28 Comments
Jun 15Liked by Richard Crim

Richard. I started reading your substack around issue 50 or so if memory serves. Followed you on reddit under your various handles that I know of. Like you I am also autistic and want to ‘follow the evidence where it leads’ as my 90s professor said to us back then. And… JFC. The 5 stages of grief don’t even apply to me as I feel like I inhabit them all at once in glorious contradiction.

But ya know. I get it. Things are so fucking bad right now. Climate change/chaos is bad enough and then I found out about the 9 planetary boundaries moons ago making it a polycrisis. And even then, the 9 planetary boundaries don’t even cover the totality of the polycrisis facing us homo-sapien-idiots. E.g https://www.andbiodiversity.info/reports.html It’s all so inter-related and inter-connected

Thank you Richard for your analysis. I feel like Mugatu in Zoolander (2001) taking crazy pills! My life experience has taught me that so many people will just squish reality for a FUCKTON of a variety of reasons (that has a vast literature about it).

Expand full comment
Jun 18Liked by Richard Crim

What is a planetary boundary moon? Why are there 9 of them?

Expand full comment
author

It dates back to 2009. It was an attempt to quantify and outline the "core" operating systems and carrying capacity of spaceship Earth. It was meant to be a "call to arms" that led to a discussion of how we should "reallocate" the world's resources in a just and equitable manner.

Because SOME PEOPLE have way more than they need, while others are starving. AND the idea that "economic growth" will "fix this injustice" is an impossible lie under our current economic systems.

"We would need at least three planets if everyone lived and consumed like the average European today." It's four and a half planets if everyone lives like an American.

https://sustainabilityguide.eu/sustainability/planetary-boundaries/

In 2009, 28 internationally renowned researchers identified and quantified a set of nine planetary boundaries within which humanity can continue to develop and feel good in the future. If we cross these limits, abrupt or irreversible environmental changes can occur with serious consequences for humankind.

The nine planetary boundaries identified are:

Climate change

Change in biosphere integrity (biodiversity loss and species extinction)

Stratospheric ozone depletion

Ocean acidification

Biogeochemical flows (phosphorus and nitrogen cycles)

Land-system change (for example deforestation)

Freshwater use

Atmospheric aerosol loading (microscopic particles in the atmosphere that affect climate and living organisms)

Introduction of novel entities

Source: Stockholm Resilience Center

Basically, this is why we are not going to "techno wizard" our way out of this.

Expand full comment
Jun 20Liked by Richard Crim

Stockholm Sydrome, lol!

Expand full comment
Jun 20Liked by Richard Crim

Once I clearly saw this coming, and you really were the reason I could see clearly, once I admitted that there was no way out, I found relief. I believe human nature is inheritently nasty that us destroying ourselves was inevitable. Look at what's going on. People are willing to bet the lifespan of the planet their children live on to make a few more bucks. And not not a few. The whole crew was on board.

I've been told that climate scientists employed by the big energy companies warned that today's problems were an almost certainty back in the 1960's. "But that means we've got another 50 years of profits, Hell with the future"

I really thought it would be Nukes. This is such a mundane thing to die incrementally. No big bang. Just a dribble of death slowly turning into a torrent of misery. Oh well. . . .

Expand full comment

Haha, not sure if you’re making a joke about “planetary boundary moons” or if you don’t understand the expressions “moons ago.” If the former, then woosh to myself. If the latter then the expression “moons ago” is fairly synonymous with “a long time ago” or a while back.” Whatever the case may be, Richard has given you a good answer to the what the planetary bounds are about. :)

Expand full comment

Many moons ago . . . Got it. Still doesnt make sense, lol

Expand full comment

No understanding in mine perfectionable grammar sentenced constructionism? Into the reconstruct of paraphrasing therefore! Ass belows:

A while back, I discovered just how bad climate change was going to be: really bad. A crisis of major proportions. But then I came across the “9 planetary boundaries” framework and found that climate change was one of just 9 boundaries that could / would likely do bad stuff if those boundaries were crossed. We have now crossed 6 of those 9 boundaries (climate change is one of them) according to the Stockholm Institute. Therefore not just one crisis, but a polycrisis.

