Title: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:42:31 pm Warming catches up with big glaciers
By RUTH LAUGESEN - Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 18 November 2007 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming001.jpg) DISAPPEARING ICE: The Tasman Glacier, the biggest of New Zealand's twelve largest glaciers, all of which are rapidly shrinking in response to regional climate warming. Climate change is making New Zealand's biggest glaciers melt twice as quickly as comparable ice masses overseas, according to research released today. The Southern Alps' 12 biggest glaciers had crossed a "tipping point" into faster melting as they respond to regional warming, said National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research principal scientist Jim Salinger. "These have now passed a threshold, where the ice is collapsing, rapidly expanding lakes at the foot of the glaciers," he said. "It is not yet clear whether the glaciers will disappear completely with future warming, but they are set to shrink further as they adjust to today's climate." The findings come as the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change releases a synthesis report in Valencia today on climate change, its likely impacts, and what can be done to mitigate it or adapt to it. The report, which builds on the findings of three IPCC reports this year, will arm policymakers as they go into the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali next month. Those talks will begin work on an international agreement for responding to climate change to replace the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012. The Niwa research, which is the first long-term study of ice mass in the Southern Alps, found 5.8cukm of ice had been lost in the past 20 years. That was almost 11% of the total ice mass. More than 90% of this loss was from the 12 largest glaciers. Those glaciers Tasman, Godley, Murchison, Classen, Mueller, Hooker, Ramsay, Volta/Therma, La Perouse, Balfour, Grey, and Maud had lost an average of 22m in ice thickness since 1986. In comparison, figures from the World Glacier Monitoring Service found that a sample of large world glaciers had lost an average of 9.6m in ice thickness since 1980. Smaller glaciers, having rapidly adjusted to regional warming earlier, had not receded much in the past 20 years or in a few cases have slightly advanced. They include two well-known West Coast glaciers, the Fox and the Franz Josef. Salinger said the glaciers overseas had responded more quickly to rising temperatures, and had thus already experienced substantial melting. New Zealand mean air temperatures have risen 0.4C since 1950 but the big glaciers here would probably not disappear any sooner than those overseas because they had taken longer to respond to warmer temperatures typically being covered in an insulating blanket of thick rock debris. However, Salinger says, "it is already clear that they will not return to their earlier lengths without extraordinary cooling of the climate because the large lakes now block their advance". http://www.stuff.co.nz/sundaystartimes/4277239a6442.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:43:05 pm Shrinking footprints
The Press | Saturday, 26 January 2008 The environmental challenges facing the world may seem overwhelming. JOHN McCRONE meets some people who are undaunted by the seeming hopelessness of responding as individuals. The view from inside and outside a Hummer is very different. Inside is a driver feeling pride in the "power, capability, attitude, and authenticity" of a massive, military-style, 44 Yank tank. But outside is a public now almost universally thinking "there goes a gas guzzling dickhead" says Carlin Archer, of the Christchurch eco-living webguide, ecobob. com. "The driver's saying, ‘look at me. Aren't I great? I can afford to waste huge amounts of fuel’." For many Kiwis, 2007 proved to be a tipping point. At least that is what those working at the grassroots of sustainable living are saying they have seen. "People have woken up and want to know what they can do," says Rhys Taylor, national co-ordinator of the Sustainable Living Programme. "They certainly saw Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. But they say it is actually something that's been nagging away at the back of their minds for a long time. Now they are ready to act." Taylor says for an old greenie like himself, the swiftness of the mood change has been a surprise. For decades society seemed to be going only one way - houses got bigger, cars faster, the travel more exotic. For example, he can remember when a room had one plug point. A newly built home could now have six to a room. And there will be something plugged into each of them. "If we talk about our carbon footprint, we can see it has been literally expanding." People have got used to consuming more stuff every year. And even if it is only 2 or 3 per cent extra, it adds up. Suddenly people are looking around and realising it is not just their bodies that have grown flabby, says Taylor. Their lifestyle feels bloated, heavy-footed. There is a desire to put the process in reverse and start shedding the kilos again. The question is how to reorganise their lives? No-one wants to go back to the past, to give up on luxury and fun. So what is the mainstream response going to be? What is the blueprint for a sustainable future? Archer seems as much as anyone the face of the new environmentalism. EcoBob stands for "best of both" - keep your lifestyle, but also keep the world. Running a Christchurch website development company with his brother, Daniel, Archer never planned to be a sustainability activist. After returning from London four years ago, he had the dream of using family land near Woodend to build an ecologically-sound home for him and his South African girlfriend. In fact, it could become an eco-commune because his brother, sister, parents and a few friends want to build there too. There is no intention to stint. "An eco-home doesn't have to be a hippy hovel," Archer says. It is just a matter of intelligent design - putting in all the energy-saving features, and using low-environmental-impact materials, that traditional suburban homes still ignore. But Archer found it a struggle to gather the names of likely builders and architects, or suppliers of solar panels, energy-efficient appliances and other eco-home technology. So he set up a website to share practical information with others and found that instead of hundreds of visitors, he was getting thousands a day. The side project has grown to the point that it pays for itself and could become a full-time business. Archer agrees 2007 marked an attitude change. A few years back, many of his friends would rib him. "I was known as the eco man. They would joke about coming over to my place and tipping Roundup on the garden because I wasn't pulling up the weeds." Now there is more likely to be interest than derision. People want to hear what kind of changes will be seen if sustainable thinking moves into the mainstream. Archer details the lifestyle alterations he has made - and apologises for the fact there is a way to go. Living and working in a rented house high on the hill in Mount Pleasant while he plans his eco-house, Archer says one of his commitments is to go zero waste. So he now has to remember to take his cloth bags to the supermarket. He queues for meat at the counter to avoid the tray packs. He tries to side-step any packaging which cannot be recycled. "It's a bit irritating when I put my hand out for a juice I'd like, but then have to take something else in a bottle that can be recycled," Archer confesses. Archer says none of the changes are extreme. It is simply a question of being aware there are choices and then not being too embarrassed to act upon them. Steadily you build a new set of habits into your life. He says it does not even have to be a big-bang lifestyle conversion. The flab has built up a few per cent every year. Rather than a crash diet that is hard to stick to, it is better to start slimming down a few per cent every year. If this becomes a mainstream attitude, the impact would be significant. A cross in Lyttelton, there is another grassroots effort to understand what sustainability will mean in practice. Margaret Jefferies, chairwoman of Project Lyttelton, says the project started out with quite a different mission. Years ago its purpose was preserving the historic feel of the town. The group was involved in restoring the Timeball Station and creating the Torpedo Boat Museum. Then it became about community action, and now it's sustainable living. Jefferies says people seem to have been quietly worried about rampant consumerism for years. Now they are ready to act. She says as a port with a strong artistic community, Lyttelton has always had a stroppy edge. And some locals are proposing quite radical action. Lyttelton already has an "enviro-kindy", a community composting scheme, and a time bank for neighbourhood work. To tackle the woeful energy-efficiency of its heritage cottages, a bulk discount on home insulation has been negotiated for the town. The community garden behind the swimming pool is a place where locals can grow their own food, sharing both effort and know-how. And the town's farmers' market has been a big hit, doing its bit for food miles by insisting all produce comes from within a 100km radius - although you see the odd bunch of bananas from stall-holders stretching the rules, Jefferies admits. Next on the agenda is the possibility of making Lyttelton completely plastic bag free and tapping local land owners, like Lyttelton Port, for waste ground that could be cultivated. Jefferies says experience has taught a few lessons. One of the biggest is that a community effort has to be open-minded and positive. People have to move at their own pace and not be made to feel that partial change is failure. She says it was a mistake at one of Lyttelton's street parties to have people manning the recycling bins, telling people where they should put the rubbish. "People were in party mode. It got up their noses." Chipping away at the problems is the pragmatic approach, Jefferies says. "It's got to be fun, not prescriptive. If worm farms are your thing, it's what you love, then you go and concentrate on that. If you don't want to be out agitating about plastic bags, that's fine." Jefferies has also noticed a difference between those who see sustainability as about "tack on" changes and those looking for a deeper personal or spiritual change. She says some want the same lifestyle, just with more efficient and renewable technology. Others want to get right out of the trap of working ever harder just to own more stuff. Lyttelton is one of a number of "transition town" experiments that have sprung up around the country. Lincoln is another with its rather more academically oriented Envirotown programme. Jefferies says while Project Lyttelton is rather homespun, Envirotown comes with a thick manual. Rhys Taylor says hardly anything about sustainable-living practices is new. The difference is in the will to act. Taylor says the country has problems that need to be tackled at a higher level, of course. However, what people need most is the information. Then they will respond intelligently. He points out that so much of our waste is hidden. We are happy to buy cheap plastic junk from China because we have no idea of the coal being burnt, the pollution being produced. "We've managed to export the problem." So one of the most necessary changes is to start making waste visible again. At the sustainable living evening classes he teaches, part of the homework is to carry out energy and refuse audits. These days you can get speedometer-like devices like the Christchurch-developed Centameter which hooks up to your power meter with a radio link and sits in the kitchen telling you how many kilowatts per hour you are burning. Taylor says once something can be measured, a target can be set to gradually reduce usage. For example, it is not hard to check your annual car mileage, then aim to cut out enough car trips to travel, say, 5% less each year. But can society really be turned around while there are still Hummer drivers out there taking a perverse pride in their profligacy? Why should the few make sacrifices if most probably won't? Taylor says perhaps it is rather that the wasteful are now becoming more visible to us as we become attuned to the issue of sustainability. Surveys are showing more of the population is ready for a change than we think, Taylor says. But right now people are still learning what it all must mean in practice: how can we go forward in a way that still gives us the best of both, a life and a world? http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4373521a13135.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:44:07 pm Climate change shatters huge ice shelf
‘Like an explosion’ — ancient landscape crumbles in shocking vision of global warming By REBECCA PALMER and PAUL EASTON - The Dominion Post | Thursday, 27 March 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming002.jpg)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming003.jpg) OFF THE SHELF: A 415sq/km chunk of the Wilkins Ice Shelf has collapsed into the Ancarctic ocean. A gigantic Antarctic ice shelf is collapsing and global warming is being blamed. An iceberg 41 kilometres long and 2.5km wide fell off the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula in late February. That triggered the disintegration of 405 square kilometres of ice. The entire ice shelf — the size of the Hawke's Bay region — is now in danger of disintegrating. The destruction was captured in satellite pictures from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in the United States. Scientists said a thin strand of ice about 6km wide was all that was stopping the remaining 13,680sq km shelf from collapsing. Professor Tim Naish, of Victoria University's Antarctic Research Centre, said the breakup was part of a pattern seen for about 50 years. Ice breaks were fully expected. "They're likely to be a more frequent event." (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming004.jpg) OTHER-WORDLY: An image taken from a British Antarctic Survey video, showing the breakup of the ice shelf. The BAS sent a Twin Otter aircraft to fly the length of the main crack. Massive rectangular icebergs are collapsing into house-sized rubble. The Antarctic Peninsula had warmed by about 2½ degrees in the past 50 years — more than other parts of the world. Remnants of the shelf could end up near New Zealand, he said. In 2006, large icebergs drifted up the South Island's east coast. Professor Naish said the breakdown of the Wilkins shelf would not contribute to rising sea levels. He compared it to an ice-cube in a glass of water — when the cube melts, the water level does not go up, as it has already been displaced. But the disappearance of ice shelves could cause connected glaciers to melt and flow into the ocean more quickly, which would raise sea levels. Niwa principal scientist David Wratt said the ice shelf collapse was likely to be a result of climate change. "It's certainly a sign that things are happening." The peninsula's Larsen Ice Shelf had collapsed in 2002, with 500 billion tonnes of ice breaking up into bergs in less than a month. Ted Scambos, a glaciologist at the snow and ice data center, alerted the British Antarctic Survey when he saw a big chunk of the Wilkins shelf breaking away on satellite images. An aircraft was sent to check the size of the collapse. "Big, hefty chunks of ice, the size of small houses, look as though they've been thrown around like rubble — it's like an explosion," researcher Jim Elliot said. By March 08, about 570 sq km had broken off, including the chunk Dr Scambos had seen. "I didn't expect to see things happen this quickly," British Antarctic Survey scientist David Vaughan said. "The ice shelf is hanging by a thread." Dr Vaughan, who earlier predicted the Wilkins shelf would collapse in 30 years, said the collapse was the result of global warming. Dr Scambos said scientists believed the shelf had been in place for hundreds of years. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming005.jpg) ANTARCTIC HEATS UP The Wilkins Ice Shelf is a plate of floating ice on the southwest Antarctic Peninsula, which stretches toward South America. Temperature rises in the region have been greater than other places on Earth. The size of the threatened shelf is estimated to be about 13,680 square kilometres – about 22 times the size of Lake Taupo. Satellite images show about 570 square kilometres of ice have collapsed so far, including a large chunk that broke away on February 28. The rest of the shelf is "hanging by a thread", the British Antarctic Survey says. In 1998, the shelf lost 1100 square kilometres of ice, or about 6 per cent of its surface. Several other ice shelves have collapsed in the region in the past three decades. In 2002, the Larsen B shelf disappeared in just over 30 days. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4452883a6479.html http://www.stuff.co.nz/4452970a11.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on February 16, 2009, 04:44:23 pm You wanna see something really spooky?
