WHEN HOAX IS HOAX

.
Global warming is an established fact that many uneducated folks don’t believe, because they lack scaffolding built mostly from exposure to science & mathematics. Too many moving parts make understanding technical details difficult. 

An alarming increase in rate of warming is documented in recent paper by Columbia University climate group led by Dr. James E. Hansen, former director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Professor Hansen et. al. provided compelling explanations for why warming is accelerating beyond model predictions since 2020. 

The acceleration is alarming to most reasonable people. 

Some of this post is adapted from answer I provided on Quora during first week of June.  After a few readers challenged my answer, I added link to Hansen’s paper in comment. Within hours privileges with Quora were suspended. I could no longer edit posts or comments, write posts, message moderators or contributors — I found myself banished for spam policy violations. * 

Quora Moderation then removed my Link to Columbia University climate paper. 

I’m not trying to scare anyone, but certain subjects seem taboo these days for not easily explained reasons, right? Someone from Columbia or Harvard writes about Israel and is labeled antisemitic, right? Banishment follows. De-platformed, they lose freedom to speak on any subject.

It seems like climate science is becoming another taboo, at least for me.  

Listen to Peter Thiel, below, one of the most powerful AI players in world today and funder of social media platforms.

Tune to minutes 46 to 61. It gets crazy, right? 52-54 is confession that climate change advocacy scares the shit out of him. He slams climate activist Greta Thunberg. She unleashes anti-Christ, he seems to say. Creepiest part for me is he might someday get power enuf to take Earth with him when he sets it on fire. 

Who disagrees?



What follows is latest on how Earth warms for any who are curious. It’s consensus common to climate researchers, which reads easy enough for most high schoolers to understand.

Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), & gaseous water vapor (H2O) help block heat on Earth from escaping into space, right? On the other hand, sulfur compounds like barium sulfate (BaSO4) in paint and sulfate aerosols in pollution help reflect incoming sun energy back into space away from Earth. 

Professor Hansen mentions in his paper that recent reductions in sulfur pollutants combined with rising carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) add to accelerating increases in average global temperatures beyond expectations predicted by climate theory.  Paper points out that after 2020 all container shipping fleets discontinued use of high sulfur content fuels. This reduction in atmospheric sulfur aerosols was significant but not adequately accounted for in prediction models, the paper claims. 

Planetary warming builds when radiated heat pours onto Earth from the Sun and is trapped by atmosphere. 

Energy blocking-water-vapor is molecular, a gas. It’s invisible but makes an effective blanket for heat buildup. Clouds, on the other hand, are made of water droplets, a liquid, which radiates heat differently than gaseous water. Clouds hold some heat on their undersides like blankets but are more effective at reflecting incoming heat of the Sun from their topsides.



Main takeaway is this: climate models have underestimated the impact of recent reductions of sulfur pollutants, which were deflecting sun heat more effectively than was understood. The result is that recent acceleration in the rise of global temperatures was underestimated by models.

One result of this study is it makes clear that global warming can be decelerated by re-introducing sulfate pollutants into the atmosphere. Sulfates seed clouds to increase energy-reflecting cloud cover. This method is clearly undesirable because sulfates are known to harm biosphere, oceans, and human health. Best anecdote for poison of increasing atmospheric heat, it seems, is to reduce methane, carbon dioxide, and humidity.

Listen up, people:
It takes enormous amounts of energy to develop & run artificial general intelligence. Billionaires like Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and Jensen Huang are trying to be first to develop powerful artificial general intelligence, which if tamed will permit who’s first to control the world. Whoever wins race will become modern-day Alexander the Great on steroids, right?

Or worse. 

Here’s something else to think about: Human brains contain nearly 100 billion neurons according to some estimates. ChatGPT claims that one quadrillion brain cells can in principle be stacked inside a human head. It’s 1 followed by 15 zeros, right? It’s 10,000 times more than we have. Can ChatGPT be right?