Eep!

Expand full comment
Jun 14Liked by Richard Crim

Thank you for another update Richard.

One key question to ask is the following:

Will the climate change moderates (e.g. Mann, Hausfather) and skeptics/contrarians/deniers (e.g. Lindzen, Siegel) ever admit that they were wrong, or will they remain in denial all the way to their graves?

Expand full comment
author

Hausfather almost admitted that the Moderates were wrong last year.

Zeke Hausfather wrote this on October 13th for the NYT.

I Study Climate Change. The Data Is Telling Us Something New.

“While natural weather patterns, including a growing El Niño event, are playing an important role, the record global temperatures we have experienced this year could not have occurred without the approximately 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming to date from human sources of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.”

“While many experts have been cautious about acknowledging it, there is increasing evidence that global warming has accelerated over the past 15 years rather than continued at a gradual, steady pace. That acceleration means that the effects of climate change we are already seeing — extreme heat waves, wildfires, rainfall and sea level rise — will only grow more severe in the coming years.”

“I don’t make this claim lightly. Among my colleagues in climate science, there are sharp divisions on this question, and some aren’t convinced it’s happening.”

“Climate scientists generally focus on longer-term changes over decades rather than year-to-year variability, and some of my peers in the field have expressed concerns about overinterpreting short-term events like the extremes we’ve seen this year.”

“In the past I doubted acceleration was happening, in part because of a long debate about whether global warming had paused from 1998 to 2012. In hindsight, that was clearly not the case.”

I got excited that a "breakthrough" was happening.

But, then he backed away from this position and started repeating the Moderate Orthodoxy again.

Expand full comment
Jun 16Liked by Richard Crim

Here it comes . . . you can feel it emotionally before you feel the heat. Fear. True fear is in the air as people slowly wake up to a reality that can't be ignored any longer. Tourists dropping dead in Greece, monkeys falling from trees . . . the stories get reported, but nobody wanted to connect the dots. So now the dots are connecting themselves.

You can feel it. This is it. The first summer of our new Hell that is Earth. It's gone. Never coming back. Your future? Your plans? Forget about them. Your future now is one of survival. If you're lucky. Many of us won't be. You can feel it . . .

Expand full comment
author

Excellent summation. You do realize I am evangelizing you, right?

I have a doctorate in Anthropology and I understand the power of Evangelical techniques in cultural information transmission. If you want to really change the world, you start by creating a cult of true believers who become acolytes and disciplines.

There is an element of "gospel creation" in my papers. Each stands alone as an epistle but is linked into a cohesive whole.

Pieces like this one are "sermons" . My Attempts to provoke a "Road to Damascus" epiphany. My Attempts to cause your Paradigm of the World to change.

I AM TRYING to radicalize you. Because you have to have a radical change in your worldview to join a cult that wants to change the world.

You have a gift for preaching. Just saying. ;-)

Expand full comment
Jun 20Liked by Richard Crim

The Dude (Climate Moderates) -

"No man nothing is fucked here"

Lebowski (The True Believers) -

"Nothing is fucked? THE GODDAMN PLANE HAS CRASHED INTO THE MOUNTAIN!"

If there's any real miracles being performed it's getting people to do 20 minutes of leg work so that you aren't "hard to follow". You put so much time into these reports that it kills me to read those critiques, when an unexplained abbreviations can be figured out with a 5 minute google search with some contextual words.

On the topic of preaching and prophets, there's nothing radical here. But! You are casting a line of clarity into a chasm of laziness, intentional distortions, amongst a hopium addled people. You are a Jeremiah.

The hour is late to be this stupid. I realize this going to come across as harsh 😅

Expand full comment
author

Trust me, when you accept the inevitably of COLLAPSE in your heart, it WILL change you. In ways both GREAT and small.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

At the very least, even if you decide to "party till you die", it will be "informed excess".