I'll post it later tonight... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:45:24 pm Glacier to go in 20 years
NZPA | Thursday, 24 April 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming006.jpg) MELTING ICE: The terminal lake of the Tasman Glacier complete with icebergs that have calved from the terminal face as viewed from a skiplane on Easter Monday, 24 March 2008. Climate change will see most of the Tasman Glacier in the Southern Alps melt away over the next 20 years, scientists say. "In the past 10 years, the glacier has receded a hell of a lot," said glaciologist Martin Brook. "It's just too warm for a glacier to be sustained at such a low altitude — 730 metres above sea level — so it melts rapidly and it is going to disappear altogether." The Tasman Glacier is the biggest in the Southern Alps and, at 29 kilometres, was one of the longest in the world's temperate zones. In 1973, there was no lake in front of the Tasman Glacier. New measurements taken last week indicate the lake at its foot is now 7km long, 2km wide and 245m deep. The lake has attracted regular excursions by boatloads of tourists, but Dr Brook warned yesterday that they may be at risk from huge chunks of ice unexpectedly breaking loose underwater and surfacing as far as 60m from the glacier face. "There's actually a sub-surface apron of ice that slopes away under the water for at least 50m or 60m from the front of the glacier," Dr Brook said. As this ice-apron melted, blocks of ice broke off and floated to the surface. "This happens pretty quickly and is potentially a hazard for the tour boats that cruise up to the cliff: the blocks just pop out on the surface and some are between 5m and 10m in size." The lake has been formed as the ice which makes up the glacier melts, and is a key factor in its destruction: the deeper the lake, the faster the retreat of the glacier. According to another glaciologist, Trevor Chinn, the development of the lake was a tipping point: no amount of snow at the head of the glacier, the neve, can compensate for melting triggered by the lake. The last major survey of the glacier was in the 1990s. Since then, the glacier has retreated 180m a year, exposing a basin carved out of rock more than 20,000 years ago when the glacier was a lot larger and more powerful. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4494166a6479.html Tasman Glacier could go in 20 years Hot air blamed for Tasman Glacier's melt By JOHN KEAST - The Press | Thursday, 24 April 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming007.jpg) MELT DOWN: The Tasman Glacier is melting fast and will ultimately disappear, experts fear. — DAVID HALLETT/The Press The Tasman Glacier in Mount Cook-Aoraki National Park is retreating at an alarming rate and will ultimately disappear, experts at Massey University warn. Dr Martin Brook, lecturer in physical geography, said that in 1973 there was no lake in front of the glacier, but new measurements last week indicated the lake was now 7km long, 2km wide and 245m deep. The lake is formed as ice in the glacier melts. "In the last 10 years the glacier has retreated a hell of a lot. It's just too warm for a glacier to be sustained as such low altitude, 730 metres above sea level, so it melts rapidly and it is going to disappear altogether. "Significantly, the deeper the lake, the faster the retreat of the glacier." The lake could only grow to a length of 16km, which would mean a further 9km of glacier retreat. "Using the empirical relationships between the water depth and glacier retreat rate, we could expect further retreat of between 477m and 822m each year. At these rates, it would take between 10 and 19 years for the lake to expand to its maximum," Brook said. His work indicated that an extreme scenario for the future retreat of the glacier, developed by Dr Martin Kirkbride in the 1990s, was correct. "The last major survey was in the 1990s and since then the glacier has retreated back 180m a year on average. This has exposed a huge rock basin which was eroded more than 20,000 years ago when the glacier was a lot larger and more powerful." Research students are studying the glacier and lake using a new towfish sonar and echo-sounding equipment. "The glacier followed a slow retreat phase for a while, in that a thermo-erosional notch in the ice cliff face would develop at the water line, melt back into the glacier undercutting the ice above, causing the ice to collapse into the lake. "But what is happening now is that a short foot of ice is extending out into the lake away from the ice cliff, and the glacier is now in a period of fast retreat. This is because as the water depth increases, sodoes the speed of retreat — simply, a much larger part of the glacier is submerged and the water, even at only 2°C, is still able to melt the glacier ice," Brook said. As well as looking at the Tasman Glacier, the team is analysing the newly exposed sub-surface landscape. http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4495365a24035.html http://www.stuff.co.nz/4494061a7693.html Tasman Glacier retreat extreme Created: Wednesday, 23 April 2008 | Last updated: Thursday, 24 April 2008 Massey University News (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming008.jpg) From left: technician David Feek, senior lecturer Dr Ian Fuller and PhD student Claire Robertson looking at sub-bottom sediment using the towfish sonar. In the background is a high-precision GPS transmitter attached to the towfish, which gives its location to about 5mm accuracy. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming009.jpg) PhD student John Appleby (left) and Honours student Rob Dykes (right) in a boat on the lake measuring depth with an echo sounder. The Tasman Glacier is retreating faster than ever and will ultimately disappear, glaciologists are warning. In 1973 there was no lake in front of the Tasman Glacier, says Dr Martin Brook, lecturer in physical geography in the School of People, Environment and Planning. New measurements taken last week indicate the lake, formed by ice melt from the glacier, is now 7km long, 2km wide and 245m deep. The lake has been formed as the ice which makes up the glacier melts. “In the last 10 years the glacier has receded a hell of a lot,” Dr Brook says. “It’s just too warm for a glacier to be sustained at such a low altitude, 730m above sea level, so it melts rapidly and it is going to disappear altogether. Significantly, the deeper the lake, the faster the retreat of the glacier.” Dr Brook says the lake can only grow to a length of about 16km, which would mean a further 9km of glacier retreat. “Using the empirical relationships between water depth and glacier retreat rate we could expect further retreat of between 477m and 822m each year. At these rates it would take between 10 and 19 years for the lake to expand to its maximum.” His work indicated that an extreme scenario for the future retreat of the Tasman Glacier, developed by Dr Martin Kirkbride in the 1990s, was correct. “The last major survey was in the 1990s and since then the glacier has retreated back 180 metres a year on average. This has exposed a huge rock basin which was eroded more than 20,000 years ago when the glacier was a lot larger and more powerful.” Dr Brook and a number of research students are studying the glacier and the lake using a new towfish sonar and echo sounding equipment to measure the depth and analyse sediments under the lake. “The glacier followed a slow retreat phase for a while, in that a thermo-erosional notch in the ice cliff face would develop at the water line, melt back into the glacier undercutting the ice above, causing the ice to collapse into the lake. “But what is happening now is that a short foot of ice is extending out into the lake away from the ice cliff, and the glacier is now in a period of fast retreat. This is because as the water depth increases so does the speed of retreat — simply, a much larger part of the glacier is submerged and the water, even at only two degrees celcius, is still able to melt the glacier ice. “The result is large pieces of ice fracturing off the ice foot and floating on the surface — the debris on the icebergs on the surface of the lake and the icebergs are a reflection of this.” As well as addressing the future of the Tasman Glacier, which is in Aoraki Mount Cook National Park, the team is analysing the newly exposed sub-surface landscape. The project is also interested in the glacier because it is very different to the clean-ice glaciers on the West Coast. Tasman is covered in rock and debris, and has a different relationship with climate, Dr Brook says, as well as different patterns of retreat. “In particular, although there’s a near-vertical ice cliff at the front of the glacier that terminates in the lake, there’s actually a sub-surface apron of ice that slopes away under the water for at least 50m or 60m from the front of the glacier. As this ice-apron melts, blocks of ice break off and float to the surface. This happens pretty quickly and is potentially a hazard for the tour boats that cruise up to the cliff — the blocks just pop out on the surface and some are between 5m and 10m in size.” http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-us/news/article.cfm?mnarticle=tasman-glacier-retreat-extreme-23-04-2008 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: dragontamer on February 16, 2009, 04:45:53 pm "The driver's saying, ‘look at me. Aren't I great? I can afford to waste huge amounts of fuel’." Well, look at that. I always thought they were thinking "Look at me.....I'm a wanker". (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/wink.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:46:21 pm Plug being pulled on nature's freezer
An Arctic traverse shows the ice is in retreat By STACEY WOOD - The Dominion Post | Saturday, 19 July 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming010.jpg) EXPEDITION LEADER: Grant Redvers traversed the Arctic ice pack on board the Tara, which in a former life was the boat Sir Peter Blake was murdered on. — MAARTEN HOLL/The Dominion Post Scientists continue to debate the impact of global warming on the Arctic ice pack, but for the man who spent nearly a year and a half traversing it the picture is crystal-clear. As expedition leader on board the Tara, Kiwi Grant Redvers oversaw atmospheric, oceanographic and meteorological testing, as the icebound boat made its way across the top of the world. Retracing the 1893 journey of the wooden ship Fram, the crew ploughed the boat into the ice northeast of Siberia, allowing the Arctic drift to carry them more than 5000 kilometres. In a previous life, the Tara was Sir Peter Blake's boat Seamaster. Sir Peter was murdered on the boat by Amazon River pirates in 2001. Most of the Tara's data is being processed by scientists in France. Some startling observations speak for themselves, however. Between the summers of 2005 and 2007 the team recorded a loss of more than a million square kilometres of ice. During one 12-month period, the ice retreated 400 kilometres, and Mr Redvers says the evidence of melting was highly visible. "In summer, over 50 per cent of the surface area is covered in pools of surface melt." The melting of the ice cap will not raise sea levels much, but the oceans may become warm enough to trigger more melting in Greenland. That could cause ocean levels to rise up to seven metres. The journey, which took the Fram about three years, took half as long for the Tara. Thinner ice and stronger winds enabled Mr Redvers' team to emerge into the Fram Strait after only 507 days. The warmer temperatures of the Arctic summer posed some problems for the crew on the Tara. Despite being in the heart of nature's freezer, the team found it hard to keep food cold, forcing them to find other means of preservation. "We ate a lot of Santa's reindeer," Mr Redvers says. The schooner's sauna — "one of our few luxuries" — was turned into a meat-smoking room. Mr Redvers was the only expedition member to stay on board for the whole journey. Others came and went by helicopter. "It was a dream of mine," he says, "not just to go in as a researcher, but to ... live there." Mr Redvers is back in New Zealand but heading for hotter climes. He has been invited to a premiere of a Central American film featuring the Tara. The film, De Los Mayas al Polo Norte (The Mayas at the North Pole) is one of several productions about the expedition. After a whirlwind tour through Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama, Mr Redvers will retreat to his home on the shores of Lake Taupo to write a book about the Tara expedition. For now, the Tara has returned to France, but Mr Redvers says there is plenty more adventure on it's horizons. The boat is expected to set sail on another epic journey early next year. THEIR OWN ICE AGE The team adopted the term "polar time", because everything takes 10 times longer than normal in the extreme environment. Tara's owner, Etienne Bourgois, is head of fashion label Agnes B, which made special Arctic-friendly outfits to help the team combat the cold. The crew enjoyed fresh salads, courtesy of the world's northern-most hydroponic vege garden, grown on board. The expedition adhered to a strict no-waste policy, and offset their emissions by donating to a carbon capture programme. Of the 507-day journey, 230 were spent in permanent darkness, and a further 230 in constant light, with the rest somewhere in between. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4621881a27490.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 04:47:46 pm NZ glaciers smallest since records began
By TOM CARDY - The Dominion Post | Monday, 15 September 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming011.jpg) WARMING SIGN: Marion Glacier in Arawata Valley has recently withdrawn from its proglacial state. Most of New Zealand's glaciers are the smallest they've been since records began. — DR TREVOR CHINN/NIWA Most of New Zealand's glaciers are now the smallest they have been since records began — and they continue to shrink at a rapid rate. The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, which made the discovery, said global warming was the main culprit. Between April last year and March this year, glaciers in the Southern Alps lost about 2.2 billion tonnes of permanent ice — the equivalent in weight to the top section of Mount Taranaki. It is the fourth highest annual loss since monitoring began 32 years ago. The total ice for the glaciers now comprises an estimated 44.9 cubic kilometres — the lowest on record. The volume of ice dropped by 50 per cent during the last century. NIWA principal scientist Jim Salinger said glaciers were fed by snow, but because of the La Nina weather system over New Zealand, more easterly winds and warmer than normal temperatures during the period, there was less snow in the Southern Alps and more snowmelt. Dr Salinger said while the glaciers were sensitive to changes in wind and precipitation as well as temperature, global warming was a big factor in their shrinking. "It's one of the clearest signs that our climate is warming and that [the shrinkage] is a definite physical response. To have that amount of melting you would have to reduce the precipitation at least by a half or more or warm a degree," he said. "We know that precipitation has not gone down in the Southern Alps. In the last quarter of a century it's gone up. So to make them retreat you've got to have more melting, which is higher temperatures. "This is certainly a definite sign of warming in the New Zealand area." Niwa has surveyed 50 glaciers in the Southern Alps for the past 32 years, recording the height of the snowline at the end of each summer. On average the snowline this year was 130 metres above where it would need to be for the glaciers not to shrink, Dr Salinger said. It was unlikely the glaciers would disappear entirely, as that would require a temperature rise of 7 degrees celsius and no snow even at the top of our highest mountain, Aoraki Mount Cook. But they would continue to retreat. Another sign of warming were 12 glacial lakes, including ones at Marion Glacier and Tasman Glacier. "They are definitely a sign of warming. There is no doubt about it. You get a very rapid loss of snow and ice and that's what's been happening." http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4692547a6479.html Media Release Glaciers continue to show significant ice loss 15 September 2008 National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research (NIWA) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming012.jpg) The large Tasman Glacier in Aoraki-Mount Cook National Park. (Photo: Dr Trevor Chinn, Alpine and Polar Research, Hawea) New Zealand’s glaciers are showing the lowest total ice mass on record and most are continuing to shrink at a rapid rate. Research released by the National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research (NIWA) shows the Southern Alps glaciers have lost 2.5 km³ (2.2 billion tonnes) of permanent ice from April 2007 to March 2008, the fourth highest annual loss since monitoring started. The 2008 total ice volume estimate for the Southern Alps glaciers of 44.9 km³ is the lowest on record. For the past 32 years NIWA has been surveying 50 glaciers in the Southern Alps, using a small fixed wing aircraft, to record the height of the snow line at the end of summer. NIWA Principal Scientist Dr Jim Salinger says the photographs taken on this year’s survey showed the glaciers had lost much more ice than they had gained during the past glacier year. “As a result of La Niña conditions over New Zealand, more easterlies, and warmer than normal temperatures, there was less snowfall in the Southern Alps and more snowmelt. The higher the snow line, the more snow is lost to feed the glacier. On average, the snow line this year was about 130 metres above where it would need to be to keep the ice mass constant,” Dr Salinger says. Dr Salinger says these results match trends of ice mass lost globally. International monitoring of mountains glaciers by the World Glacier Monitoring Service in Switzerland shows most glaciers are retreating. Of the glaciers where continuous data is available, the mean annual average loss in ice thickness since 1980 is close to half a metre per year. For more information contact: Dr Jim Salinger NIWA, Auckland Tel: +64 9 375 2053 Mob: +64 27 521 9468 Background Information: Worldwide, glaciers are regarded as a useful indicator of global warming, but New Zealand’s glaciers are more complicated because they have their source in areas of extremely high precipitation. West of the Main Divide in the Southern Alps, more than 10 metres (10 000 mm) of precipitation falls each year as clouds are pushed up over the sharply rising mountain ranges. This means the mass and volume of New Zealand’s glaciers is sensitive to changing wind and precipitation patterns as well as to temperature. So, for example, the glaciers advanced during most of the 1980s and 1990s when the area experienced about a 15% increase in precipitation, associated with more El Niño events and stronger westerly winds over New Zealand. The glaciers in parts of Norway are similar. Despite the sensitivity of New Zealand glaciers to changes in both precipitation and temperature, the volume of ice in the Southern Alps dropped by roughly 50% during the last century. New Zealand’s temperature increased by about 1°C over the same period. Globally, most glaciers are retreating. Of the glaciers for which there are continuous data from the World Glacier Monitoring Service, the mean annual loss in ice thickness since 1980 remains close to half a metre per year. The Service has said that the loss in ice mass “leaves no doubt about the accelerating change in climatic conditions”. For world glacier data, see www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms. The level of the glacier snow lines is not necessarily closely related to the amount of snow that falls on the country’s ski fields during winter. Most of the popular ski fields are east of the Main Divide, or in the North Island. Mount Hutt, for instance, gets its snow from big southeasterlies, whereas most of the glaciers are fed by westerlies. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming013.jpg) http://www.niwa.co.nz/news/mr/2008/2008-09-15 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 05:35:00 pm Heavy snow likely to bolster southern glaciers
By PAUL GORMAN, Science Reporter - The Press | Monday, 15 September 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming014.jpg) GLACIAL FUTURE: Heavy alpine snowfalls in the South Island this winter could temporarily halt or even reverse the continuing decline of some glaciers in the Southern Alps. Meanwhile, Franz Josef Glacier (pictured) and the nearby Fox Glacier in Westland National Park both buck the worldwide trend as they continue to advance. — ALAN WOOD/The Press Heavy alpine snowfalls in the South Island this winter could temporarily halt or even reverse the continuing decline of glaciers in the Southern Alps. The latest survey by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) draws the gloomy conclusion that the country's glaciers are shrinking at an alarming rate. The total ice volume of the Southern Alps' glaciers is 44.9 cubic km, the least since the annual survey began 32 years ago. The 50 glaciers in the survey lost 2.5 cu km, or 2.2 billion tonnes, of permanent ice in the 12 months from April 2007, the fourth greatest annual loss on record. That was reflected in a mean South Island snowline over the period of 1960m above sea level, 130m higher than the 1976-2008 average. However, the stormy winter means the snowpack in some parts of the Southern Alps is the greatest it has been for about a decade. Power company Meridian Energy is eagerly awaiting a large spring thaw and the boost it will give to its southern hydro-lakes, which are only just starting to recover from very low levels throughout the winter. Niwa principal climate scientist Jim Salinger said that extra snow could boost the ice mass quite quickly in some smaller glaciers but would not show up in larger glaciers for years. "It depends what happens over the summer. We've still got the snow melt to come that's November to February and maybe March. If it's a cold summer, it might halt the decline a little, but the general trend is downward." There was also a chance of late spring snowfalls. The shrinking of the glaciers was due to climate change, Salinger said. "Temperatures have increased a degree over a whole century, and by about three-tenths of a degree since 1960." The melting trend in New Zealand matched that globally. "International monitoring of mountain glaciers by the World Glacier Monitoring Service in Switzerland shows most glaciers are retreating," Salinger said. "Of the glaciers where continuous data is available, the mean annual average loss in ice thickness since 1980 is close to half a metre per year." http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4692591a19753.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Elric of Melnibone on February 16, 2009, 05:45:38 pm Yes, few deny climate is changing.
