Global Warming

[lotr10]

How the U.S. Made Progress on Climate Change Without Ever Passing a Bill

A “green vortex” is saving America’s climate future.

www.theatlantic.com

Good article.

This article would be more credible if the authors pointed out how important the use of natural gas has been in driving down US carbon emissions.
The rest is pretty weak IMO. Take this passage:

Meanwhile the seas rose, wildfires raged, and the Earth saw its hottest 10 years on record.

First, the seas have been rising since the end of the last Ice Age. You know back when people walked from Siberia to Alaska and mainland Asia to Japan.

Second, wildfires have always raged. Historical records chronicle wildfires that covered tens of thousands of square miles regularly breaking out back before humans even reached North America. And today's wild fires have more to do with arson then Global Warming.

Third is the statement "hottest 10 years on record". The key here is "on record" which can be accurately determined back about 150 years. After that the best you can do is estimate temperatures and those estimates get less reliable the further you go back in time. And 150 years to the Earths climate is like claiming that stock market changes over a one minute period mean anything.

 

[irish_buffalo]

Did you understand the article that was posted East? And I'm talking about the Scientific Article that these authors published and was linked to at WUWT. It's really not that hard. These scientists looked at whether global warming would increase desertification. They concluded that their model indicated that deserts would not grow as a result of the warming. What was your take?

As an aside increasing global desertification is one of the most devastating potential outcomes of global warming. A study like this, if replicated & confirmed, is important to understanding the real risks, and lack thereof, that Global Warming represents.

Wrong again. It was a BLOG post that was posted to wattsupwiththat, which is a site propped up by Big Oil, ran by an ex-weatherman, with no college degree, and where you get all of your information.

The article was a disingenuous BLOG about the McColl/Berg study.

 

[lotr10]

Wrong again. It was a BLOG post that was posted to wattsupwiththat, which is a site propped up by Big Oil, ran by an ex-weatherman, with no college degree, and where you get all of your information.

The article was a disingenuous BLOG about the McColl/Berg study.

Really? This is the link that appeared in the first sentence of the Blog Post you mentioned:

No projected global drylands expansion under greenhouse warming - Nature Climate Change

Model projections of future drylands distribution using a proxy based on atmospheric aridity show expansion under climate change, but may not be an accurate representation. An alternative index based on ecohydrological variables such as water limitation shows no global expansion of drylands.

www.nature.com

It's the study in question. Care to read it and get back to me with your opinion of what it says?

 

[irish_buffalo]

This article would be more credible if the authors pointed out how important the use of natural gas has been in driving down US carbon emissions.
The rest is pretty weak IMO. Take this passage:

Meanwhile the seas rose, wildfires raged, and the Earth saw its hottest 10 years on record.

First, the seas have been rising since the end of the last Ice Age. You know back when people walked from Siberia to Alaska and mainland Asia to Japan.

Second, wildfires have always raged. Historical records chronicle wildfires that covered tens of thousands of square miles regularly breaking out back before humans even reached North America. And today's wild fires have more to do with arson then Global Warming.

Third is the statement "hottest 10 years on record". The key here is "on record" which can be accurately determined back about 150 years. After that the best you can do is estimate temperatures and those estimates get less reliable the further you go back in time. And 150 years to the Earths climate is like claiming that stock market changes over a one minute period mean anything.

You are full of anecdotal BS.

How long have sea levels been rising? How does recent sea-level rise compare to that over the previous centuries? – NASA Sea Level Change Portal

Visit NASA's portal for an in-depth look at the science behind sea level change.

sealevel.nasa.gov

Satellite Data Record Shows Climate Change's Impact on Fires – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Over the past several decades, as the world has increasingly warmed, so has its potential to burn.

climate.nasa.gov

 

[irish_buffalo]

Really? This is the link that appeared in the first sentence of the Blog Post you mentioned:

No projected global drylands expansion under greenhouse warming - Nature Climate Change

Model projections of future drylands distribution using a proxy based on atmospheric aridity show expansion under climate change, but may not be an accurate representation. An alternative index based on ecohydrological variables such as water limitation shows no global expansion of drylands.

www.nature.com

It's the study in question. Care to read it and get back to me with your opinion of what it says?

 

[lotr10]

You are full of anecdotal BS.

How long have sea levels been rising? How does recent sea-level rise compare to that over the previous centuries? – NASA Sea Level Change Portal

Visit NASA's portal for an in-depth look at the science behind sea level change.

sealevel.nasa.gov

Satellite Data Record Shows Climate Change's Impact on Fires – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Over the past several decades, as the world has increasingly warmed, so has its potential to burn.

climate.nasa.gov

There is nothing anecdotal about the rise in sea levels since the last Ice Age. Nor is the fact that people walked to Japan and Alaska anecdotal.

I know I'm going against my own beliefs of not attacking the info posted but the articles you cite are crap - pure unadulterated crap. They over generalize and are bad science.

 

[lotr10]

View attachment 18154



View attachment 18155

And you believe this guy? Based on what? This kind of "fact checking" doesn't work for politics and it certainly doesn't work for science.