Expand full comment
Jun 20Liked by Richard Crim

Just don't tell them they are the insane ones, because in about a year those same people will claim they always believed. "I deny that I denied anything!"

Expand full comment
author

Most people could not live with themselves if it wasn't for their ability to "selectively edit" their memories. We are all "hero's" in our own minds.

Expand full comment
Jun 16Liked by Richard Crim

I forgot when I first read one of your essays. Maybe 18 months ago? It was on Medium (they kicked me out) and I at first thought you were a crank. I remember you saying something like "I'm not making this up, I'm using their own statistics" So I thought this might get really funny. But as I continued to read I was like " How can you argue about this? The facts are the facts" And on that day I was "Born Again" I became a climate crank. Now nobody likes me. Thanks Richard!

Expand full comment
author

You are welcome Brother Vaughn.

Expand full comment
Jun 17Liked by Richard Crim

LOL!(kind of)

Expand full comment

GHE theory fails because of two erroneous assumptions: 1. near Earth space is cold & w/o GHE would become 255 K, -18 C, ball of ice & 2. radiating as a 16 C BB the surface produces “extra” GHE energy aka radiative forcing (nee caloric).

Both

Are

Just

Flat

Wrong

!!!

Without the atmosphere, water vapor and its 30% albedo Earth would become much like the Moon, a barren rock, hot^3 400 K on the lit side, cold^3 100 K on the dark.

“TFK_bams09” GHE heat balance graphic & its legion of clones uses bad math and badder physics. 63 W/m^2 appears twice (once from Sun & second from a BB calculation) violating both LoT 1 and GAAP. 396 W/m^2 upwelling is a BB calc for a 16 C surface for denominator of the emissivity ratio, 63/396=0.16, “extra” & not real. 333 W/m^2 “back” radiating from cold to warm violates LoT 1 & 2. Remove 396/333/63 GHE loop from the graphic and the solar balance still works.

Kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules (60%) render a terrestrial BB (requires 100%) impossible as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.

Since both GHE & CAGW climate “science” are indefensible rubbish alarmists must resort to fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.

Expand full comment
author

Nick, believe it, or not, you are not the first "denier" I have interacted with. So I am going to tell you what I told them two years ago.

WE ARE LUCKY.

We are going to find out "who's right" over the next two years. I think in just 12 months it will be obvious what's going on but it might take another year to be obvious and undeniable.

Either I'm right or you are.

In a 12 to 24 months we will KNOW.

I am not wasting any more time discussing this. There are better things to talk about and if I'm wrong you can gloat all you want.

Expand full comment
author
Jun 15·edited Jun 15Author

Thank you for providing a "contrasting opinion" for my readers. Many of them probably never explore denier "science" and are unfamiliar with it.

And there are some things we do agree on.

"Without the atmosphere, water vapor and its 30% albedo Earth would become much like the Moon, a barren rock, hot^3 400 K on the lit side, cold^3 100 K on the dark."

It's true. If the Earth didn't have an atmosphere, oceans, and reflect roughly 30% of the Sun's Energy away (albedo) it would be just like the Moon.

A rather obvious point but still true.

Now here's something for you to consider.

The Earth's albedo HAS DIMMED by about 1.5% since 1999. That's a FACT.

It has been measured by two separate teams using different methodologies. Both Goode's Project Earthshine and the CERES satellite team came to the same conclusion.

That's "gold standard" science.

I don't have to tell you that "dimming" the albedo means more ENERGY goes into the Climate System. I shouldn't have to tell you that due to axial tilt 80% of that Energy happens in the Tropics between 23°N and 23°S or that 90% of this Energy is immediately absorbed by the tropical oceans.

That gain of 1.5% sounds tiny doesn't it?

But, in 2023, using the ARGO float system, we measured (because it's not science if you cannot measure something) 15 Zetta Joules of Energy going into the oceans and warming them up. That's equal to 470,000,000 million Hiroshima bombs worth of Energy.