But is man the sole cause? And is shuffling money the cure? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 05:58:05 pm NZ's eco footprint sixth largest
NZPA | Wednesday, 29 October 2008 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/GlobalWarming015.jpg) NOT SO CLEAN AND GREEN: New Zealand's ecological footprint is the sixth highest in the world, ranking alongside the United Arab Emirates and the US in the top 10 worst offenders. New Zealand's ecological footprint — measured per head of population — is the sixth largest in the world, according to a global survey released today. Swiss-based conservation group WWF said in its Living Planet report that more than three quarters of the world's population lives in countries whose consumption levels are outstripping environmental renewal. The report, a leading statement on the planet's health, shows that only the United Arab Emirates, the United States, Kuwait, Denmark and Australia have larger ecological footprints than New Zealand on a per-head basis. "As a country we are in dubious company in terms of our demands on the planet," said WWF-New Zealand's executive director Chris Howe. The WWF calculations included carbon emissions from the production of imported goods and services and showed New Zealanders' use of natural resources was excessive. Mr Howe said it made sense to look after nature as the country's health and prosperity depended on it. "We are lucky in New Zealand to have a bountiful country with large biocapacity — but if we continue to consume our resources at this breakneck pace, its ability to provide for us will decline." As world consumption rates increased, biodiversity was declining. An ecological footprint measures the amount of resources humans use and the waste they generate: New Zealand has moved from requiring 5.9 "global hectares" per person in the 2006 WWF report to an average of 7.7 global hectares. A global hectare is a standardised hectare of land able to produce resources and absorb wastes at world average levels. Worldwide, the average ecological footprint jumped from 2.2 global hectares per person to 2.7 global hectares per person, but the world has only an average 2.1ha available per person. "Humans are now exceeding the planet's regenerative capacity by about 30 percent," the report said. If demand kept growing at the same rate, the equivalent of two planets would be required in the mid-2030s to sustain current lifestyles — or 3.5 planets if everyone on Earth used resources at the same pace as New Zealanders. The report by WWF — also known as the World Wildlife Fund — said the largest human-induced pressure on the planet was from fossil fuel use. In New Zealand, the main growth in carbon emissions since 1990 has come from the energy sector — mainly transport and electricity generation. According to Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority reports New Zealand is now second only to the United States both in the number of cars owned per person and in the number of kilometres travelled in those cars. Mr Howe said the most urgent priority in NZ should be given to reducing our carbon emissions. "We have the will to change, but we need much more support from Government to do so, and that needs to happen now," he said. The Government needed to commit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 2005 levels, by 2050. The top 10 nations with largest ecological footprint per capita are: 1. United Arab Emirates 2. United States of America 3. Kuwait 4. Denmark 5. Australia 6. New Zealand 7. Canada 8. Norway 9. Estonia 10. Ireland • Source: WWF Living Planet Report 2008. http://www.stuff.co.nz/4743115a7693.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 06:08:17 pm See what excessive quantites of greenhouse gases can cause? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/12emdgust.gif)
Kiwi seas were as hot as spas scientists say By RUTH HILL - The Dominion Post | Tuesday, 30 December 2008 If you lived in New Zealand 50 million years ago, you could have had a warm dip in the sea all year round, scientists say. The spa-pool-like conditions that existed in the early Eocene period a time of significant global warming suggest scientists may be underestimating the likely effect of climate change. Using sedimentary rocks from the bed of the Waipara River in North Canterbury, an international research group led by GNS Science palaeontologist Chris Hollis has reconstructed ancient sea temperatures. They found surface sea water exceeded 30 degrees celsius, and water at the sea floor hovered around 20°C during an episode of greenhouse gas-induced global warming that lasted for between two million and three million years. "These temperatures are at the extreme end of modern tropical water masses," Dr Hollis said. Year-round sea surface temperatures of 25°C to 30°C are today found only at the equator. In a study to be published in the international scientific journal Geology next month, scientists have inferred warm conditions in New Zealand for this period from a wide range of fossil evidence showing the country was once covered in lush tropical forest. But, till now, the degree of warmth was uncertain. Dr Hollis said similar freakishly warm conditions had been reported for this period in high-latitude regions of the northern hemisphere. "It now seems likely that some, as yet unknown, heat-transport mechanism comes into play during times of extreme global warmth." Co-author Matt Huber, of Purdue University, Indiana, said the new findings were at least 10°C higher than previous estimates, which indicated climate models had underestimated past warming episodes. "It is possible that models are also underestimating future warming projections." Dr Hollis said research into extreme climatic changes in the past would benefit from New Zealand's recent decision to join the Integrated Ocean Drilling Programme an international project extracting 2000-metre sediment cores from the ocean floor. The recent findings, part of an eight-year study, will be presented at an international conference on climate change at Te Papa next month. Funded by the New Zealand Government through the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, the project involves an international team of 12 research scientists and graduate students. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4805564a6479.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on February 16, 2009, 07:10:04 pm No rules against spamming here huh?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 16, 2009, 07:15:49 pm I originally posted all that stuff at the old group, so I simply spent half an hour reformatting it all for SMF groups (the original HTML code wasn't compatible with these groups) and re-uploading all the image files at Photobucket, then associating the URLs with those articles; then once I had everything just right, I reposted it all into this new group! ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 29, 2009, 05:54:46 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons/517GlobalWarming17Mar09.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on March 29, 2009, 07:52:09 pm Spam #10 New Zealand's ecological footprint — measured per head of population — is the sixth largest in the world, according to a global survey released today.
Considering that NZ produces food for 50 million people, those 50 million should be included in our equation. More bullshit propaganda. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on March 29, 2009, 08:07:43 pm Spam #10 New Zealand's ecological footprint measured per head of population is the sixth largest in the world, according to a global survey released today. Considering that NZ produces food for 50 million people, those 50 million should be included in our equation. More bullshit propaganda. I agree with that. More bullshit and propaganda. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 03, 2009, 06:01:14 pm Arctic ice ‘gone in 30 years’ NZPA | Friday, 03 April 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/2312537s-03Apr09.jpg) Arctic sea ice is melting so fast most of it could be gone in 30 years. A new analysis of changing conditions in the region, using complex computer models of weather and climate, says conditions that had been forecast by the end of the century could occur much sooner. A change in the amount of ice is important because the white surface reflects sunlight back into space. When ice is replaced by dark ocean water that sunlight can be absorbed, warming the water and increasing the warming of the planet. The finding adds to concern about climate change caused by human activities such as burning fossil fuels, a problem that has begun receiving more attention in the Obama administration and is part of the G20 discussions under way in London. "Due to the recent loss of sea ice, the 2005-2008 autumn central Arctic surface air temperatures were greater than 5C above what would be expected," the new study reports. That amount of temperature increase had been expected by the year 2070. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/2312536s-03Apr09.jpg) BEARS' HABITAT DISAPPEARING: Global warming is destroying Arctic ice at a faster rate than expected. The new report by Muyin Wang of the Joint Institute for the Study of Atmosphere and Ocean and James E Overland of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, appears in Friday's edition of the journal Geophysical Research Letters. They expect the area covered by summer sea ice to decline from about 2.8 million square miles (7.25 million sq km) normally to 620,000 square miles within 30 years. Last year's summer minimum was 1.8 million square miles in September, second lowest only to 2007 which had a minimum of 1.65 million square miles, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Centre. The Centre said Arctic sea ice reached its winter maximum for this year at 5.8 million square miles on February 28. That was 278,000 square miles below the 1979-2000 average making it the fifth lowest on record. The six lowest maximums since 1979 have all occurred in the last six years. Overland and Wang combined sea-ice observations with six complex computer models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to reach their conclusions. Combining several computer models helps avoid uncertainties caused by natural variability. Much of the remaining ice would be north of Canada and Greenland, with much less between Alaska and Russia in the Pacific Arctic. "The Arctic is often called the Earth's refrigerator because the sea ice helps cool the planet by reflecting the sun's radiation back into space," Wang said in a statement. "With less ice, the sun's warmth is instead absorbed by the open water, contributing to warmer temperatures in the water and the air." The study was supported by the NOAA Climate Change Program Office, the Institute for the Study of the Ocean and Atmosphere and the US Department of Energy. http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2312253 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Nitpicker1 on April 30, 2009, 02:01:52 pm just in case yas hadn't noticed Niwa sacks Jim Salinger 24/04/2009 One of New Zealand's top climate scientists, Jim Salinger, has been fired from his job at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa). The high-profile scientist, whose work contributed to a Nobel prize, is reported to have been sacked for ignoring a new Niwa policy against speaking publicly without prior approval. "I can't understand it, it's not as though I'm doing bad science, it's not as though I'm under-performing, so I'm really astounded," Dr Salinger said on TV One News tonight. TV One said Niwa had accused Dr Salinger of serious misconduct after he took part in a programme the channel produced about glaciers. The Green Party said Dr Salinger was dismissed earlier this week for helping TVNZ weatherman Jim Hickey with climate-related inquiries. The scientist has frequently appeared in TV climate reports and has spoken in the media about climate change. "Niwa's actions will make all government scientists nervous about their jobs," said Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons. "New Zealand is on a slippery slope when trying to provide Kiwis with a greater understanding of our climate is a sackable offence." Ms Fitzsimons said scientists should be able to help the public and the media with scientific problems, particularly around issues like climate change. "An investigation is needed into how it came to be that one of New Zealand's foremost scientists was frog-marched out of his job for what appears to be trivial and petty reasons." Ms Fitzsimons said the Minister of Research, Science and Technology, Wayne Mapp, should call in Niwa and tell them to "get to the bottom of this messy matter". Greenpeace said it wanted answers from Niwa and the Government. "Dr Salinger has done some amazing work to educate New Zealanders about climate change and he is highly respected internationally," said Greenpeace senior climate campaigner Simon Boxer. "He was very clear about the need for urgent climate action in New Zealand." TV One reported Dr Salinger was considering claiming unjustified dismissal. http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/2361900/Niwa-sacks-Jim-Salinger/ (http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/2361900/Niwa-sacks-Jim-Salinger/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Nitpicker1 on April 30, 2009, 02:03:12 pm Scientist lodges second claim
By PAUL GORMAN The Press Last updated 05:00 30/04/2009 Sacked scientist Jim Salinger has slapped a second grievance case on his former employer, Niwa. The high-profile climatologist decided yesterday to challenge his firing by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) last Thursday as an unjustified dismissal. Salinger will fight to be reinstated. A separate personal grievance case over the way Niwa dealt with Salinger while he was still an employee had already been filed against the Crown research institute (CRI). Salinger's lawyer, Alex Hope, confirmed the scientist wanted his job back. A mediated hearing had been set down for mid-May, he said. Salinger confirmed a hearing had been scheduled for May 12 or 13. Niwa spokeswoman Michele Hollis repeated there would be no comment from the institute because it was a confidential employment issue. Salinger yesterday declined to talk further about his sacking, which he had maintained was for doing his job and talking to the media. However, this week he had told The Press things changed at Niwa about six months ago, before worsening in March and leading up to his firing. "I had to pinch myself for about four weeks that this could be happening to me. It was clear what route it was going to take in the last week. "Clearly, they weren't changing their minds along the track they were going to take. It's not nice being sacked. But, in a sense, I had prepared myself for it." He had been threatened with "dismissal due to serious misconduct", he said, on returning to work on March 6 after taking part and commenting on an annual survey of the alpine snowline. Two letters were waiting for him a long letter with a list of "allegations" and a smaller note on his snowline survey work, he said. Labour Party list MP Moana Mackey, a molecular biologist who worked as a scientist, said Salinger's sacking had unnerved scientists around the country. Scientists were now thinking twice about whether they could talk about their research. She said Research, Science and Technology Minister Wayne Mapp had avoided answering questions in Parliament about Salinger's dismissal, saying he could not comment because it was an employment matter. He had also evaded her question in Parliament asking if he would assure scientists they were entitled, and encouraged, to talk publicly about science, she said Mapp told The Press the existing practices of CRIs allowing scientists to speak out would continue. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/national/2373502/Scientist-lodges-second-claim (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/national/2373502/Scientist-lodges-second-claim) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on April 30, 2009, 04:26:11 pm Jim Salingers sacking has more behind it than they are prepared to say.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on April 30, 2009, 04:27:19 pm Huge ice chunks break away from Antarctic shelf
Massive ice chunks are crumbling away from a shelf in the western Antarctic Peninsula, researchers have said, warning that 3,370 square kilometres of ice - an area larger than Rhode Island - was in danger of breaking off in coming weeks. The Wilkins Ice Shelf had been stable for most of the last century, but began retreating in the 1990s. Researchers believe it was held in place by an ice bridge linking Charcot Island to the Antarctic mainland. But the 330-square-kilometre bridge lost two large chunks last year and then shattered completely on April 5. "As a consequence of the collapse, the rifts, which had already featured along the northern ice front, widened and new cracks formed as the ice adjusted," the European Space Agency said in a statement Wednesday on its Web site, citing new satellite images. The first icebergs broke away on Friday, and since then some 700 square kilometres of ice have dropped into the sea, according to the satellite data. "There is little doubt that these changes are the result of atmospheric warming," said David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey. The falling away of Antarctic ice shelves does not, in itself, raise sea levels, since the ice was already floating in the sea. But such coastal tables of ice usually hold back glaciers, and when they disintegrate that land ice will often flow more quickly into the sea, contributing to sea-level rise. http://www.3news.co.nz/Huge-ice-chunks-break-away-from-Antarctic-shelf/tabid/209/articleID/101860/cat/61/Default.aspx?ArticleID=101860 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 01, 2009, 10:58:30 pm Kiwis unlock glacier secret The Dominion Post with NZPA | Friday, 01 May 2009 Research by three New Zealand scientists may have solved the mystery of why glaciers behave differently in the northern and southern hemispheres. New Zealand researchers, geologist David Barrell of GNS Science, Victoria University geomorphologist Andrew Mackintosh, and glaciologist Trevor Chinn, of the Alpine and Polar Processes Consultancy, have helped provide definitive dating for changes in glacier behaviour. The three were part of a team of nine scientists, led by Joerg Schaefer of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, which used an isotope dating technique to get very precise ages for glacial deposits near Aoraki-Mount Cook. They measured the build-up of beryllium-10 isotopes in surface rocks bombarded by cosmic rays to pinpoint dates when glaciers in the Southern Alps started to recede. The technology is expected to be widely applied to precisely date other glaciers around the world. Glaciers are sensitive indicators of climate changes, usually advancing when it cools and retreating when it warms. The first direct confirmation of differences in glacier behaviour between the northern and southern hemispheres, the new work topples theories based on climate in the northern hemisphere changing in tandem with the climate in the southern hemisphere. The research argues that at times the climate in both hemispheres evolved "in sync" and at other times it evolved differently in different parts of the world. Dr Barrell told NZPA their research presents "new data of novel high precision" though the team has so far chosen not to roll out wider interpretations too quickly. He said much of it reinforced work done 30 years ago by Canterbury University researcher Professor Colin Burrows, who used NZ glacier data to highlight some of the similarities and differences between northern and southern records over the past 12,000 years. The paper published in Science magazine today showed the Mount Cook glaciers advanced to their maximum length 6500 years ago, and have been smaller ever since — but glaciers in the Swiss Alps advanced to their maximum only in the past 700 years — during the northern hemisphere's "Little Ice Age", which ended about 1860. During some warm periods in Europe, glaciers were advancing in New Zealand. At other times, glaciers were well advanced in both areas. In a commentary which accompanied the research, Greg Balco, from the Berkeley Geochronology Center in California, said the conclusion that glacier advances in the northern and southern hemispheres were not synchronised was "unexpected". Dr Barrell said the paper presented only the first instalment of the dating work, and more will be revealed at an international workshop on past climates to be held at Te Papa on May 15. "We expect that much progress will result from this new work and the discussions at that meeting," he said. "The New Zealand findings point to the importance of regional shifts in wind directions and sea surface temperatures," he said. Regional weather patterns such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) were superimposed on the global climate trends reflected in the behaviour of glaciers. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/2378376/Kiwis-unlock-glacier-secret Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: gladys2 on May 02, 2009, 01:19:28 am KTJ - That bit about glaciers being sensitive indicators of climate change as above - Christ! Even in my lifetime the Franz Joseph and Fox have been up and down like a whore's drawers...
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on May 02, 2009, 06:43:44 am Gladys, the warmalists - well, the human induced ones anyway, will tell you that because its warming, more snow falls, thus forming glaciers that advance. (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/rolleyes.gif) In the same breath, they will tell you that because its warming, the snow melts, thus making the glaciers retreat.
