- 40
- 39 191
Martin Hunter
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 18 พ.ย. 2006
Refuting Gregg Braden's dangerous misinformation about climate change
This presentation refutes the arguments presented by Gregg Braden, "El calentamiento global es un ciclo natural", found here: th-cam.com/video/jGrHoNKULGI/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=sangenarino
His grotesque misrepresentation of published scientific literature should be considered a crime against humanity.
*** NO ONE SHOULD TAKE GREGG BRADEN SERIOUSLY ABOUT THE CAUSES OF THE CURRENT CLIMATE CRISIS.***
As an antidote, I recommend anything published by NASA, NOAA or the IPCC, for anyone interested in the overwhelming scientific consensus which is: the current (last 100 years) period of global warming is man-made, primarily from carbon dioxide and methane emissions from anthropogenic sources (fossil-fuel driven economies).
His grotesque misrepresentation of published scientific literature should be considered a crime against humanity.
*** NO ONE SHOULD TAKE GREGG BRADEN SERIOUSLY ABOUT THE CAUSES OF THE CURRENT CLIMATE CRISIS.***
As an antidote, I recommend anything published by NASA, NOAA or the IPCC, for anyone interested in the overwhelming scientific consensus which is: the current (last 100 years) period of global warming is man-made, primarily from carbon dioxide and methane emissions from anthropogenic sources (fossil-fuel driven economies).
มุมมอง: 805
วีดีโอ
Fusion360 Tutorial
มุมมอง 852 ปีที่แล้ว
Intro to CAD design on Fusion 360 software: Making a Lego Brick
SHS Chorus - Winter Concert 2018
มุมมอง 166 ปีที่แล้ว
"O Nata Lux" "Carol of the Bells" "All I Want for Christmas is You" "Celebration"
SHA!Cappella - White Winter Hymnal
มุมมอง 636 ปีที่แล้ว
Somerville High School a cappella group doing Robin Pecknold's "White Winter Hymnal"
Tufts Leica FLIM SP8 Confocal Microscope: Tutorial
มุมมอง 4.6K7 ปีที่แล้ว
Tufts Leica FLIM SP8 Confocal Microscope: Tutorial
Thanks
Thank you for doing this.
Hello Martin, Gregg Braden did an interview with Danica Patrick on her “Pretty Intense” pod cast. Gregg describes the earths cycles that affect/warm the ocean. Which he says warm water releases CO2 etc. and other climate claims. When U get a minute, if U could comment to ur viewers if U believe this is factual. This is Danica’s link: m.th-cam.com/video/e0BcukK3QMA/w-d-xo.html Thanks Martin
Hello Martin,? Ur facts u presented are very interesting. But would be nice to actually see ur credentials to back up ur knowledge.
Appreciate your approach. I checked regarding his publications. The person you cite is actually another scientist; those papers are not those of the Gregg Braden you are debunking. I would be shocked if he's published anything in the scientific literature in 30+ years.
can we get the powerpoint presentation
Thanks. I posted this my post on Facebook, which I have included here. I know someone on Facebook who after seeing my post told me that I need to read and listen to Gregg Braden, I did and think it’s nonsense. Climate change is an extremely important issue, yet this person who I know on Facebook is not a bad person, but it makes pessimistic because there is a certain percentage of the human population out there (like him) that would rather take the risk of denying climate change by listening to some New Age clown on TH-cam. Like I said to him: “what are you going to do if you’re wrong about climate change, apologize and say sorry? Here is my post: Listen dude, what are you going to do if you’re wrong about climate change, apologize and say sorry? Oil and gas companies spent $3.6 billion on corporate climate change denial between 1986 and 2015. That’s a hell of a lot cash. Do you really think these oil companies would be spending all this money if they weren’t getting results in terms of their anti climate change propaganda campaigns? Obviously it’s paying off and you’ve of their victims, you’ve been conned. I suggest you look at the Exxon study done in the 1970s, which was buried and look at their charts. Everything they predicted remarkably correct. They knew climate changes man-made, but they buried the study for profit. I also suggest you look at NASA climate change studies. NASA has no interest financial gain in regards to studies, unlike oil companies. Have you heard of the Koch brother oil billionaires? They found this misguided scientist who was skeptical about climate studies so the Koch brother gave him a ton of money to do his own research, and when he finished his research he came back and apologized for his previous statements about climate change. He stated that “it’s worse than I thought, it is man-made. Something needs to be done drastically soon.” If logic doesn’t change your viewpoint, then you fall into the category of being an idiot. Einstein said “two things are infinite, the universe and stupid stupidity.” Of course he wasn’t labeling statement on all human beings, just the morons and idiots. Take a look at the studies and get back to me. Let me know if you’re still antic climate change. Looking forward to your reply.
