The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
Fact: There is no immunity or protection against The Law of Scoreboards.
Did you know: What the media does NOT want you to read is at
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)
Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
User Info Engineering .vs. Science Pt 2; entered at 2023-01-29 23:59:51
Posts: 181
Registered: 2021-09-03
That's what I meant. You either understand it or don't.

Of course even if you understand the mechanisms of a system really well, if you can't measure everything accurately enough (or quickly enough, or process the measurements quickly enough), then the system isn't predictable by you. At some level of complexity, even if the system is deterministic by the laws of physics, it is not deterministic to the mere mortal trying to measure the position, velocity and energy state of every molecule in the atmosphere. Yet "scientists" try to claim otherwise.

If carbon is sequestered but then is released from the ocean most of it can't wind up "fixed" (out of the game); if it did the result would logically be (due to the space occupied by both water and land) the death of every living thing on the planet since without the plant side of the cycle you're doomed.

There is a guy (can't remember his name) who claims we are on the verge of such a catastrophe because of carbon sequestration by sea critters absorbing carbon, fixing it into their bodies, then dying and falling to the bottom of the ocean thereby removing the carbon from the atmosphere. His claim was that the reduction in vulcanism has reduced the amount of carbon returned to the atmosphere, and started us on a gradual but steadily increasing deficit.

I don't particularly believe his doomsday scenario, but it certainly holds more water (so to speak) than the idiot global warming CO2 greenhouse gas theories. He at least proposes a model that doesn't require ignoring historical CO2 levels documented in ice cores, like the global warmingmongers do.

Neither does his doomsday ignore the fact that warmer temperatures and higher CO2 would be very good for life on Earth.

As far as doomsday scenarios, my list in order is:
1 - another Ice Age (where my house is was under 2 miles of ice in the last glaciation)
2 - a meteor strike (or multiple, aka Graham Hancock's Younger Dryas theory*)
9 - Carbon failure of plant life.

I suppose I should think about adding a Fauchi-esque scenario.

* whether or not his theory about what actually happened is correct, it's certainly a valid hypothesis of what could happen.
2023-01-29 23:59:51