They then evolve a convoluted theory, in order to prove what they have just spun up from moonbeams and a desire for the next grant. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Magoo on May 02, 2009, 07:45:46 am I heard the replay of an interview in part between Leighton Smith and Prof. Bob Carter which I found very interesting. His opinion is worthy of note in my view.
http://www.nzcpr.com/guest92.htm ( about Bob Carter) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on May 02, 2009, 09:25:05 am KTJ - That bit about glaciers being sensitive indicators of climate change as above - Christ! Even in my lifetime the Franz Joseph and Fox have been up and down like a whore's drawers... Ive been around a few years and none of the glaciers have retreated as far as they are now. Ive never heard of gi-normous chunks of ice breaking off as they are regularly now. I have no doubt there is climate change - as there has been numerous times in the past. This time though things may be moving faster than in the past. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on May 02, 2009, 09:32:10 am http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/pages/glaciers.html
Some interesting before and after shots on this site. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 03, 2009, 07:56:21 pm Garath Morgan (a rabid capitalist and rightie) has got it when it comes to human-induced climate change....(https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/afro.gif) What a pity the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” haven't got it and still have their heads in the sand! (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/40emthdown.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on May 04, 2009, 09:48:20 am NZ glacier findings upset climate theory
Research by three New Zealand scientists may have solved the mystery of why glaciers behave differently in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Geologist David Barrell of GNS Science, Victoria University geomorphologist Andrew Mackintosh and glaciologist Trevor Chinn of the Alpine and Polar Processes Consultancy have helped provide definitive dating for changes in glacier behaviour. They were part of a team of nine scientists, led by Joerg Schaefer of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University in New York, who used an isotope-dating technique to get very precise ages for glacial deposits near Mt Cook. They measured the build-up of beryllium-10 isotopes in surface rocks bombarded by cosmic rays to pinpoint dates when glaciers in the Southern Alps started to recede. The technology is expected to be widely applied to precisely date other glaciers around the world. Glaciers are sensitive indicators of climate changes, usually advancing when it cools and retreating when it warms. AdvertisementAdvertisement The first direct confirmation of differences in glacier behaviour between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, the new work topples theories based on climate in the Northern Hemisphere changing in tandem with the climate in the Southern Hemisphere. The research argues that at times the climate in both hemispheres evolved in sync and at other times it evolved differently in different parts of the world. Dr Barrell said their research presented "new data of novel high precision", though the team has so far chosen not to roll out wider interpretations too quickly. He said much of it reinforced work done 30 years ago by Canterbury University researcher Professor Colin Burrows, who used NZ glacier data to highlight some of the similarities and differences between northern and southern records over the past 12,000 years. The paper published in Science magazine yesterday showed the Mt Cook glaciers advanced to their maximum length 6500 years ago, and have been smaller ever since. But glaciers in the Swiss Alps advanced to their maximum only in the past 700 years - during the Northern Hemisphere's "Little Ice Age", which ended about 1860. During some warm periods in Europe, glaciers were advancing in New Zealand. At other times, glaciers were well advanced in both areas. In a commentary which accompanied the research, Greg Balco, from the Berkeley Geochronology Centre in California, said the conclusion that glacier advances in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres were not synchronised was "unexpected". Dr Barrell said the paper presented only the first instalment of the dating work, and more would be revealed at an international workshop on past climates to be held at Te Papa on May 15. "The New Zealand findings point to the importance of regional shifts in wind directions and sea surface temperatures," he said. Regional weather patterns such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation were superimposed on the global climate trends reflected in the behaviour of glaciers. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10569888 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 04, 2009, 11:23:11 am Did Auntie Herald copy that story from the Dominion Post newspaper (owned by their rival company, Fairfax) and republish it? Because it seems almost word-for-word with the Dom-Post article as posted in Reply #22 and originally published by the Dom-Post last Friday (1st May). I note that Auntie Herald published the story the day after the Dominion Post published it. Incidentally, I notice the NZ Herald has a photograph of the terminal of Fox Glacier accompanying the article. Here is a photograph showing the entire length of Fox Glacier, and a second photograph showing the upper icefall and glacier névé (and Horokoau/Mount Tasman), with both images captured by me almost two weeks ago.... (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/April%202009%20South%20Is%20Pix/DSCH3-03944-800px.jpg) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/April%202009%20South%20Is%20Pix/DSCH3-03948-800px.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Lovelee on May 06, 2009, 12:02:03 pm http://www.youtube.com/v/s5kg1oOq9tY
;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 06, 2009, 12:45:11 pm Weathering the storm of Salinger sacking WORLD OF SCIENCE — BOB BROCKIE The Dominion Post | Monday, 04 May 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Caricatures/2383661sJimSalinger25Apr09.jpg) TVNZ'S Jim Hickey: Hello. Is that Jim Salinger, part-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, president of a world meteorological commission, companion of the Royal Society of New Zealand and renowned science communicator? Dr Salinger: Yes. That's me. Jim Hickey: Can you tell us about the weather? Dr Salinger: No! I can't comment. Jim Hickey: What do you mean, you can't comment? Dr Salinger: You've asked the wrong person. My boss says I'm not to talk to you. You must ask the communications manager at my place of work, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research. She'll put you right. She might even put you in touch with me. Jim Hickey: But we'd rather hear about the weather from the horse's mouth, as it were. Dr Salinger: No. If I talk to you about the weather without permission I could get further up my boss's nose. That's more than my job's worth. Jim Hickey: You must be joking! No joke. Something like this must have happened to Dr Salinger. Niwa has given him the boot for publicly making unsanctioned remarks about the weather. Scientists up and down the country are astonished and outraged at their colleague's sacking. The man has been fired for what he does best - making science intelligible to the public. Dr Salinger's case opens a window on the inner workings of Niwa and is a telling example of the malaise that has enveloped New Zealand science in the past 17 years. The weather, the ocean, the air, lakes and rivers used to be researched by government scientific agencies until 1992, when Environment Minister Simon Upton closed them all down and rejigged them as commercial companies. "Professional managers", not necessarily scientists, were appointed to run these companies for profit. Some of the new bosses may have successfully managed a brewery, a drug company or a football team but few understood what scientists do. The new men brought their business suits and ethics to their jobs and imposed these strange managerial protocols on their scientists. Commercial and scientific enterprises have different motivations, methods and goals. A lot of commerce is competitive and secretive but scientists were not accustomed to that. They worked collaboratively and in the public eye. Now, managers worry that talkative scientists might embarrass their institutions or, worse, give away information that they might otherwise sell. Scientists find it belittling and demeaning to ask their new masters' permission to speak about their science, as though they can't be trusted to comment diplomatically. Many scientists I know find themselves disempowered and their discipline degraded. Dr Salinger's sacking would be understandable if serious commercial or political issues were at stake but his managers appear to have given him the elbow on trivial grounds. Goodness knows how many other petty in-house protocols stand in the way of publicising science. Scientists see this as more than just an employment issue. His sacking overrides scientific conventions - not a good look for science or for the country. Outlook: Stormy. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/2382545/Weathering-the-storm-of-Salinger-sacking Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: TokGal on May 06, 2009, 01:04:40 pm Yes I believe in global warming, but I think it is part of a natural cycle which will eventually lead to a new ice age and there is very little we humans can do to change it, bar changing earth's orbit round the sun........what will be, will be.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 14, 2009, 01:14:57 am Scientists warn on ocean acidification NZPA | Wednesday, 13 May 2009 Bluff's oyster fisheries in Foveaux Strait may be at the top of a hit list of species vulnerable to increasing acidity levels in the oceans, New Zealand scientists say. But the global phenomenon of ocean acidification may pose a threat not only to New Zealand's fisheries and aquaculture industries, but to marine ecosystems around the world, according to the national science academy, the Royal Society. "Concerns exist over acidification and its potential, within decades, to severely affect marine organisms, food webs, biodiversity and fisheries," the society said in a paper released yesterday. The oceans are becoming more acidic as they store more carbon dioxide from the rising levels in the Earth's atmosphere. Oceans store about 50 times more carbon dioxide than the atmosphere, and they have absorbed more than 30 percent of the carbon dioxide released by human activity. The Royal Society is planning to hold a workshop on the issue in Wellington on September 9. Carbon dioxide-saturated oceans pose a threat to New Zealand's corals, crustaceans and shellfish, because they may thin the calcium carbonate shells not only of the adult organisms, but their juvenile stages. Acidification may also be threatening calcifying algae which cover 80 percent of the Otago coast and provide the habitat for larvae of species such as paua and kina. Mussels, Pacific and Bluff oysters, paua and scallops make up a $300 million industry. A key form of calcium carbonate, aragonite, which is used by corals and other sea life may become less available before the middle of the century, according to Professor Keith Hunter, head of Otago University's chemistry department. A National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) scientist at the university, Dr Philip Boyd, said kina, mussels, oysters, and paua were among important coastal species which could be affected. In the open ocean micro-organisms such as some plankton at the base of global food webs may be left with weaker and thinner shells. "We will see a significant 'tipping point' in terms of ocean chemistry by as early as 2030," said Dr Boyd. "We may see the shells of some of these 'calcifiers' dissolve". Both scientists emphasised there were huge gaps in knowledge of how marine life and ecosystems would change, but said the only plausible way to slow down the changes was to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. Coastal organisms may have extra resilience because the conditions in which they live vary naturally, and corals in the southern fjords may also have some adaptions in place because of acidic tannins in bush run-off. But Antarctic ecosystems will be very vulnerable, because colder water can take up more carbon dioxide, and many cold-water organisms such as corals are slow-growing. Proposals for helping aquaculture adapt have included breeding species capable of tolerating acidity, reducing the acidity of water in which larval stages develop, and changing the species farmed. Prof Hunter said Australian research had shown that Sydney rock oysters could be selectively bred to tolerate higher levels of acidity. "There may be some future for the aquaculture industry to adapt," he said. The September workshop has been planned to alert government and private sector agencies to the scientific and technical issues, and to inform scientists of the most important priorities in future research. http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2406762/Scientists-warn-on-ocean-acidification Spectre of seas without shells By ABIGAIL SMITH - The Dominion Post | Wednesday, 13 May 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2407518s-13May09.jpg) POISONED SEA: Abigail Smith says the oceans are becoming more acidic by the day, affecting the ability of shellfish and coral to create the shells and skeletons vital to their survival. — REUTERS. Remember Silent Spring? It was in 1962 that Rachel Carson's book alerted the world to the problems of the insecticide DDT in the food chain. Birds of prey were particularly vulnerable, with their eggshells becoming so thin they could no longer contain growing embryos. The threat of springtime with no birdsong catapulted the world into a new awareness of ecology and conservation. Forty-seven years on, a new threat is looming, this time in the sea. Once again the busy rhythm of people is causing an ecological crisis. Not as complicated as modelling global warming, not as simple as banning a pesticide, our newest planetary drama is called ocean acidification. It happens because of the connections between air, water, and shells. We know that human activities, particularly the burning of coal, oil, petrol and wood, have for the past 200 years increased the amount of carbon dioxide, or CO2, in the atmosphere. While these molecules float around in the air, they act like a blanket keeping Earth warm and eventually changing the whole climate. The warming effects of CO2 have been less than they could have been, however, because about a third of CO2 from the air gets mopped up by the oceans. What's good for global climate change, however, is bad for the sea. When you add CO2 to sea water, it becomes more acid. And that means that the carbonate ion, CO3, gets scarcer. That might seem like no big deal, but many marine plants and animals use carbonate, along with calcium, for constructing protection and structure. Clams, snails, urchins, corals, some algae, and many plankton all use calcium carbonate (CaCO3) to build their shells. Marine ecologists have only just begun to investigate the potential problems that a more acid ocean might pose to creatures in the sea. What they have found so far is alarming. Tiny plankton, zillions of which form part of the basis of the marine food chain, are usually protected by a robust and complex ball of carbonate. But when you grow them in more acid conditions, these little shells become thinner and more frail. Even more alarming, experiments with corals show that under acid conditions, some do not make a skeleton. They sit there like a jelly glob with no sign of the complex architecture that makes coral reefs so diverse and so attractive to tourists - and to fish. This isn't just a problem for squishy marine critters. Marine aquaculture and multimillion-dollar fisheries such as mussel farming are likely to be affected. Tourism to coral reefs is another multimillion-dollar industry, and some economies are wholly reliant on it. There is even the suggestion that a more acid ocean could be more corrosive and thus affect shipping and ports. The sea is growing more acid by the day. Early estimates suggested that acidity could go up 30 per cent by the end of this century. Now scientists are warning that, in the Southern Ocean, we could be seeing measurable changes within a few decades. The effects of what we have already pumped into the air are probably irreversible. There are no practical solutions or cures - no antacid for the sea's indigestion. The only thing we can do is to slow it down. Luckily, we already want to reduce carbon emissions and know we need to stop the invisible clouds of CO2 rising into the air. We already have mechanisms in place to change how we live and travel. Ocean acidification provides another, and perhaps a more urgent, reason for continuing on this path as fast as possible. We still have birds of prey. That is because people cared, listened and took action. Ordinary gardeners stopped using DDT, and eventually governments also responded. Now you can't buy DDT and you can't spray it around. Geologists, who specialise in the long- term view, are beginning to call the present time period the anthropocene epoch. They mean that the activities of humans are so pervasive that they will be the dominant signal in the geologic record of our time. So far it appears that the anthropocene will be renowned for its great extinction event - a period in which Earth became so unhealthy that hundreds of species of animals and plants ceased to be. Given that acidification is to be added to the effects of coastal pollution, ongoing development, sedimentation and over-fishing, it is not surprising that our coastal ecosystems are set to crash. We can choose to make a difference. Just don't drive. Turn off the power. Think about all those millions of plankton making their complex and perfect skeletons. Think about that exhaust, puffing out the back of every car, each little bit of CO2 heading into the air, into the sea, a little drop of poison for our planet. Each of us can make small differences. Think about what you could do, today, to save just one plankton, just one coral. Because a sea without shells is like springtime without birds. • Associate Professor Abigail M Smith is a geochemist in the Marine Science Department at the University of Otago. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/2407463/Spectre-of-seas-without-shells Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 30, 2009, 03:16:24 am Tip of the iceberg for wonder By KATARINA FILIPE - The Timaru Herald | Friday, 29 May 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2455059s-29May09.jpg) ADRIFT: Wintry conditions have blown icebergs down to the southern end of the Tasman Glacier terminal lake. Iceberg fans are in for a treat this winter. More than 50 icebergs of all shapes and sizes have been blown down to the southern end of the Tasman Glacier terminal lake, giving people the chance for a close inspection. Strong winds at Aoraki Mount Cook blew the icebergs down the lake and cold temperatures froze the waters around them, leaving them stuck in place. Glacier Explorers operations manager Bede Ward said it was a "fitting finale to an absolutely bumper season". "All the ice in the lake will be our iceberg ‘stock’ for next summer." Glacier Explorers passengers have seen the largest iceberg calvings on the terminal lake since the season began last September. In the most significant single calving in the lake's 25-year existence, a giant slab of ice about 250 metres long by 250m wide by 80m high plunged into the lake, causing a three-metre tidal wave on February 10. A second iceberg about quarter of the size calved from the face soon afterwards. The event followed a huge chunk of turquoise basal ice eight metres wide and 30m high calving from an iceberg into the lake on February 04. Mr Ward said reports of the retreat of the two-million-year-old, 27-kilometre-long Tasman Glacier had been a great drawcard for business. "We're getting more and more icebergs now so we're naming them in order to track and communicate changes," he said. Since the terminal lake began forming in 1973, the Tasman Glacier's retreat had quickened because the lake was expanding all the time and causing a more rapid melt of the glacier face, Mr Ward said. "From now on I think we may be looking at major calving from the terminal face as an annual event." http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/2454997/Tip-of-the-iceberg-for-wonder Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on May 30, 2009, 06:48:00 am Quote Iceberg fans are in for a treat this winter. Are people these something like train spotters? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 27, 2009, 02:27:12 pm Ice caps melting — astronaut REUTERS | 12:52AM - Monday, 27 July 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2677927s-27Jul09.jpg) EARTH BELOW: Space Shuttle Endeavour is seen docked to the International Space Station. A Canadian astronaut, returning to space after 12 years, says Earth's ice caps appear to be melting. — NASA. A Canadian astronaut aboard the International Space Station says it looks like Earth's ice caps have melted since he was last in orbit 12 years ago. Bob Thirsk, who is two months into a planned six-month stay aboard the station, said he is mostly in awe when he looks out the window, particularly at the sliver of atmosphere wrapped around the planet. "It's a very thin veil of atmosphere around the Earth that keeps us alive," Thirsk said during an in-flight news conference. "Most of the time when I look out the window I'm in awe. But there are some effects of the human destruction of the Earth as well. "This is probably just a perception, but I just have the feeling that the glaciers are melting, the snow capping the mountains is less than it was 12 years ago when I saw it last time," Thrisk said. "That saddens me a little bit." If Thrisk needs a sympathetic ear, he has 12 crewmates with him, at least until Tuesday, when visiting shuttle Endeavour astronauts are scheduled to depart. The astronauts delivered a Japanese-built experiment platform, installed new batteries for the station's solar power system and stashed spare parts to keep the station operational after shuttles are retired next year after seven more flights. The $100 billion station, a project of 16 nations, is nearing completion after more than a decade of work. Endeavour astronauts Chris Cassidy and Tom Marshburn are scheduled for a fifth spacewalk on Monday to rewire a station gyroscope, fix insulation on its Canadian-built robot and install television cameras needed to guide a Japanese cargo vessel into its docking port. The HTV cargo hauler is slated for its debut flight in September. "All in all I think it's an extremely successful mission in spite of a lot of really interesting curveballs that have been thrown our way," Endeavour commander Mark Polansky told reporters. The latest glitch occurred on Saturday when the station's US air-scrubber shut down, prompting NASA to call in extra flight controllers to oversee the device manually. The machine strips deadly carbon dioxide, a by-product of respiration, from the station's air. "It's not something that we want to do long term, because (of) the number of commands we have to send from the ground. But in the short term, we've got the carbon dioxide removal system back up and running and operating at close to its normal capacity," Smith said. A backup air-scrubber is due to be launched aboard NASA's next shuttle mission, targeted for launch in August. Endeavour is due back at the Kennedy Space Centre in Florida on Friday. http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/2677865/Ice-caps-melting-astronaut Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 28, 2009, 05:22:30 pm Maybe global warming has not come here yet its freezing cold,
I was expecting sunny days and my own beach ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 28, 2009, 05:46:11 pm I was expecting sunny days and my own beach ::) In Woodville? :o ::) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/TooFunny.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingPinkPanther.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ROFLMAO_Dog.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingHard.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ItchyBugga.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 28, 2009, 05:58:35 pm I was in woodville once when the sun shone [well actually, I've been in Woodville often - just not usually when the sun was shining] - and I'm sure theres a beach somewhere near the bridge over the Manawatu....