 

[irish_buffalo]

Money grubbing scientists.

Just keep following the "smoking is not harmful" BS site you always come on here to show as proof.

 

[Stirred not Shaken]

Even if you believe in" climate change " or " global warming " , EV's are not the answer : https://www.nationalobserver.com/20...irty-little-recycling-problem-their-batteries

Plus we still get the majority of electricity from coal and nat. gas. Just switching from one pollution source to another, however China which has very little oil resources benefits greatly from switching to EV's as most EV batteries are made in China.

 

[lotr10]

Even if you believe in" climate change " or " global warming " , EV's are not the answer : https://www.nationalobserver.com/20...irty-little-recycling-problem-their-batteries

Plus we still get the majority of electricity from coal and nat. gas. Just switching from one pollution source to another, however China which has very little oil resources benefits greatly from switching to EV's as most EV batteries are made in China.

And China is building more new coal fired electric generating power plants then anyone else in the world. They have no intention of walking away from the cheapest and most reliable source of electricity on Earth.

And your point about the environmental down side of many forms of alternate energy like Batteries is spot on. From the issues associated with extracting the minerals needed to make the batteries to their less then trivial disposal. And of course how will we power an electric grid to support all those energy gobbling electric cars?

I can see China switching to electric cars and cornering their manufacture while building even more coal fired generating stations to provide the power for the billion new electric cars on their streets.

 

[lotr10]

I disagree with their basic point of climate change being a serious problem but this is a new way to look at how we might react should it turn out that it is worse then the evidence so far predicts:

We Need to Manage a Careful Retreat From Climate Change, Scientists Urge

It's imperative that human societies factor a strategic 'managed retreat' into the ways they respond and adapt to climate change, researchers say, and figuring out how is a conversation that needs to be happening now.

www.sciencealert.com

Managed retreat is the coordinated movement of people and buildings away from risks, which, in the context of climate change, are approaching from numerous fronts, including sea level rise, flooding, extreme heat, wildfire, and other hazards.

I prefer adaptation in which "managed retreat" is a selective subset.

 

[lotr10]

While this research is aimed at understanding how human "caused" global warming will impact weather it discloses just how large natural climate variation is. If you want to support a human Global Warming theory you have to demonstrate that the changes we're seeing are outside the normal variability. This is science 101.

Intensifying Thunderstorms Today Echo an Ancient Pattern at Least 50,000 Years Old

While grumbling skies and spectacular displays of air-splitting light can be a thrilling experience to witness, thunderstorms can also do an awful lot of damage.

www.sciencealert.com

 

[irish_buffalo]

Leaked UN climate report underscores growing risk, need for fast action

The world’s top climate scientists are preparing to issue their starkest warning yet about the dire consequences of global warming.

thehill.com

 

[irish_buffalo]

Climate change: Large-scale CO2 removal facility set for Scotland

A plant that could remove the equivalent to 40 million trees every year is planned for Scotland.

www.bbc.com

 

[lotr10]

Leaked UN climate report underscores growing risk, need for fast action

The world’s top climate scientists are preparing to issue their starkest warning yet about the dire consequences of global warming.

thehill.com

A couple of comments here:

* This is a "leaked" report containing no science. You don't conduct scientific research by leaking UN reports. And frankly, why would anyone believe a UN report?

* If this report is scientifically accurate and I don't think it remotely is, then it's already to late. China & India alone spew out more CO2 then Europe, Japan and the USA combined. And these two countries plus the rest of the developing world have shown no inclination whatsoever of cutting their greenhouse gas emissions. So I guess we're already screwed.

 

[lotr10]

Climate change: Large-scale CO2 removal facility set for Scotland

A plant that could remove the equivalent to 40 million trees every year is planned for Scotland.

www.bbc.com

Good for Scotland. Of course I prefer getting the CO2 out of the atmosphere the good old fashioned way with trees.

Maybe Scotland can charge China a fee for all of China's CO2 they pull out?

 

[irish_buffalo]

Good for Scotland. Of course I prefer getting the CO2 out of the atmosphere the good old fashioned way with trees.

Maybe Scotland can charge China a fee for all of China's CO2 they pull out?

Maybe? We are probably beyond stopping the damage anyway. The article I posted from several days ago talked about how behind the consequences were from the cause. We will not see the damage done right away but future generations will feel the brunt. Hopefully science can bail us out.

 

[lotr10]

Maybe? We are probably beyond stopping the damage anyway. The article I posted from several days ago talked about how behind the consequences were from the cause. We will not see the damage done right away but future generations will feel the brunt. Hopefully science can bail us out.

So even if we disagree about whether human caused Global Warming is happening and if it happens will be dangerous can we agree that our only real option is adaptation? And I would rather try adapting to the change, if it happens, from a position of economic strength then weakness.

 

[irish_buffalo]

So even if we disagree about whether human caused Global Warming is happening and if it happens will be dangerous can we agree that our only real option is adaptation? And I would rather try adapting to the change, if it happens, from a position of economic strength then weakness.