Thanks for taking on that big crank Braden. For someone who passes himself off as an AI cheerleader, I wonder why New-Age types suck up his snakeoil - I thought they would be dead set _against_ evil AI/transhumanism for being anti-life.
I have only heard Braden speak AGAINST AI and trans humanism, not for it.
Einstein never nearly understood the mechanism of gravity. Einstein never nearly understood what is gravity. Einstein never nearly understood TIME. Einstein never nearly understood what is E=MC2. I have surpassed Einstein and Newton. FACTS. The coronal heating problem in solar physics relates to the question of why the temperature of the Sun's corona is millions of kelvins versus the thousands of kelvins of the surface. I have solved the problem. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This CLEARLY explains what is E=MC2 AND F=MA ON BALANCE. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !! What is E=MC2 IS dimensionally consistent. What is GRAVITY IS, ON BALANCE, AN INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE (ON BALANCE). Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. “Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!!! Magnificent. Consider WHAT IS THE SUN ON BALANCE !!!! THINK. Consider why and how that there is something instead of nothing ON BALANCE. Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. The first, second, AND third dimensions in/of/AS SPACE are BALANCED !!! (Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE !!!) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE !!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). I have CLEARLY explained, ON BALANCE, how and why a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) sweeps out equal area in equal TIME. Great. By Frank Martin DiMeglio
Respected Sir, Can you please tell me mie scattering in solid? like when an incident light fall on the solid material then the light scatters as the diameter of solid increases. please explain the scattering of light with diameter of a solid material. Thank you.
Dear Sagar, In Mie theory, the scattering object is treated as a homogeneous entity with constant refractive index, which differs from the refractive index of the homogeneous medium that surrounds it. Whether the scattering object is gaseous, liquid or solid is irrelevant. The size dependence of the scattering is primarily a function of the particle diameter, and secondarily of the difference in refractive index between particle and medium: (1) Scattering efficiency increases with particle size; (2) As the particle diameter approaches, and surpasses, the wavelength of the scattered light, there will be a proportionately larger contribution of oscillatory behavior, as a function of wavelength and scattering angle. I recommend playing with some online Mie codes to get a better feel for that: www.philiplaven.com/mieplot.htm or omlc.org/calc/mie_calc.html One other thing to keep in mind: Mie theory, in its standard application, involves the scattering of light from dielectric particles. If you want to consider light scattering from metallic spheres, it is absolutely possible to use Mie theory but the boundary conditions for electric and magnetic field continuity at the particle surface will differ - and hence, the solutions to Mie theory will take a slightly different form. More advanced light scattering textbooks, like van de Hulst or Kerker, address that problem. See: books.google.com/books/about/Light_Scattering_by_Small_Particles.html?id=PlHfPMVAFRcC or www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780124045507/the-scattering-of-light-and-other-electromagnetic-radiation Bestregards, Martin
@@martincazador Thank you so Sir. This will be very helpful to me.
really nice explanation of Mie scattering. very helpful. Thank you so much. TU Vienna
why you have to covered it all with the box sir ?
That's likely so they can warm the microscope, stage, objectives, etc. to 37 degrees C for live-cell imaging applications. Keeping everything warm reduces the possibility of focus drift over time.
@martin Hunter : can u please attach the PDF for Ur video
anw, thanks for the explanantion, sir. but where does this explanation come from? is there any book as reference? i really need to read the book. thanks
Radiative heat transfer ( modest ) chapter 11
@@khalidalhammadi9527 thanks haha I've graduated anyway
I want to characterize gold nanoparticles by Mie theory and I want to know the refractive index of gold nanoparticles to calculate the cross section, and other composites of crumb diffusion. I need you who helps me to find the refractive index or dielectric constant.
Hi Martin, Can you tell me where Figure 3 in the video comes from? I don't see it in Van De Hulst. Thanks! BTW, did you crawl thru all that in Van De Hulst? It's not the best writing. Must have taken some time. Kudos.