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 28, 2009, 07:08:46 pm We do get realy hot days in the summer but its freezing cold right now and there is still no sign of my beach yet. :o
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 30, 2009, 06:41:08 pm Arctic tundra hotter, boosts global warming REUTERS | 9:39AM - 30 July 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2703430s-30Jul09.jpg) GETTING HOT IN HERE: Arctic tundra around the world are heating up rapidly and boosting the process of global warming. — REUTERS. Regions of Arctic tundra around the world are heating up very rapidly, releasing more greenhouse gases than predicted and boosting the process of global warming, a leading expert said. Professor Greg Henry of the University of British Columbia also said higher temperatures meant larger plants were starting to spread across the tundra, which is usually covered by small shrubs, grasses and lichen. The thicker plant cover means the region is getting darker and absorbing more heat. He said tundra covers about 15 percent of the world's surface and makes up around 30 percent of Canadian territory. Henry, who has been working in the Arctic since the early 1980s, said he had measured "a very substantial change" in the tundra over the last three decades, citing greater emissions and plant growth. Since 1970, he said, temperatures in the tundra region had risen by one degree Celsius per decade — equal to the highest rates of warming found anywhere on the planet. "We're finding that the tundra is actually giving off a lot more nitrous oxide and methane than anyone had thought before," Henry told reporters on a conference call from Resolute in the northern Canadian territory of Nunavut. "We're really trying to get a handle on this because if (further tests show) that's true, this actually changes the entire greenhouse gas budget for the North, and that has global implications," he said. Scientists blame climate change on a surge in emissions of greenhouse gases. The effects in Canada's North and Arctic regions have been particularly notable. Henry said his research station in Nunavut had recorded record high temperatures virtually every summer since the early 1990s. The warmer temperatures mean plants are growing bigger and faster, while larger species are spreading northward. "The tundra is getting a lot weedier all the way around the globe. This has major implications," said Henry, who also chairs an international project studying tundra. "You're changing the color of the surface of the earth by making it darker... so the consequence of that is increased warming again." Some scientists also fear that as the permafrost in the Arctic melts, it will release vast amounts of carbon and methane into the atmosphere. http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2703353/Arctic-tundra-hotter-boosts-global-warming Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 11, 2009, 01:51:54 pm Hotel collapses in Taiwan typhoon Climate-change havoc Stuff.co.nz (http://www.stuff.co.nz) with Associated Press | Monday, 10 August 2009 A six-story hotel in Chihpen, Taitung county, Taiwan collapses and plunges into a river after floodwaters eroded its base as typhoon Morakot passed through the area. The Typhoon caused the worst flooding in the area in 50 years. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2737127s-10Aug09.jpg) The hotel on a lean before collapsing. — Associated Press/ETTV Television. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2737132s-10Aug09.jpg) The hotel begins to topple. — Associated Press/ETTV Television. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2737134s-10Aug09.jpg) The toppling hotel hits the water. — Associated Press/ETTV Television. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/2737141s-10Aug09.jpg) The full weight of a six storey hotel creates an enormous splash. — Associated Press/ETTV Television. http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/2737145/Hotel-collapses-in-Taiwan-typhoon Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Ferney on August 11, 2009, 01:58:19 pm Worst flooding in 50 years. Wow!
50 years is a just a speck in time. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 11, 2009, 02:57:11 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons/789TheTaskOfReducingEmissions11Aug0.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 02, 2009, 01:01:23 pm The NATs “do” enviroment stuff.... (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons/2823908sItsACompromise02Sep09.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 24, 2009, 08:52:04 pm Global Warning Faced with one of the great questions of our time — whether the Earth’s current warming is caused by humans – economist Gareth Morgan did what only a philanthropist can do: hired some top scientists to give him the answer. By JOANNE BLACK - The Listener | Vol.218 No.3600 - May 09-15, 2009 Riding her motorbike north through Alaska, or across the Sahara, Joanne Morgan would occasionally pause to point out something — desertification, perhaps, or dying forests — and say to her husband, “See that? That’s caused by global warming.” “I got bloody sick of it, to be honest,” Gareth Morgan says now. “And finally I said to her, ‘Joanne, for God’s sake, you can’t possibly make such sweeping statements‘.” Her answer was that if he had read Tim Flannery’s climate-change book The Weather Makers, as she had, then he would understand. So, he started reading it, but instead of being convinced that human activity — most notably the burning of fossil fuels — was causing global warming, Morgan finished each page with more questions than answers. He decided to hire some climate change policy researchers to investigate. Early last year, he again read Flannery’s book, this time while heading to Antarctica, rolling around in an icebreaker in the Southern Ocean, accompanied by friend and writer John McCrystal, also a climate change sceptic. “I was intrigued, but I wasn’t convinced by the arguments for anthropogenic [from human activity] global warming,” Morgan says in his company boardroom in a downtown office block overlooking Wellington Harbour. “I’m naturally sceptical about everything. God, I come from the financial sector and you get pretty sceptical about people’s behaviour there.” His researchers returned with papers that were no use because they were about policy, “and I didn’t even know if climate change was true. I thought, isn’t it intriguing that countries are spending all this public policy money yet we don’t take the first step, which is to ask, ‘What is the problem we are trying to solve?’” After speaking to Victoria University Professor of Geology Peter Barrett, Morgan decided to hire the best scientists in the world on both sides. The result is Morgan and McCrystal’s new book Poles Apart — Beyond the Shouting, Who’s Right About Climate Change? Morgan likens the process to being on a jury: hearing all the evidence from both sides, but also subjecting the scientists to rigorous questioning and cross-examination before deciding which side has the most scientific credibility. Along the way, Morgan and McCrystal became deeply exasperated with what they considered the equal willingness of both camps to be activists for their cause, obscuring efforts to get at the science. “People have very emotive, very predetermined views, and that typifies both sides,” says Morgan. “We’ve had some heated sessions with our alarmist scientists where they’ve been on the verge of walking out, saying, ‘How dare you question our conclusions?’ I had to keep saying, ‘Look, I have a completely open mind.’ But their fervour has caught the public, so they have found themselves – on the basis of partial knowledge – being rounded into either camp rather than simply being able to ask for some clarity and for someone to explain why it’s true and why it isn’t. “If I had one message, it is, ‘For God’s sake, stay objective, don’t get wound up by either side’s polemics and emotion,’” says Morgan. “It’s like people feel they must have a cause, and it turns reasonable people into nutters and they don’t see it. They only see it on the other side. I would say to the guys who helped me, ‘I don’t want to know about the other stuff, this is a scientific inquiry, for Christ’s sake’, and they’d get really offended. They might be professors and they’re not used to being spoken to like that; they are used to intimidating the public because the public is ignorant.” Initially, Morgan says he and McCrystal were like weathervanes, persuaded by whatever they had just read. “You’d read a paper in the morning that said climate change was nonsense, and it would convince you, then in the afternoon you’d pick up a paper [that was] predicting hellfire and brimstone and us all being dead by dawn, and that would convince you.” During their researching, both men learnt a lot of science. In doing so they have crystallised for themselves and their readers the core arguments of both sides of the climate change debate, and decided that anthropogenic global warming is the more credible argument. “Are we satisfied as jurors that it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the cause of the warming is anthropogenic?” asks Morgan. “No, we’re not. But if we rephrase the question and ask, if, on the weight of the evidence presented, we think the cause of the warming is anthropogenic or natural, then we would say anthropogenic. But I would bear in mind that John Maynard Keynes quote with which we end the book, ‘When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?’ There could be some new development out tomorrow that makes us all look like chumps.” Clearly, although they’re open to that possibility, the pair think it unlikely. Science, they explain, is on the side of global warming having human causes, notwithstanding huge variations in the world’s climate long before humans evolved. Although there is endless argument about global temperatures in the past, the measurements since about 1900, and certainly more recently, are sufficiently reliable for there to be general agreement that in recent decades to 1998, the world’s temperature warmed, although temperatures have been stable in the past 10 years. But a decade does not mean much in the scale of climate change, and the trend is still for increasing warmth. Even if the historical temperature statistics can be disputed (and they are), the pair say there is no argument that warmth causes ice to melt. And at the North Pole, ice is melting very quickly because Arctic temperatures have increased at almost twice the average global rate over the past 100 years. Poles Apart says that after the thaw of 2007, Arctic sea ice was at its lowest recorded level since satellite-borne microwave measurements began in 1978; the thaw of 2008 was the second lowest. Other studies, using the best estimates, suggest that in the mid-20th century the Arctic was the warmest it had been since records began in 1840, and it has continued to warm since then. A similar level of thawing is not occurring in the Antarctic, but this, according to scientists, does not mean Arctic thawing can be shrugged off as a regional rather than a global-climate-related event. For a start, the Antarctic has a much denser thermal mass so can stay cooler longer. Further, the Arctic ice is thinner, so when it cracks apart it exposes the dark ocean water to the sun. Ice reflects heat back into space but the ocean absorbs that heat. Because of that, one of the concerns is that the Arctic risks entering a “vicious feedback loop”. The Arctic picture is interesting, and possibly disturbing, depending on your point of view, but like many other observable changes — the expanding Gobi Desert, the devastation caused by pests in areas where cold would normally have killed them off, coral bleaching — evidence that the world is warming is not the same as evidence that human behaviour, such as burning fossil fuels, is the cause. After all, as Morgan points out, in its history the Earth has been warmer than it is now. It has gone without ice for millions of years. And even knowing that ice-core data shows the speed of the current warming is without precedent in 2-5 millennia does not in itself mean this current period — which falls outside the cycle of warming caused by the rhythms of the sun — is man-made. It is unusual, yes; it is fast, yes, but are humans to blame? Yes to that, too, Poles Apart concludes. The burning of fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide in which the carbon isotopes occur in a different ratio to that of CO2 released in the pre-industrial era. Results from isotope ratio mass spectrometers can and do accurately reveal that the increased CO2 in the atmosphere comes from the combustion of fossil fuel, and CO2 is one of the gases that is creating an excessive greenhouse effect, partly by increasing the rate of evaporation, which means there is more water vapour in the atmosphere. The vapour is itself a greenhouse gas, trapping infrared radiation in the atmosphere and thus warming the Earth. There is much, much more to the theory and science of global warming than this, including the latent heat already in the oceans (the heat stored in the top 3.2m of the ocean is equivalent to the amount of heat in the entire atmosphere, scientists conclude), which means even if humans stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, there is still at least another 50 years’ worth of “committed warming” to be experienced. And, plainly, humans will not stop burning fossil fuels tomorrow. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which the two authors seem to conclude is as willing as any other participant in the debate to play politics, forecasts that if atmospheric CO2 doubles from its pre-industrial levels of 280 parts per million, and beyond the current 387ppm to 560ppm (which the IPCC considers a “low-emissions scenario”), the climate is likely to warm by about 3°. So far, it has warmed by about 0.8° over the past 150 years. Actual numbers are hard to predict because there are a number of significant moderating effects on temperatures, in particular clouds, which are extremely difficult to factor into computer modelling of the climate. The IPCC’s “mid-range” scenario of emissions suggests concentrations of CO2 could reach 800ppm by 2100, which could mean an increase of 3.3° from present levels. And as Poles Apart points out, if 3° doesn’t sound like much, people should remember that in any 50-year period, the average temperature varies by usually no more than 0.2°, and there is no evidence Earth has ever been, on average, in the period of human habitation, more than 2° warmer than it is now. Nor is there evidence to suggest Homo sapiens have experienced higher atmospheric CO2 levels than currently exist. “If we accept the theory of anthropogenic global warming, we must at least evaluate the prospect that we may soon be inhabiting a world whose climate is different to that to which our species has adapted,” Morgan and McCrystal say in Poles Apart. “After all, greenhouse-gas concentrations seem set to keep rising at the equivalent of 1.5ppm of CO2 per year.” In the course of the research McCrystal has gone from being a sceptic to a believer (or an “alarmist”, to use the authors’ terminology) but, like Morgan, he says he is open to evidence that they may have got it wrong. “At this stage it is important to keep open minds. It is still on a knife-edge for me, and it’s always possible something is about to come along that will tip me back the other way, but at the moment there is insufficient evidence to do that.” “The position we reached is that the science of anthropogenic global warming is almost impossible to argue with. Sceptics are light on coherent propositions that stack up against the coherent proposition on the other side.” But McCrystal says what gives the debate its urgency is that no one can wait for absolute certainty because the stakes are too high. Indeed, because the book is devoted to exploring whether global warming is man-made, it ends just when it is getting interesting. If global warming is man-made, what can be done to stop it? In Morgan’s assessment, the scenario is bleak. “If you ask by how much do we have to reduce emissions in order to [make a difference], I look at the numbers that are required and there’s not a show, not a shit-show of that happening. My first pass at it is, ‘You’ve got to be joking‘.” “The IPCC gives a series of scenarios and says, ‘All is not lost.’ I struggle to believe them. I’m a natural pessimist anyway, but the cuts in emissions that are required make me think they’ve put the rose-tinted glasses on in order not to spook everybody. I’m a wee bit in the James Lovelock camp in the sense that I think, ‘Shit, it’s a tall order.’ You’ve got to hope the scientists are wrong about the whole bloody theory, but I don’t think they are.” “But then, how many times in the past have we seen technology solve apparently insurmountable problems? The only thing that worries me about this one is the lag – the lagged effects like the ocean, and by the time we collectively, as a world, say, ‘Crisis! Crisis!’, well, sorry, mate, we should have done that 50 years ago.” The uncertainty over whether global warming is anthropogenic, and then trying to calculate exactly what effect it will have, makes the whole issue a public-policy nightmare, Morgan says. “The dilemma you have as a human being is that to reduce this problem and deal with your carbon footprint, you upset the livelihood of people in other places. Growing crops for biofuels was a classic example. It displaced food crops, which put up the price of food, which might not affect you and me, but in Africa that’s life or death. So, every policy course you take has costs, and every policy has only a probability of being right. It’s not certain, especially in this issue where you’re talking about such long time periods. That’s why it deserves the respect of the public having a reasonable view, rather than getting in camps shouting at each other.” Morgan says the public policy dilemma is akin to former prime minister Robert Muldoon seeing the price of oil rise to $80 a barrel and thinking, “We can’t live with that”, so embarking on a huge programme of borrowing to build the Think Big projects, aimed at greater energy self-sufficiency, only to have the price of oil drop back to $20 a barrel while the country is saddled with debt. “You must look at the counterfactual, which is, ‘What is the cost to society if you’re wrong?’” McCrystal says the danger of saying global warming is already too advanced to stop is that people then say they might as well maintain their levels of consumption and drive their Hummers, “and that may well make the situation worse than it needs to be”. “So, policies to mitigate the effect of global warming mean not only making adaptations to a warmer world, but also making the world the least warm it needs to be from the position we are in now. The bleaker end of the spectrum now seems to be: ‘We can’t stop this, but we still need to act now so the problem does not become even worse than it otherwise threatens to be’.” The pair think any solution must be global, but New Zealand’s role is likely to be small. McCrystal says, “New Zealand is such a tiny contributor to the whole problem, and most of what we do contribute is actually pretty difficult to tackle unless we mean to change everything about the way we live. Needless to say, we are a primary producer and it is our primary production that creates most of our most potent greenhouse gases, and what do we do otherwise? It doesn’t make any sense to cripple ourselves as a country in order to make such a slight difference to the overall problem.” He says although it is not talked about much, global warming will bring benefits to some parts of the world, “and we just happen to be one of them”. “Parts of New Zealand will be better off,” McCrystal says. “New Zealand could be in a position of being a lot more self-sustaining in terms of energy needs than ever before. We probably won’t get much warmer, but we probably will get windier, which, ironically, will make us capable of building wind farms in more locations. We’ll get wetter along the West Coast, which is great for the hydro lakes, and if it is a bit warmer there will be less demand on electricity. “It will be disastrous for the East Coast,” he says. “We’ll get more droughts and pastoral farming will be a thing of the past in areas like Wairarapa, Marlborough and even parts of Canterbury, but there will be other benefits in other parts of the country. “So, if you’re trying to convince New Zealanders that we need to act, and we need to radically change everything about our lives because of global warming, then you need to be asking them to save the planet, not save themselves. And how do you do that? It’s like trying to get Americans to care about the Third World while America is going along quite nicely, thank you. Why should they care? It goes to everything that is fundamental about political philosophy, which is what really excited me about the whole thing.” Morgan says serious efforts to reduce emissions have to include China and India. “There is no point shagging around trying to send an example to outermost Kenya of how they should reduce their carbon footprint. If you really want to have a material impact on carbon emissions, you’d say to China, ‘Stop building those bloody coal-fired power stations.’ Because if we’re looking on the scale of materiality, at the margin of where the next bit of CO2 is coming from, that’s where. “If it’s a global problem, then the global solution is to say, ‘Yes, China, we’ll have free trade with you, but first please do this.’ And both sides will pay the price – some people will be out of work and goods won’t be as cheap. So, we have a deal, right, because we’re both losers. But at least we’re not going to fry. “At the moment we’re on this thing where some are in Kyoto [the protocol] and some are not, and it’s like the World Trade Talks where a round of talks can go for years and then break down. But if global warming is true, we can’t afford that timelag. You can’t afford a GATT-round approach if you want to honour the chance of getting it right.” http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3600/features/13260/printable/global_warning.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 11, 2009, 07:25:41 pm Ice shelf finding ‘debunks claims of sceptics’ By KIRAN CHUG - The Dominion Post | 5:00AM - Wednesday, 11 November 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/3050125s-11Nov09.jpg) DEEP FROZEN: A mooring line encased in platelet ice after being immersed in supercooled water from under the McMurdo Ice Shelf. Alex Gough of Otago University is in the background. — ANDREW MAHONEY. New Zealand scientists say massive ice shelves are protecting Antarctica from experiencing the same rapid decline in sea ice as the Arctic. The research team says the discovery further debunks the claims of sceptics who have pointed to the continent's growth as evidence against global warming. The team was led by Otago University physics researcher Andrew Mahoney, who said the eight-month study focused on a topic scientists understood little about. Dr Mahoney said findings would help climate scientists make predictions about the future. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research oceanographer Mike Williams said the research explained why Antarctic sea ice was not decreasing at a similar rate to that of the Arctic. Figures from America's National Snow and Ice Data Center show that Arctic sea ice shrank by about 4 per cent of 500,000 square kilometres each decade during the past 30 years. By contrast, Antarctic sea ice was not believed to have changed much in size and may have increased slightly. However, Antarctic Research Centre director Tim Naish, who was not part of the research team, said the latest data issued in a report by Nasa indicated that the amount of Antarctic sea ice lost since 2003 could have doubled. Dr Naish said the New Zealand team's findings were exciting as they would help scientists understand which parts of the continent would become vulnerable in the future. Scientists already knew the hole in the ozone layer meant a mass of cold air was channelled over Antarctica, suppressing the effects of warming temperatures. This study added another explanation to why the sea ice was not decreasing rapidly, and provided a more complete response to the questions of global warming sceptics, Dr Naish said. "The simple answer is that the balance of evidence is completely overwhelming." Although the ice shelves provided sea ice with a buffer against warming waters, that buffer would not last forever, he said. Scientists needed now to understand why the ice shelves provided a better buffer in some areas, so as to predict how fast and how much sea levels could rise. This was one of the most serious consequences of climate change, and Dr Naish said it was an area that would be central to discussions in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate change conference next month. The more scientists could do to understand why and predict when sea ice would decrease, would help determine sea level rises, he said. Once the buffer of ice shelves was lost — and Dr Naish said it was unknown how stable they were – the Antarctic sea ice would be less protected from global warming. That could lead to sea-level rises around New Zealand's coastline. Dr Mahoney said the findings meant that in the future climate-change scientists would need to take into account how warm water would interact with ice shelves, and not just floating ice-sheets. Dr Williams said understanding how sea ice would change would help scientists better predict how weather systems would change in the southern hemisphere. ————————————————————————— WHAT THE SCIENTISTS FOUND
Arctic sea ice:
Antarctic sea ice:
Source: National Snow and Ice Data Center, Boulder, Colorado. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/3050096/Ice-shelf-finding-debunks-claims-of-sceptics (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/3050096/Ice-shelf-finding-debunks-claims-of-sceptics) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on November 12, 2009, 07:12:01 am And if all else fails, you merely silence [literally] thopse critics who disagree with the Global Warming Machine...
