Kevin,
In the presentation by the Nobel Laureate, at minute 4:43, he presents that “From ~1880 to 2015 [global] temperature has increased from ~288 K to 288.8 K (0.3%), i.e., amazingly stable!” Implying and actually stating that global warming is not a valid concern for the world, as you also indicated.
This man is intelligent, and certainly knows that K stands for Kelvin which puts zero at absolute zero (virtually no molecular activity). So, 0.8 deg K is only 0.3% change from absolute zero. Smart thinking.
Well, the human body temperature is 98.6 F or 37 C, which is 310.15 K. And if you or I had an increase of 0.8 K our body temperatures would be 37.8 C or 100.04 F. And we would be sick in bed or going to the hospital. Small children can have brain damage if body temperatures are over 100 F for very long.
I can excuse an elderly Nobel Laureate for pontificating about why he does not believe in global warming or that 0.8 deg K is nothing to be concerned about. But those of us who still work with science can know better.
So, yes, I did find one significant error in the first 5 minutes of his presentation. I will not watch the remaining 25 minutes until I have recovered from this first shocker.
This might not be a biochar topic, but at least here we can be conversations from different points of view. I was interested in his reasoning, and in your support. I hope you and others are interested in mine.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP
Email: psanders@ilstu.edu<mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu> Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile: 309-531-4434
Website: www.drtlud.com<www.drtlud.com>
From: biochar@yahoogroups.com <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2019 11:06 AM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ‘Tom Miles’ <tmiles@trmiles.com>; dyarrow5@gmail.com; hsmclaughlin@verizon.net; rick012@yahoo.com
Subject: Redirecting Effort to Develop Biochar Markets… Was: RE: [biochar] Fwd: [geo] Re: Survey, last chance to participate
Hi Ron
The purpose of the Biochar List is to lead to the widespread use of biochar. This is best accomplished by increasing the understanding of how biochar can benefit the Customer. The work being done, and the approaches being taken by Rick Wilson and Hugh McLaughlin (and others, including David Yarrow, “Worm Guy”, etc…) are “the way to go.”. Their work is being directed at demonstrating actual applications for the right kind of biochar, to ensure that there is an investment “pay-off” to the Customer who actually makes, buys, or uses biochar.
As such, Farmers, Growers, and other potential biochar makers, users, and buyers will look to their work and say “I can sensibly use biochar, and will get a direct and acceptable return on my investment in it.”
Virtually NOBODY is going to make, buy, or use biochar, unless they can clearly see a return on their investment.
Who is going to spend time, money, and effort use biochar if all they have to go on are:
* Statements from Biochar Producers: “Buy our biochar, because it is good.”
* Statements from those concerned about Climate Change who say: “Use biochar to reduce Climate Change.”
I would suggest that “Climate Change” is basically “dead in the water” , and that it is chimerical to want to believe that carbon credit payments will ever lead to a situation where people will pay their own money to use biochar primarily for the its climate change benefits. They WILL use biochar, if they get a direct and sensible return from an investment in biochar. The “Climate Change Benefit” will simply be a “non-financial added bonus.”
Take a look at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0 , which is a video entitled “Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax”. I challenge you to find any significant errors or flaws in his presentation.
The problem with “biochar promotion” for the past 10+ years is that its focus has been on:
* “Producer Push”
* “Climate Change Amelioration”
(Can you imagine any potential biochar user saying “Even though I get no net cash return, I think I’ll buy $1,000 worth of biochar, because it is “good for the climate.” ???
Why not change the “Driving Strategy” to one of creating “Market Pull”, as is now being done by Rick, Hugh, David, and a few others? With more people like them creating “Market Pull”, I would suggest that biochar acceptance and usage could “take off” as we all want it to do.
Best wishes,
Kevin
_,___