At around 15 min, when you show S1[theta] and S2[theta], what does an and bn mean?
Anyone know what University this is from? Who is the lecturer?
Yours truly: Martin Hunter, in the Biomedical Engineering Dept. at Tufts University (Medford, MA, USA). I use it for an Intro to Biophotonics course for undergrad and grad students.
Oh cool. Nice lecture. Much clearer than reading Bohren. BTW, what text are you showing on the pages? Also, is there a web page for the course still up?
Glad it was helpful! The full course material is only posted internally at Tufts, sorry. The text was primarily from van de Hulst (www.amazon.com/Light-Scattering-Small-Particles-Physics/dp/0486642283)
Great lecture. Thanks for sharing it. Please correct me if I am wrong but I think that in the slide where you introduced the Jones matrix you have a typo in the equation. ,The factor that you refer to as the spherical wave factor, should not depend on time. I think that the omega*t in the exponential should be changed to z.
Hi Jose, thanks for your positive feedback and the question. The omega*t term does need to be included as well as the kr term, because it describes a propagating wave that has both temporal and spatial dependence. I'd recommend checking out Chapter 2 in Hecht's "Optics" textbook, in particular equation 2.74 (www.polaritech.ir/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Hecht-optics-5ed.pdf).
Thank you very much!
wow
I'm working with grade school kids in a science club, and just posted this on TH-cam so that we could slow it down to watch (0.25 speed in settings). Didn't quite mean it to wow the world, but glad you liked it :)
Hi! We watched this in my Civil War history class last week & the P&C kids loved it!
Yay, thanks for sharing that!
AFTER ALL, IT'S ABOUT LOVE! LOVE YOU, BRO. YOUR DOGHTERS GOT GOOD VIBES!!
É isso aí, viejo! Abrazon
Thanks a lot. What is Mie Resonance? Can you please explain?
Hi Vinoth, These are also sometimes called WGM (Whispering Gallery Modes) or MDR (Morphology-Dependent Resonances). They occur whenever a standing wave can be established around the circumference of the sphere. You can read about them in these articles: thesis.library.caltech.edu/6857/4/Chapter_3.pdf and www.osapublishing.org/oe/abstract.cfm?uri=oe-16-21-16390&origin=search. -Martin
Thank you very much for the response and the references. I am going through these. I have come across something like this, "Particle resonance is generated by varying the size parameter (z), which is z = (2*pi*r*n)/lambda where r is the radius of the particle, n is the refractive index of the surrounding medium and lambda is the wavelength of the radiation. For what values of z, one can achieve resonance? Thanks a lot again.
I haven't gone through the math of that in detail. My guess would be that you'd want the circumference of the sphere to be an integral multiple of the wavelength of the light inside the particle. I'd read up on those papers, and look into Lord Rayleigh's analogous work on whispering modes of sound inside circular buildings. Let me know what you find out! Thanks.
Thank you very much. If that is the case (what you guessed), then the resonance condition will be achieved for particle of any size that matches the integral multiple of wavelength. I got this from one of the reviewers "The enhanced local field effects, could be discussed in terms of the Mie resonance for small spheres" That makes me to research on Mie resonance. I will certainly let you know whatever I come to know. Thanks a lot.
Really helpful! Thank you.
Thanks for the great lecture...
You said it! You should LOVE this: 207+ videos, by different artists, of same (yet rewritten song) calling to SC "Take Down Your Flag". The YT playlist is here: bit.ly/takedownyourflag or search for the Take Down Your Flag, Peter Mulvey
haciendanegra Thanks for the support and encouragement. I love your song too, it carries a lot of power, and I love how you offered it for people to mold and express themselves with it.
:-)
Yeaaaah that's Rock n Roll!!!
Yeah!! Hunter`s Rock!!I love you Brother!!
True. I wrote it in 2004...
It was great to hear this song live a couple days ago. Thank god they at least stopped using that term "shock and awe", but it does date the song a little.
Glad you liked it, and thanks for the support: we all need it from each other these days. Peace *
That's The Martin I know! only... even better! Martin, you're a "wine man": the older, the bettah! actually, "nevah bettah"! I sense a mix of influences there, but mostly Bod (Dylan) and John (Lennon)... Good lyrics!! no more BU(LL)SH(IT)!!! LOVE