Quote Outspoken journalist and author Ian Wishart has been put on mute at a climate science conference. Wishart, whose book Air Con is sceptical about man-made global warming, was appalled to be shut out of a phone conference with New Zealand's top climate scientists yesterday. Organisers admitted muting Wishart's phone for "time management" because there were 25 journalists trying to ask questions of the five assembled scientists in Wellington. "What they were after was a carefully stage-managed presentation," Wishart told The Press. "In my view it was a propaganda stunt." http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/3054281/Muted-Wishart-angry-at-scientists Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 12, 2009, 05:28:39 pm Seas may rise even higher By KIRAN CHUG - The Dominion Post | 5:00AM - Thursday, 12 November 2009 Scientists are predicting seas will rise higher than the levels the Environment Ministry advises local councils to plan for. Delegates in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate change conference next month are to be told of the new predictions, which draw on new satellite images of Greenland and Antarctica. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted a sea level rise of up to 59 centimetres by the end of the century. However, the director of the Antarctic Research Centre, Tim Naish, said the international community now believed sea levels could rise by 1.9 metres. Environment Minister Nick Smith said the Government was working on establishing a national environmental standard on planning for sea levels, which he hoped would be in place next year. He hoped to put the standard out for consultation next year, but said it was likely that councils would still be required to plan for a rise of 59cm. "The Government is not going to consider adjusting its policy every week," Dr Smith said. In its advice to councils, the ministry says that as sea levels rise, more high tides will flood coastal land. Waves will have more chance of attacking backshores and foredunes, and erosion of beaches will worsen. More estuaries and harbours will flood, cliffs will retreat, and existing coastal defences could be damaged. That could leave the land and buildings behind existing sea walls without protection. Ministry senior analyst Warren Gray said the current advice to councils was to plan for a sea level rise of 50cm, and consider what a rise of 80cm could mean. He said some were planning for sea level rises of up to 1.5 metres. "We want people to be safe, but not building defences that are not necessary," he said. A new IPCC report is not expected to be published until 2013, but Dr Gray said that if an interim report was completed, the ministry's advice could be reviewed. The new data was presented at a media briefing held by the Science Media Centre and NZ Climate Change Centre in Wellington yesterday. Dr Naish said he believed that the new figures would impress the urgency of the problem upon policy makers. They were particularly relevant for New Zealand, where such a large portion of the population lived on the coastline, he said. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/3054107/Seas-may-rise-even-higher (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/3054107/Seas-may-rise-even-higher) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on November 15, 2009, 02:02:33 pm East coast swelters as heatwave continues
(http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,7174400,00.jpg) THE heat has left Melbourne and Adelaide sweltering will hit Sydney this week bringing temperatures nearing 40C tomorrow and remaining in the high 30s though to next weekend. And there is no relief in sight just yet. High temperatures are expected for the rest of summer. The bureau predicts minimum temperatures will be well above average from November to January. Emergency services on alert In South Australia emergency crews were kept busy containing a series of blazes in blistering heat, with three of the largest fires destroying nearly 300ha. On Yorke Peninsula, farm machinery is believed to have started a 60ha grass fire at Maitland about 11.30am. Six Country Fire Service appliances, a bulk water carrier and specialist farm units brought the flames under control within an hour and protected a house. At Wynarka, about 50km east of Murray Bridge, about 200ha was destroyed in a grass fire on the Tailem Bend-Karoonda road that started at about 1pm. Police closed the road after visibility was reduced because of thick smoke, and re-opened it by 3.30pm. CFS spokeswoman Karina Loxton appealed for continued vigilance over the coming few days. "We urge everyone to do the right thing and watch their activities, particularly in total fire ban areas," she said. Meanwhile, a number of events have been cancelled today due to the heat. These include the Rundle Street Market, The Big Aussie Swap event that was to have been held in Whitmore Square, the Gilles St markets and the Ovarian Cancer Challenge Walkathon scheduled for 10am at Semaphore. Monarto zoo is also closed due to the threat of bushfires. In Victoria temperatures in the Mallee region are predicted to hit 41C on Saturday and Sunday and 37C on Monday. Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) state duty officer Dennis Ward warned people conducting their own bushfire preparations in parts of the state without fire restrictions to remain vigilant. "People need to be aware that we've had a long, hot, dry period and it's going to continue for bit,'' he said. "The main thing is that people be aware and be careful, particularly those doing their own fire protection.'' El Nino driving temperatures NSW Bureau of Meteorology senior forecaster Elly Spark said the hot weather was caused by a backdrop of El Nino and a very hot air mass over central Australia. Northwesterly winds, generated by a high-pressure system in the Tasman Sea, were carrying this hot air to the NSW coast. "Generally, conditions over inland NSW have been hot to very hot, and they will continue that way for some time," Ms Spark said. "On November 3, the temperature at Penrith hit 39.4 degrees. "There will be a change on Tuesday, but by the end of the week conditions are going to get very hot again. "On Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, temperatures in western Sydney will be on the rise. "Penrith is expected to have a 37-degree day on Thursday, followed by 39 degrees on Friday." http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26349733-421,00.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 15, 2009, 05:36:14 pm And dont we live in the luck country with its brrrrrrrrr cold weather ::)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 23, 2009, 05:59:29 pm NZ glaciers continuing to shrink NZPA | 10:55AM - Monday, 23 November 2009 New Zealand's glaciers are continuing to shrink, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) says. NIWA's annual end-of-summer survey of the snowline on key South Island glaciers showed they lost much more ice than they gained between April 2008 and March 2009. Scientists flew over 50 glaciers in the Southern Alps and Kaikoura area and photographed the positions of snowlines on glaciers during the survey. NIWA snow and ice scientist Jordy Hendrikx said above-normal temperatures, near or below-normal rainfall and above-normal sunshine were among the reasons for the continued shrinking. This year's snowline was, on average, 95 metres above where it needed to be to keep the ice mass constant, NIWA said. This indicated the loss of glacier mass observed in the 2007-2008 survey had continued. Over the past 33 years, there had been an overall decrease in the glacier mass balance, despite periods where the balance had increased for a few years. http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/3088709/NZ-glaciers-continuing-to-shrink (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/3088709/NZ-glaciers-continuing-to-shrink) Glaciers continue to shrink New Zealand’s glaciers lost significant ice mass again last summer. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research (http://www.niwa.co.nz) | 23 November 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA000r_SnowGraph.jpg) When one portion of snow melts, it takes about two equivalent portions of snow fall to keep a glacier's mass balance the same. The National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research (NIWA) has just released the results of its annual end-of-summer survey of the snowline on key South Island glaciers, showing continued loss of glacier mass. The survey uses a small fixed wing aircraft to fly over 50 glaciers in the Southern Alps and Kaikoura. Scientists take photographs and then analyse the images to determine the position of the snowline after the summer melt but before the first winter snowfall. This provides an index of the mass balance or ’health’ of the glaciers of New Zealand. The survey has been going since 1977. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA001r_RollestonGlacier.jpg) ROLLESTON GLACIER NIWA Snow and Ice Scientist Dr Jordy Hendrikx says weather patterns over the course of the year from April 2008 to March 2009 meant that overall the glaciers had lost much more ice than they had gained. This was mainly due to the combination of above normal temperatures and near normal or below normal rainfall for the Southern Alps during winter, and La Niña-like patterns producing more northerly flows creating normal-to-above normal temperatures, above normal sunshine, and well below normal precipitation for the Southern Alps particularly during late summer. The higher the snowline, the more snow is lost to feed the glacier. On average, the snowline this year was about 95 metres above where it would need to be to keep the ice mass constant. This indicates that the loss of glacier mass observed in 2007-08 has continued. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA002r_GodleyAndClassenGlaciers.jpg) GODLEY & CLASSEN GLACIERS (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA003r_AorakiAndTasmanGlacierAand.jpg) AORAKI-MOUNT COOK, TASMAN GLACIER & HOCHSTETTER ICEFALL (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA004r_AorakiAndTasmanGlacierLake.jpg) AORAKI-MOUNT COOK & TASMAN GLACIER TERMINAL LAKE When studying and reporting what is happening to glaciers, it is important to look at more than one factor. The position of the end of summer snowline is only part of the story; in New Zealand, an estimated 90% of ice loss from glaciers since 1976 is due to down-wasting and lake calving. NIWA’s snowline surveys show an overall decrease in the glacier mass balance (and thereby volumes) over the past 33 years — but this is punctuated by periods where the prevailing weather conditions caused the glacier mass balance to increase for a few years. Similarly, glacier terminus position (the “length” of a glacier) can be misleading when considered on its own because total volume can be decreasing even while terminus length is increasing. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA005r_BonarGlacierAndMountAspiri.jpg) BONAR GLACIER & MOUNT ASPIRING (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA006r_ParkPass.jpg) PARK PASS (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/NIWA007r_TutokoAndTheDonneGlacier.jpg) MOUNT TUTOKO & DONNE GLACIER For more information, contact: Dr Jordy Hendrikx NIWA Snow & Ice Scientist Mob: +64 21 039 4711 For images: Large sized high resolution glacier photographs and graphs showing the changes in glacier ice mass can be downloaded at ftp://ftp.niwa.co.nz/niwamedia/glaciers (http://ftp://ftp.niwa.co.nz/niwamedia/glaciers). Background information: 1. Worldwide, glaciers are regarded as a useful indicator of global warming, but New Zealand’s glaciers are more complicated because they have their source in areas of extremely high precipitation. West of the Main Divide in the Southern Alps, more than 10 metres (10 000 mm) of precipitation falls each year as clouds are pushed up over the sharply rising mountain ranges. This means the mass and volume of New Zealand’s glaciers is sensitive to changing wind and precipitation patterns as well as to temperature. So, for example, the glaciers advanced during most of the 1980s and 1990s when the area experienced about a 15% increase in precipitation, associated with more El Niño events and stronger westerly winds over New Zealand. The glaciers in parts of Norway are similar. 2. Despite the sensitivity of New Zealand glaciers to changes in both precipitation and temperature, the volume of ice in the Southern Alps dropped by roughly 50% during the last century. New Zealand’s temperature increased by about 1°C over the same period. 3. Globally, most glaciers are retreating. Of the glaciers for which there are continuous data from the World Glacier Monitoring Service, the mean annual loss in ice thickness since 1980 remains close to half a metre per year. The Service has said that the loss in ice mass “leaves no doubt about the accelerating change in climatic conditions”. For world glacier data, see www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms (http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms) 4. The level of the glacier snowlines is not necessarily closely related to the amount of snow that falls on the country’s ski fields during winter. Most of the popular ski fields are east of the Main Divide, or in the North Island. Mount Hutt, for instance, gets its snow from big southeasterlies, whereas most of the glaciers are fed by westerlies. The melt season is also of critical importance, so while a glacier may receive “normal” snow accumulation, it could be subject to above normal melt and the net result is a higher snowline and less ice. 5. An estimated 90% of the ice loss from New Zealand glaciers in the Southern Alps since 1976 is due to down-wasting and lake calving mainly from 12 of the largest glaciers on the eastern side of the main divide. These processes are:
http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/glaciers-continue-to-shrink2 (http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/glaciers-continue-to-shrink2) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Sir Blodsnogger on November 24, 2009, 04:31:26 am Are you ready
to meet your maker? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 24, 2009, 02:08:23 pm Shrinking glaciers curtail climbing trips By FLEUR COGLE - The Timaru Herald | 5:00AM - Tuesday, 24 November 2009 Aoraki-Mount Cook's shrinking glaciers are forcing climbers to think more carefully about their excursions into the national park. The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) yesterday released the results of its annual end-of-summer survey of the snowline on key South Island glaciers, showing the glaciers continue to shrink. The news is no surprise to those who know the national park. Veteran mountaineer Gordon Hasell, who has been climbing in the area since the 50s, said that during the 60s the lake at the base of the Tasman Glacier was the same size as the duck pond in Timaru's Botanical Gardens. "It's now about 4km long." With a new lake and the increased exposure of the glacier's moraine walls, climbers were being forced to change the way they approached the park. Mr Hasell said climbers no longer have as easy access to parts of park as they once did. "Now the major effect excess recession has had is a greater dependence on air access." Department of Conservation ranger Ray Bellringer said the changes had been "very spectacular and very noticeable over a period". http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/3090706/Shrinking-glaciers-curtail-climbing-trips (http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/3090706/Shrinking-glaciers-curtail-climbing-trips) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 30, 2009, 05:58:51 pm The future.... (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons/3094310sNoFlashPhotography25Nov09.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 05, 2009, 11:41:50 am Wellington could be more like Venice by 2100 By EMILY WATT - The Dominion Post | 5:00AM - Saturday, 05 December 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/Wellington_2100.jpg) SEA RISE SCENARIO: The computer graphic shows that low-lying parts of central Wellington are at risk of flooding if the sea level rises one metre. If you want to go to the library, you'll get your feet wet, Wellington police will need boats to get to work, and parts of Customhouse Quay might get a bit soggy. Wellington City Council has issued a graphic to show how rising sea levels would affect the capital. "It's important to remember that, for areas such as the CBD, doing nothing is clearly not an option," councillor Ray Ahipene-Mercer said. "Tools like this help us to assess a range of appropriate response options, and will also help people understand why it is important to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." Local authorities should be preparing for a rise of up to one metre in sea levels by 2100, he said. The council was shown the computer-generated graphic this week. It showed, if nothing was done to protect the city centre, low-lying parts were at risk of flooding. Sea level rise could also increase erosion and the effects of storm surge. The council's strategy and policy committee considered this week the draft 2010 climate change action plan. It looked at cutting greenhouse gas emissions and preparing for a rise in temperature and sea level. Mr Ahipene-Mercer said Wellington had assets worth billions of dollars which could be affected, including roads, railway lines and the city centre. The council planned to shift the focus to community emissions rather than just the actions of businesses and organisations. It has set a target to cut community emissions by 3 per cent by June 2013 and committed $35 million towards plans with a climate change focus in its 2009-19 Long-Term Council Community Plan. Projects include walking and cycling plans, intensifying development in the city centre and retro-fitting homes with better insulation. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3129355/Wellington-could-be-more-like-Venice-by-2100 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3129355/Wellington-could-be-more-like-Venice-by-2100) See the following interesting pages on the Wellington City Council website:
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 05, 2009, 03:25:22 pm Galciers were getting smaller in 1888 too... and seeing as that dramatic waterworld graphic of downtown Wellington is being spammed across threads... THE GLACIAL PERIOD. Otago Witness , Issue 1893, 2 March 1888, Page 31 The intense cold of the Glacial Period must not be regarded as having been caused by conditions which were permanent in their nature. The period known to geology as the Ice Age was comparatively recent, but there is little doubt that similar periods of great cold preceded it at widely separated intervals, and that these were not occasioned by any mere terrestrial changes, but must be explained by cosmical causes. The most generally accepted explanation of these remarkable conditions is that the orbit of the earth has been in times past much more eccentric, or elongated, than now. This fact, Dr James Croll remarks in his work, " Climate and Time," would not of itself, perhaps, fully account for the low temperature producing the Glacial Period.; but through physical conditions caused by it this term of severe cold might be induced. It is always, assumed that, owing to the precession of the equinoxes, the winter of. the Northern Hemisphere at this time occurred when the earth was in aphelion, or at the point of its orbit furthest from the sun. Croll estimates that the heat received then 1 at this point would be so much less than now that the mid-winter temperature would be lowered to an enormous extent, and the winters would not only be much colder, but also much longer than now. The result of this would be an enormous accumulation of snow and ice during the winter, which the short summer would not suffice to melt. The influences which brought the Ice Age to a close are supposed by Croll to be a gradual lessening of the eccentricity of the earth's orbit, the movement of the equinoxes bringing the winter solstice of the Northern Hemisphere back to perihelion, or the action of the ocean currents and the trade winds. He supposed, further, that the region of the equator was, during the Glacial Period, submerge — a fact which would tend to the free motion of the waters and the increase of the average warmth of the Southern Hemisphere, and a still further lowering of the temperature on the northern half of the globe. But the elevation of the land about the equator subsequently caused a deflection of the ocean currents northwards and the creation of the great current of the Gulf Stream, which has an enormous influence in the distribution of heat in the Northern Hemisphere. But the important causes bringing the earth up to its present temperature, like those creating the very great depression of the Glacial Period, were those acting from without rather than existing conditions on the surface of the earth itself. http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=OW18880302.2.135.4&srpos=9&e=-------10--1----2%22ice+age%22-all Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 08:17:58 am It's about time they bit back!!