In a single year.

The Dino Killer asteroid released an estimated 10 billion Hiros in a single day into the Climate System. Since the 1950's we have forced roughly 14 billion Hiro's worth of Energy into the oceans.

Those are FACTS.

When you can explain how these FACTS are "indefensible rubbish" then we can start a dialog. Until then, keep preaching your "faith". As I have said before, "I hope you find it comforting in the days to come".

Expand full comment

Isn’t this attitude of “that seems like a very small number (it can’t be causing any problems)” part of the denier-science attitude. So 0.4% isn’t very much by anyone’s concrete everyday reckoning. But increase something by 0.4% ish every year on year and there’s potential for destabilising a complex system.

Expand full comment

Did this not post?? Needed revised anyway.

So, we agree that the Earth w/o GHE, i.e. w/o water vapor created albedo, becomes Lunarific. That Fact disputes GHE which claims w/o it Earth would be a 255 K ball of ice.

You did not address my annotated GHE graphics bad math and badder LoT - Facts.

You did not address the impossible “extra” energy of a BB Earth - Facts.

That a lower albedo means more net heat – check!

My back of envelope (Q=UAdT) says 2% Δ albedo = Δ1.5 C.

Eight metrological global sites measure 8 different albedos from 27.5% & 94 W/m^2 to 34.2% & 117 W/m^2, 23 W/m^2 of uncertainty. Seven showed cooling, one showed warming. Trenberth2011jcli24.

That Argo measures more ocean heat – check!

15 zetta Joules (Oooh, large!!) per year out of how many total ASR?

I got a total ASR of 3,851 zetta J per year. 15 is 0.039%. Fact.

Official global warming is +1.0 to 1.5 C in the GMST anomaly over 140 to 170 years depending on the "expert" and database.

The current GMST trend is 0.013 C PER YEAR!!! (UAH data)

Insignificant, impossible to actually measure & NOT a “heat wave.”

Natural variability – check!

What does any of that have to do with CO2? GHGs?

There is no GHE, there is no CO2 GHG driven CAGW.

Expand full comment

15 zJ/3,851 zJ = 0.4% not 0.04%.

Fat finger double tap.

Expand full comment

So, we agree that the Earth w/o GHE, i.e. w/o water vapor created albedo, becomes Lunarific. That Fact disputes GHE which claims w/o it Earth would be a 255 K ball of ice.

You did not address my annotated GHE graphics bad math and badder LoT - Facts.

You did not address the impossible “extra” energy of a BB Earth - Facts.

That a lower albedo means more net heat – check!

My back of envelope (Q=UAdT) says 2% Δ albedo = Δ1.5 C.

Eight metrological global sites measure 8 different albedos from 27.5% & 94 W/m^2 to 34.2% & 117 W/m^2, 23 W/m^2 of uncertainty. Seven showed cooling, one showed warming. Trenberth2011jcli24.

That Argo measures more ocean heat – check!

15 zetta Joules (Oooh, large!!) per year out of how many total ASR?

I got a total ASR of 439.6 zetta J per year. 15 is 0.03%. Fact.

Official global warming is +1.0 to 1.5 C in the GMST anomaly over 140 to 170 years depending on the "expert" and database.

The current GMST trend is 0.013 C PER YEAR!!! (UAH data)

Insignificant, impossible to actually measure & NOT a “heat wave.”

Natural variability – check!

What does any of that have to do with CO2? GHGs?

There is no GHE, there is no CO2 GHG driven CAGW.

Expand full comment
Jun 17Liked by Richard Crim

You know of course that you're insane? It's OK, calm down. I'm insane too . . . I own two motorcycles, but I'm in therapy for it. Your intellectual sophistication is quite impressive to the other patients there I'm sure. Do they give you unsupervised access to the internet? Could be trouble. I said calm down . . . it's OK to have issues. Don't yell at me! Leave me alone! This site is for true believers, not "intellectuals" like you!

Expand full comment

Thank you Richard!

Expand full comment