly submitted.

To enable automatic processing, insure the page contains this page's URL.

Preferably as a link, but can also be just text, or an HTML comment (so hidden from view). Links get priority.
URLs failing automatic processing will be queued for manual processing, and will be delayed.