(https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/afro.gif) UN hits back at climate sceptics amid e-mails row The UN's official panel on climate change has hit back at sceptics' claims that the case for human influence on global warming has been exaggerated. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said it was "firmly" standing by findings that a rise in the use of greenhouse gases was a factor. It was responding to a row over the reliability of data from East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit Leaked e-mail exchanges prompted claims that data had been manipulated. Last month, hundreds of messages between scientists at the unit and their peers around the world were put on the internet along with other documents. Some observers alleged one of the e-mails suggested head of the unit Professor Phil Jones wanted certain papers excluded from the UN's next major assessment of climate science. Professor Jones, who denies this was his intention, has stood down from his post while an independent inquiry takes place. In a statement, Professor Thomas Stocker and Professor Qin Dahe, co-chairmen of the IPCC's working group 1, condemned the act of posting the private e-mails on the internet, but avoided commenting on their content. They went on to point to a key finding that states: "The warming in the climate system is unequivocal". "[It] is based on measurements made by many independent institutions worldwide that demonstrate significant changes on land, in the atmosphere, the ocean and in the ice-covered areas of the Earth." "Through further independent scientific work involving statistical methods and a range of different climate models, these changes have been detected as significant deviations from natural climate variability and have been attributed to the increase of greenhouse gases." They added: "The body of evidence is the result of the careful and painstaking work of hundreds of scientists worldwide. "The internal consistency from multiple lines of evidence strongly supports the work of the scientific community, including those individuals singled out in these e-mail exchanges." The row comes ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit which starts on Monday. Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the IPCC, said it was no coincidence the information was released in the run-up to the summit. He claimed unnamed conspirators could have paid for Russian hackers to break into the university computers to steal the e-mails. He said the theft was a scandal and was "probably ordered" to disrupt the confidence negotiators have in the science. Earlier, Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband told the BBC he would be "very surprised" if there had been any wrongdoing on the part of the East Anglia University scientists. "We're in a moment when the world is about to make some big political decisions," he said. "And there will be people who don't want the world to make those big decisions and they are trying to use this in part to say somehow this is all in doubt and perhaps we should put the whole thing off. "Well, I just think they're wrong about that." Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the scientific evidence was "very clear" and called doubters a "flat Earth group". He said: "There is an anti-change group. There is an anti-reform group. There is an anti-science group, there is a flat Earth group, if I may say so, over the scientific evidence for climate change." 'Open and transparent' Meanwhile, the Met Office said it would publish all the data from weather stations worldwide, which it said proved climate change was caused by humans. Its database is a main source of analysis for the IPCC. It has written to 188 countries for permission to publish the material, dating back 160 years from more than 1,000 weather stations. John Mitchell, head of climate science at the Met Office, said the evidence for man-made global warming was overwhelming - and the data would show that. "So this is not an issue of whether we are confident or not in the figures for the trend in global warming, it's more about being open and transparent," he told the BBC. The Met Office said it had already planned to publish the material long before the row and denied reports that government ministers had tried to block the publication. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8397265.stm Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 06, 2009, 09:16:33 am More about that leaked data:
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'? The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That) When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest: Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting: “In an odd way this is cheering news.” But perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause. Here are a few tasters. Manipulation of evidence: I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up: The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate. Suppression of evidence: Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise. Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists: Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted. Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP): ……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back…. And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority. “This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?” “I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !” Hadley CRU has form in this regard. In September – I wrote the story up here as “How the global warming industry is based on a massive lie” - CRU’s researchers were exposed as having “cherry-picked” data in order to support their untrue claim that global temperatures had risen higher at the end of the 20th century than at any time in the last millenium. CRU was also the organisation which – in contravention of all acceptable behaviour in the international scientific community – spent years withholding data from researchers it deemed unhelpful to its cause. This matters because CRU, established in 1990 by the Met Office, is a government-funded body which is supposed to be a model of rectitude. Its HadCrut record is one of the four official sources of global temperature data used by the IPCC. I asked in my title whether this will be the final nail in the coffin of Anthropenic Global Warming. This was wishful thinking, of course. In the run up to Copenhagen, we will see more and more hysterical (and grotesquely exaggerated) stories such as this in the Mainstream Media. And we will see ever-more-virulent campaigns conducted by eco-fascist activists, such as this risible new advertising campaign by Plane Stupid showing CGI polar bears falling from the sky and exploding because kind of, like, man, that’s sort of what happens whenever you take another trip on an aeroplane. The world is currently cooling; electorates are increasingly reluctant to support eco-policies leading to more oppressive regulation, higher taxes and higher utility bills; the tide is turning against Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. The so-called “sceptical” view – which is some of us have been expressing for quite some time: see, for example, the chapter entitled ‘Barbecue the Polar Bears’ in WELCOME TO OBAMALAND: I’VE SEEN YOUR FUTURE AND IT DOESN’T WORK – is now also, thank heaven, the majority view. Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight. But to judge by the way – despite the best efforts of the MSM not to report on it – the CRU scandal is spreading like wildfire across the internet, this shabby story represents a blow to the AGW lobby’s credibility from which it is never likely to recover. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 01:03:41 pm Being there and done that Bennyboo....
It turned out the guy who commissioned the whole thing is a oil Barron with vested interests in both mining and oil. It kind of deflated the whole thing really...... A rather weak case in anyone's books. If only they would show their science backing their claims then perhaps people might listen. Attacking others is pointless unless you have something to back your own claims up... Personally - I wish they were right and we were wrong, I wish it was all just one big mistake and it wasn't happening... But that's not reality. :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 06, 2009, 02:50:03 pm There is no excuse for manipulating to influence such an important area of science Dazza.
There are people grubbing for money all over the global warming industry including bankers, politicians and scientists. Since 1990, Phil Jones, the so called scientist behind the latest scandal, has collected £13,700,000 British pounds (US$22,600,000) in grants... if thats not incentive to make data convenient then I dont know what is. The machine and the show go on with increased urgency - the chorused tones that the debate is over suggests a darker side to me. The debate isnt over for NASA: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_Evidence/ http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_IceCores/ Nor is it over for some former IPCC scientists - as you can see below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEJ5pHVKjiI&feature=player_embedded Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 02:52:56 pm It turned out the guy who commissioned the whole thing is a oil Barron with vested interests in both mining and oil. It kind of deflated the whole thing really...... Where's the proof that it was commissioned by anybody? The first attempt at releasing this information was at the frothing at the mouth humans are bad website Realclimate. When Gavin deleted it, it was then uploaded to Russian servers and then propagated worldwide as people realised the con. It's been spreading like wildfire ever since. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 06, 2009, 03:21:02 pm Well I'll be darned! New Zealand climate agency accused of data manipulation November 25, 9:23 PM Climate scientists in New Zealand today accused the foremost climate-research institution in New Zealand of data manipulation of the same type as the East Anglia Climatic Research Institute (CRU) is alleged to have done. The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (CSC) today issued this paper saying that a graph published by the New Zealand National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) is not only wrong but is the result of painstaking and unjustified adjustment of raw temperature data covering the period from 1853 through 2008, Ian Wishart of The Briefing Room announced today. At issue is a claim by NIWA that the average temperature over New Zealand declined from 1853 to 1909 and then began to rise, and has been rising ever since, at an average rate of +0.92 degree (Celsius) per century. ... Treadgold's group alleges that the NIWA graph was produced, not from the raw data that NIWA supplied, but rather from temperature readings that had been adjusted. The CSC scientists were able to obtain the adjusted dataset from an un-named associate of Dr. M. James Salinger, formerly of NIWA and, before that, of CRU. Comparison of the two datasets shows significant upward adjustments of the post-1909 data and equally significant downward adjustments of the pre-1909 data, thus producing a downtrend and then an uptrend, instead of the nearly flat trend that Treadgold's group found. http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d25-New-Zealand-climate-agency-accused-of-data-manipulation Seems we now have a New Zealand (NIWA) connection to disgraced University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 03:54:15 pm Since 1990, Phil Jones, the so called scientist behind the latest scandal, has collected £13,700,000 British pounds (US$22,600,000) in grants... if thats not incentive to make data convenient then I dont know what is. Not to neglect those emails over how to circumvent certain tax laws. While they might be construed as tax avoidance as opposed to tax evasion it does indicate a desire to maximise profits. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 03:58:56 pm Treadgold's group alleges that the NIWA graph was produced, not from the raw data that NIWA supplied, but rather from temperature readings that had been adjusted. I'll defend NIWA a little. They do have cause to adjust temperatures in that thermometer sites have moved (and so forth.) However in saying that they've adjusted them to certain "international accepted standards", standards that are now, obviously in disrepute. Also interesting is NIWA's adjusted figures "show" even greater temperature increases than they're warmist mates around the globe. Something I consider that demonstrates that NIWA, even by disreputed standards, is cooking the data. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 04:17:50 pm It turned out the guy who commissioned the whole thing is a oil Barron with vested interests in both mining and oil. It kind of deflated the whole thing really...... Where's the proof that it was commissioned by anybody? The first attempt at releasing this information was at the frothing at the mouth humans are bad website Realclimate. When Gavin deleted it, it was then uploaded to Russian servers and then propagated worldwide as people realised the con. It's been spreading like wildfire ever since. The thread is here somewhere - I cant remember it's title thou! Will keep looking. After a very small amount of digging it all became very clear. The guy who first released these hacked emails was the director of a large oil company up US or Canada way - he then moved over into the coal and minerals industry.... Will keep looking. ;D In the meantime - I wouldn't mind seeing some numbers or other explanations explaining the sudden and rapid rises observed... there's all this denial going on but there's nothing behind it - there's nothing on the other side of the equals sign. Remember - the climate doesn't just change 'just because' - there is always a cause, either natural or not. So... if not humans then what (that unanswered question is now well over 5 years old on these XNC board's)?! :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 04:29:12 pm The The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition is funded by Exxon Mobile via The International Climate Science Coalition.