Artificial neurons are much larger than human ones, presumably, and take up more room when stacked. Full disclosure: I have no idea why AGI requires parking-lot-sized infrastructure to work right. Some say it is power requirements, cooling infrastructure, & other hardware, etc.

Those who know say it takes 30,000 GPUs to run ChatGPT.  One GPU can be as large as a desktop computer plus its cooling structure.  

Who has heard it said that the energy of a small city is necessary to operate fully functional artificial lifeforms like Grok & ChatGPT?

It’s not hard to calculate that AGI is going to run up demand for energy in big ways worldwide. 

Is it any wonder that AGI-robber-baron-dictator-wannabes aren’t going to tolerate public discussions of climate science on media platforms they control or influence? As far as I can tell, people like these own or help finance nearly all social platforms. 

Artificial-Intelligence billionaires & their social media influencers want people to think climate change is a hoax. They aren’t afraid to use hoax to make truth a hoax, right? Maybe they assume that Artificial Super Intelligence will fix the problems of every lie once ASI is rendered docile and made slave. 

Increasing use of fossil fuels might make Earth unlivable in dozens of years, maybe hundreds, not thousands. There is a kinda urgency to getting energy policy right, and soon. 

Who agrees?

Meanwhile, Earth endures more violent storms & rising seas.  

Billy Lee

* Quora reinstated Billy Lee with all privileges July 10, 2025

END OF SPACE

People used to think Earth was flat. Since flat things have edges, Earth had edges, which meant Earth was likely finite. If someone walked in one direction far enuf, they would fall off an edge or hit a wall, one or the other.

People now know Earth is a ball moving thru space. Walk far enough on a ball, get back where you started, right? Does this simple fact imply Earth is infinite? Of course not. We know it isn’t. Earth has finite area, which can be roughly calculated.

Today, no one understands enough about space to know how much of it there might be. Some think space goes on forever. Regardless of direction, spacecraft can never reach the end because space is all there is and must therefore be infinite.

The problem with this view comes from what folks think they know about gravity. Massive objects seem to bend and twist space in ways that make time slow down and light bend. It’s mysterious, because if you think about it, why should they?

Isn’t it crazy that massive objects have profound effects on things they don’t touch? They change path and timelines of whatever travels nearby. Something unseeable transforms invisible oceans of spacetime putty, which pushes about whatever lies buried inside.

Einstein showed how to calculate power of massive objects like stars and (then unknown) black holes to warp space in ways that forced changes to direction and speed of anything at all that moved by, but he didn’t explain why or how. It seems puzzle pieces are missing which found would at long last reveal what this malleable stuff might be.

It’s nothing we measure. Many have tried but space seems to be entirely empty. Virtual particles pop in & out of existence, yes, but taken together their measurable qualities add to zero.

What answer makes sense? —infinite space or not?

Einstein’s answer was that spacetime makes no sense apart from existence of mass & energy, which are two sides of a coin, like light, which measured becomes point-like momentum or spreading energy undulation. Apart from mass & energy, space & time cannot, do not exist.



Isn’t non-existence the meaning of the word “space”? Under any scenario that can be imagined, space & time have no meaning except to help thinking people describe peculiar relationships between objects we observe & measure. In this sense, every massive thing is connected to every other.

Energy saturates the universe. It’s everywhere we look. It fills gaps between objects with 3 dimensional ripples of undulating something or other. It means that we—tiny neural networks that we are—live trapped in cosmic amber, like prehistoric insects.

At the scale of stars and galaxies we are truly constrained; frozen in time; unable to move in any way that can be noticed—were anyone out there at scales able to observe & take notes. It is impossible for any living thing to secure vantage points in spacetime where it might observe the entire universe. 

In this sense, the Universe is a single, solid object, which is imagined by something conscious trapped inside. Perhaps, somewhere far away beyond our vision an event horizon emerges beyond which mass & energy have no place.

The universe ends not with a wall or wail but instead a whisper, a whimper, a last desperate gasp. Light fades to embers, then into dark night where imagination does not go and black birds no longer sing.

Billy Lee
Note: a version of this essay was first published by Billy Lee on Quora in January 2025