Kind of but not really. Adaptation will be a tough option at some point. I believe there will come a point where our environment will change so fast that we will have trouble keeping up. I hope I'm wrong. I also think it would be foolish to simply say F it and burn more fossil fuels. We are beyond this. I have said it a million times before but burning coal is one step above using wood. We have better technology.

As I said, hopefully these CO2 capture projects work. Hopefully science can bail us out.

 

[I enjoy wrestling]

Kind of but not really. Adaptation will be a tough option at some point. I believe there will come a point where our environment will change so fast that we will have trouble keeping up. I hope I'm wrong. I also think it would be foolish to simply say F it and burn more fossil fuels. We are beyond this. I have said it a million times before but burning coal is one step above using wood. We have better technology.

As I said, hopefully these CO2 capture projects work. Hopefully science can bail us out.

I'm glad I survived the mini Ice Age of the 70's

 

[2manyBats]

Kind of but not really. Adaptation will be a tough option at some point. I believe there will come a point where our environment will change so fast that we will have trouble keeping up. I hope I'm wrong. I also think it would be foolish to simply say F it and burn more fossil fuels. We are beyond this. I have said it a million times before but burning coal is one step above using wood. We have better technology.

As I said, hopefully these CO2 capture projects work. Hopefully science can bail us out.

so ...what's the answer for China ?

the Largest Polluter by far and what ever we do to reduce - China Increases !

 

[lotr10]

so ...what's the answer for China ?

the Largest Polluter by far and what ever we do to reduce - China Increases !


View attachment 18301

And don't forget to add India, South East Asia and other developing country's who will not let their people remain in abject poverty with no hope to move up the ladder based on first world guilt over Global Warming.

 

[eastisbest]

And don't forget to add India, South East Asia and other developing country's ....

don't forget Canadia. They're one of the highest in the per person category.

 

[lotr10]

don't forget Canadia. They're one of the highest in the per person category.

While per person data is interesting and show Canada's prolific use of fossil fuels when it comes to the theory of Global Warming quantity matters. Per capita might be important to progressive equity stakeholders but only the gross amount of CO2 emissions matters - at least according to the theory.

And for what it's worth, Canada has several geographic realities that result in their high per capita CO2 emissions:

* It gets cold up there. Warming residences and businesses requires massive amounts of energy.

* Canada doesn't exactly get a lot of sun so solar is hardly an answer there.

* Canada suffers from a tyranny of distance. And last I looked whether moving people or goods gasoline & diesel are still the best option.

 

[lotr10]

Another intriguing example of just how large natural climate change can be. Remember before the theory of Global Warming is taken seriously it must demonstrate that the changes we're experiencing are outside the normal variation of the Earths climate. So far they have not done this.

Dinosaurs were struggling long before the asteroid hit

Millions of years before a massive asteroid struck what's now the Yucatan Peninsula, the dinosaurs were already struggling.

www.upi.com

The latest analysis showed that rates of diversification ebbed and flowed for millions of years until the end of the Cretaceous, when speciation rates declined and extinction rates began to rapidly increase -- about the same time that Earth experienced mean global temperature decline of 7 degrees Celsius.

According to the latest findings, herbivores were especially hard hit by the shift in climate, suffering a steady drop off in diversification.

But the PyRate models showed carnivorous families didn't fare much better, experiencing negative diversification rates some 76 million years ago.

 

[2manyBats]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1409639705977651200

 

[chs1971]

July 1, 2021, 4:45 pm.

Dopey Joe in a news conference from Miami on his visit to the building collapse, just shared how impressed he is with the number of survivors who shared their concerns about global warming.

I am sure their are many fools willing to believe him.

I do not.

 

[Guillotine]

July 1, 2021, 4:45 pm.

Dopey Joe in a news conference from Miami on his visit to the building collapse, just shared how impressed he is with the number of survivors who shared their concerns about global warming.

I am sure their are many fools willing to believe him.

I do not.

I saw that as well.

It was pathetic.

 

[lotr10]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1410596773039464453

 

[lotr10]

We need to educate people about just how large natural climate change is. This would shut off the bad science of Global Warming alarmists using extreme weather to try to prove their theory. The scientific fact is that climate change is real and it doesn't need humans to make it happen.

Climate change, not humans, fueled decline of prehistoric elephants, mammoths

Sudden and dramatic environmental shifts, triggered by climate change, fueled the decline of prehistoric elephants, mammoths and mastodonts, according to a new study.

www.upi.com

Sudden and dramatic environmental shifts, triggered by climate change, fueled the decline of prehistoric elephants, mammoths and mastodonts -- and humans likely played only a minor role in their demise -- according to a new study.

"From approximately 6 million years ago, and especially since 3 million years ago, the ecomorphological diversity of proboscideans started to decrease globally in increments, following events of climatic cooling and harshening," co-author Juha Saarinen, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki in Finland, told UPI in an email.

This work is also a powerful reminder that for life to thrive and biological diversity to flourish, warm is better.