They are also strongly hooked up with ACT and their mate Alan Gibbs.... all $$$$$$$$ minded....... Do you REALLY believe their opinion is unbiased? ??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 04:35:27 pm After a very small amount of digging it all became very clear. The guy who first released these hacked emails was the director of a large oil company up US or Canada way - he then moved over into the coal and minerals industry.... So Realclimate, run by an absolute warmist at heart, is also the director of a large oil company? The things one learns on a chat forum is stunning. Quote In the meantime - I wouldn't mind seeing some numbers or other explanations explaining the sudden and rapid rises observed... there's all this denial going on but there's nothing behind it - there's nothing on the other side of the equals sign. Remember - the climate doesn't just change 'just because' - there is always a cause, either natural or not. So... if not humans then what (that unanswered question is now well over 5 years old on these XNC board's)?! The same things that are causing global warming on other planets in this solar system. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 04:47:28 pm The The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition is funded by Exxon Mobile via The International Climate Science Coalition. A Greenpeace claim isn't that credible you know. Especially since the only proof they've got is that they were paid to attend a conference that was sponsored by Exxon Mobil. It doesn't demonstrate before or afterwards funding. Besides which NIWA is funded by the government. An organisation whose main aim in life is tax. Guess what balmy decision the warmist have come up with as the miraculous solution? Oh, right, an air tax. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 04:55:57 pm So Realclimate, run by an absolute warmist at heart, is also the director of a large oil company? The things one learns on a chat forum is stunning. Who in the world said anything about Real Climate?! Sure wasn't me! But since it has being brought up - here's what Real Climate has to say about it... The CRU hack Filed under: Climate Science — group @ 20 November 2009 As many of you will be aware, a large number of emails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia webmail server were hacked recently (Despite some confusion generated by Anthony Watts, this has absolutely nothing to do with the Hadley Centre which is a completely separate institution). As people are also no doubt aware the breaking into of computers and releasing private information is illegal, and regardless of how they were obtained, posting private correspondence without permission is unethical. We therefore aren’t going to post any of the emails here. We were made aware of the existence of this archive last Tuesday morning when the hackers attempted to upload it to RealClimate, and we notified CRU of their possible security breach later that day. Nonetheless, these emails (a presumably careful selection of (possibly edited?) correspondence dating back to 1996 and as recently as Nov 12) are being widely circulated, and therefore require some comment. Some of them involve people here (and the archive includes the first RealClimate email we ever sent out to colleagues) and include discussions we’ve had with the CRU folk on topics related to the surface temperature record and some paleo-related issues, mainly to ensure that posting were accurate. Since emails are normally intended to be private, people writing them are, shall we say, somewhat freer in expressing themselves than they would in a public statement. For instance, we are sure it comes as no shock to know that many scientists do not hold Steve McIntyre in high regard. Nor that a large group of them thought that the Soon and Baliunas (2003), Douglass et al (2008) or McClean et al (2009) papers were not very good (to say the least) and should not have been published. These sentiments have been made abundantly clear in the literature (though possibly less bluntly). More interesting is what is not contained in the emails. There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords. The truly paranoid will put this down to the hackers also being in on the plot though. Instead, there is a peek into how scientists actually interact and the conflicts show that the community is a far cry from the monolith that is sometimes imagined. People working constructively to improve joint publications; scientists who are friendly and agree on many of the big picture issues, disagreeing at times about details and engaging in ‘robust’ discussions; Scientists expressing frustration at the misrepresentation of their work in politicized arenas and complaining when media reports get it wrong; Scientists resenting the time they have to take out of their research to deal with over-hyped nonsense. None of this should be shocking. It’s obvious that the noise-generating components of the blogosphere will generate a lot of noise about this. but it’s important to remember that science doesn’t work because people are polite at all times. Gravity isn’t a useful theory because Newton was a nice person. QED isn’t powerful because Feynman was respectful of other people around him. Science works because different groups go about trying to find the best approximations of the truth, and are generally very competitive about that. That the same scientists can still all agree on the wording of an IPCC chapter for instance is thus even more remarkable. No doubt, instances of cherry-picked and poorly-worded “gotcha” phrases will be pulled out of context. One example is worth mentioning quickly. Phil Jones in discussing the presentation of temperature reconstructions stated that “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens. The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental. But if cherry-picked out-of-context phrases from stolen personal emails is the only response to the weight of the scientific evidence for the human influence on climate change, then there probably isn’t much to it. There are of course lessons to be learned. Clearly no-one would have gone to this trouble if the academic object of study was the mating habits of European butterflies. That community’s internal discussions are probably safe from the public eye. But it is important to remember that emails do seem to exist forever, and that there is always a chance that they will be inadvertently released. Most people do not act as if this is true, but they probably should. It is tempting to point fingers and declare that people should not have been so open with their thoughts, but who amongst us would really be happy to have all of their email made public? Let he who is without PIN cast the the first stone. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/ Quote In the meantime - I wouldn't mind seeing some numbers or other explanations explaining the sudden and rapid rises observed... there's all this denial going on but there's nothing behind it - there's nothing on the other side of the equals sign. Remember - the climate doesn't just change 'just because' - there is always a cause, either natural or not. So... if not humans then what (that unanswered question is now well over 5 years old on these XNC board's)?! The same things that are causing global warming on other planets in this solar system. ... which is....? And where exactly are you referring to? Still Mars? lol. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 05:01:56 pm The The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition is funded by Exxon Mobile via The International Climate Science Coalition. A Greenpeace claim isn't that credible you know. Especially since the only proof they've got is that they were paid to attend a conference that was sponsored by Exxon Mobil. It doesn't demonstrate before or afterwards funding. Besides which NIWA is funded by the government. An organisation whose main aim in life is tax. Guess what balmy decision the warmist have come up with as the miraculous solution? Oh, right, an air tax. It's not a GreenPeace Claim (or rather - that wasn't what I was referring to anyway). The International Climate Science Coalition is in bed with The Heartland Institute - and The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition is a child of The International Climate Science Coalition. It is well known that The Heartland Institute is largely funded directly by Exxon Mobile and other like minded large money making machines. Besides which NIWA is funded by the government. An organisation whose main aim in life is tax. Lol.. a fair enough comparison that! (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/afro.gif) Of course - it is only recently that NIWA has had any opinion on this matter at all. The same for NASA and NOAA. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 05:21:34 pm So Realclimate, run by an absolute warmist at heart, is also the director of a large oil company? The things one learns on a chat forum is stunning. Who in the world said anything about Real Climate?! Sure wasn't me! Realclimate is where the data was first uploaded (though Gavin did delete it). You're the one going on about some Oil Baron. The point is, your point is irrelevant. ... which is....? And where exactly are you referring to? Still Mars? lol. Plenty of other planets are warming Dazza. Not just Mars. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 06, 2009, 05:25:36 pm Of course - it is only recently that NIWA has had any opinion on this matter at all. The same for NASA and NOAA. ROTFLMAO! Salinger has been a warmist for years. I'm trying to cast my mind back to the lecture that was presented at the University of Otago back in 1988. It boiled done to this topic being a source of Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 05:42:12 pm So Realclimate, run by an absolute warmist at heart, is also the director of a large oil company? The things one learns on a chat forum is stunning. Who in the world said anything about Real Climate?! Sure wasn't me! Realclimate is where the data was first uploaded (though Gavin did delete it). You're the one going on about some Oil Baron. The point is, your point is irrelevant. Yer - the Oil Baron who first (FIRST) released the hacked emails - the guy either did it himself or commissioned (cant remember) a 3rd party to actually hacked into the servers. I'll find it. All of this has nothing what so ever to do with Real Climate thou - other than the fact that they were bombed with it, as were many other sites at the time. ... which is....? And where exactly are you referring to? Still Mars? lol. Plenty of other planets are warming Dazza. Not just Mars. Such as ? Pluto? Please... don't... it just gets sillier and sillier! Come on - blame the sun... I dear you! ;D Deep Solar Minimum April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower. 2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008. Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%). It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. More >> (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 05:44:22 pm Wasn't talking about Salinger - I thought we were talking about NIWA.
It wasn't that long ago (around 4 years perhaps - maybe longer... but not my much) that NIWA had no opinion on the subject what-so-ever. Just the same as NASA and NOAA. Cant remember just what the relevance of that point was thou... I think it was something you brought up.... :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2009, 09:25:50 pm http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0d5_1260036692
Al Gore Buys A 100FT Housboat Tto Save The Climate Former Vice President Al Gore, the Nobel-winning self-proclaimed global prophet of green, has made a lot of money from the so-called “crisis” of global warming. He has profited from best-selling books that tout the looming climatic catastrophe, won an Academy Award for a movie about his slideshow presentation that focuses on his “sky is falling” message about a world on the brink of environmental disaster. His business interests have been focused on the profit side of the equation when it comes to “global warming,” creating a “carbon credits” program that has put millions of dollars into the pockets of Gore and his environmental cronies. There are also financial interests benefiting from the sudden shift to the ‘environmentally friendly’ light bulbs that he has trumpeted so loudly: his friends at General Electric stand to make big money from the congressionally mandated demand for their new light bulbs. There is no question that the alarmism and doomsday scenarios spread by Al Gore have been very, very beneficial to him personally and professionally. But the question persists as to whether he actually buys into what he is selling. His own behavior clearly indicates that he doesn’t believe we are at a “tipping point” of worldwide environmental destruction. While he preaches that the rest of us must dramatically change our lifestyles and lower our standards of living to “save the planet” he lives by another set of rules himself. It happens in the air, where he jets about in private planes that consume massive amounts of energy to spread his message of “conservation.” His hypocrisy is revealed on land, where he travels in fleets of limos and SUVs to deliver speeches about the dire consequences of ignoring “man-made global warming” — and leaves the cars running throughout his entire speech in order to ensure that they will be nice and cool when he exits the building and returns to his gas-guzzling vehicles. His supposedly “green” mansion consumes electricity that dwarfs the consumption of the typical family home. And now, in order to complete his hypocrisy trifecta, Al Gore may now be extending his excessive consumption to the water as well. In an amazing display of conspicuous consumption, even for Al Gore, his new 100-foot houseboat that docks at the Hurricane Marina in Smithville, Tennessee is creating a critical buzz among many of his former congressional constituents. Dubbed “Bio-Solar One,” which may reflect some latent Air Force One envy, Gore has proudly strutted the small-town dock claiming that his monstrous houseboat is environmentally friendly. (Only Al Gore would name his boat B.S. One and not get the joke. Or perhaps the joke is on us?) The boat is a custom-built Fantasy Yacht built specifically for Gore by Bill Austin of Sparta, Tennessee. According to Austin, the engines are bio-diesel fueled and Gore can expect to use about two gallons an hour to cruise Center Hill Lake. With a 500 gallon capacity Austin says Gore won’t need a refill for “two or three years” though he admits having “no clue” about where Gore could get bio-diesel at the lake. The Hurricane Marina dock doesn’t sell it. This boat is going to be the Toyota Prius of the houseboat business,” Austin proclaims. “It is the most eco-friendly houseboat anywhere in the country and is going to revolutionize the houseboat industry. People are increasingly worried about high gas prices and this is the answer.” Austin claims that the “Bio-Solar One” will create 40-50% less carbon emission and use half the fuel of other similar houseboats. “Gore will consume a lot more fuel driving to and from the lake than he will ever use cruising on this houseboat,” Austin asserts. The solar panels have not yet been installed but are expected to arrive from Reno, Nevada “any day” and will be in working order “soon,” says Austin. When the solar panels are installed the Gore boat could power itself and “most of the dock” according to Austin. In the meantime, however, Gore is plugged into the dock as his primary power source. Austin says he has several other potential customers interested in following Gore’s lead. Austin professes reluctance to talk about “other folks business” but notes that a houseboat similar to Gore’s will cost between $500,000 to a million dollars. Austin believes that Gore’s “Bio-Solar One” will set the stage for a lot of sales. Land, air and now the sea. Will space will be the final frontier? Let’s not forget: Gore made similar claims about the environmental benefits of the solar panels and other “green” additions he made to his 10,000 square foot home in Belle Meade, a cushy neighborhood in Nashville, Tennessee. The environmental savings promised from his “investments” failed to produce the results that he touted. In fact, his “energy efficient” renovations to his home actually INCREASED his electrical consumption by 10% rather than producing the promised reductions. Ultimately, Gore’s water-based excursions on his giant houseboat may prove more environmentally friendly than his fleet of limos, his private jets or his mansion. Perhaps the B.S. One will never live up to its nickname, but the jet ski on the boat is clearly powered by something other than solar or bio-diesel. Maybe Al is buying carbon credits from himself to offset that particular energy usage. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=098_1218128385 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2009, 09:33:30 pm (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=331_1178832113 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 06, 2009, 09:56:42 pm PMSL.... like Gore couldn't afford a boat BEFORE he got involved?
Hey sexy - sometimes it pays to read a bit more as well. I note the tub runs on Bio-fuel, only needs refueling once a year (house boats hardly ever move) and is decked out with solar panels enough to supply all the electricity it needs... What a STUPID name though - Bio-Solar-One! B.S.1?! lol... In saying that thou - it is another example of human waste. It's not like he NEEDS it... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2009, 11:16:52 pm Al Gore's Own Inconvenient Truth Posted by Kim Priestap Published: February 26, 2007 - 8:01 PM Al Gore's mansion uses more than twice the electricity in one month than the average household does in an entire year. From the Tennessee Center for Policy Research: Last night, Al Gore's global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy. Gore's mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES). In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh--more than 20 times the national average. Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh--guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore's average monthly electric bill topped $1,359. Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006. Gore's extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore's mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year. "As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use," said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson. In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006. Yikes! Gore is an energy glutton. Now compare this to President Bush's comparatively modest home in Crawford, Texas, which is a model of environmental friendliness: The 4,000-square-foot house is a model of environmental rectitude Geothermal heat pumps located in a central closet circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet deep in the ground where the temperature is a constant 67 degrees; the water heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. Systems such as the one in this "eco-friendly" dwelling use about 25% of the electricity that traditional heating and cooling systems utilize. A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof runs; wastewater from sinks, toilets and showers goes into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is used to irrigate the landscaping surrounding the four-bedroom home. Plants and flowers native to the high prairie area blend the structure into the surrounding ecosystem. No, this is not the home of some eccentrically wealthy eco-freak trying to shame his fellow citizens into following the pristineness of his self-righteous example. And no, it is not the wilderness retreat of the Sierra Club or the Natural Resources Defense Council, a haven where tree-huggers plot political strategy. This is President George W. Bush's "Texas White House" outside the small town of Crawford. http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/02/26/al-gores-own-inconvenient-trut.php Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 07, 2009, 05:10:30 am Yer - the Oil Baron who first (FIRST) released the hacked emails - the guy either did it himself or commissioned (cant remember) a 3rd party to actually hacked into the servers. I'll find it. All of this has nothing what so ever to do with Real Climate thou - other than the fact that they were bombed with it, as were many other sites at the time. Not according to Gavin Smidt. Realclimate got it first (and then deleted it), so your claim that it was commissioned by some Oil Baron is on thin ice. Such as ? Pluto? There are more planets (and objects) than Mars or Pluto that are experiencing global warming. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 07, 2009, 05:24:32 am Wasn't talking about Salinger - I thought we were talking about NIWA. Same thing until recently. I think you'll find NIWA (via Salinger) has been pushing the man-is-bad creed for some time. In fact those leaked emails from East Anglia have correspondence with one Jim Salinger in his NIWA days. Those emails are proving to be more and more useful all the time. As robman pointed out in another thread, global warming is the new religion. Back in the days when Roman Catholicism ruled (Western) Europe Eventually one Using fear is an age old tactic. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 03:03:55 pm The Global warming idea its like a big game of poker all the heavy weights have put all their chips into the pot and gone all in.But whats really going on ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5mRYdZCBxY&feature=rec-fresh+div-r-1-HM Global warming hysteria is new eugenics Posted: August 11, 2007 1:00 am Eastern By Henry Lamb © 2009 The BP oil company ads on television are, or should be, enough to make you never buy another drop of British-Petroleum gasoline. The farmer-type guy who stands there and talks about how wonderful it would be if you could grow a crop, convert it into fuel and put it in your tractor to plant next year's crops is disingenuous, deceptive and disgusting. So is the ad that shows a kid, holding what looks like a sugar beet, talking about making fuel out of the thing he's holding and replanting it year after year. BP airs these ads to suggest that it is working toward converting to this new "natural" fuel. What a joke. If every acre of productive land in America were converted to growing corn, sugar beets or other so-called renewable fuel, it would not come close to meeting the demand. Moreover, it would essentially destroy the environment, since these crops are heavy feeders of both water and soil nutrients. It would force the importation of food from other countries, and the fuel product would cost more per gallon and deliver less energy than petroleum products. This is the future BP's ads suggest, but the company is not alone in its deception. Guru-in-chief Al Gore's relentless tent-revival evangelism calls environmental sinners to the global warming altar to confess their carbon dioxide emissions and to seek baptism in ethanol and salvation in a Toyota Prius. Gore's global warming religion is reminiscent of the eugenics phenomenon in the 20th century. The elite of the scientific community, and well-to-do of the social set, embraced eugenics as the enlightened way to the perfect society. Skeptics were ridiculed, denounced and pointed to as the kind of scum that would be eliminated if eugenics became the official policy of government. Like the eugenics fiasco, the global warming debate left the scientific arena and has become a matter of belief, or social acceptance. The in-crowd "believes" that people are causing global warming and that the only way to stop it is to have government force people to stop using fossil fuel. The in-crowd is no longer interested in science. Their only interest seems to be to discredit the people they call "deniers" and to pressure government into adopting the policies that will ultimately prevent the use of fossil fuels. Gore's army of in-crowd zealots are in precisely the same position the pro-eugenics in-crowd occupied when they convinced Hitler's government to implement the policies necessary to advance their point of view. Should Gore's army prevail, the consequences will take longer than Hitler's violence but the end result will be quite similar: The destruction of a significant portion of society. At U.N. Climate Change meetings, Non-Government Organizations function much like the "local eugenics societies" in a prior century, lobby the policy makers to deny developing countries the use of fossil fuel and promote the use of solar panels and windmills. Consequently, thousands of people die each day, needlessly, because they do not have access to affordable energy to power water pumps, refrigerators, stoves, transportation and factories. Just as the eugenics advocates had little or no concern for the people who did not measure up to their standards of genetic perfection, global warming advocates seem to have little or no concern for the people who are, or will be, denied the benefits of abundant, affordable energy. Note that the most verbose proponents of restrictive global warming policies are eager to tell everyone else to avoid the use of fossil fuels, and then they get on their private jets and return to their private mansions, powered by fossil fuels. Al Gore used tons of fossil fuel to jet his entourage to Singapore, where he lambasted the "deniers" who have the audacity to disagree with the in-crowd – even though their disagreement is based on a mountain of scientific evidence. Gore whines about what he calls the "big oil" industry spending $10 million per year advancing their anti-global warming views. But he fails to mention that government and foundations are spending several billion – billion with a "B" – each year to promote their global warming religion. Like the eugenics fiasco, in the end the truth will prevail. Science will prevail, and the nonsense preached by guru-Gore will be rejected in the same way eugenics was rejected. Gore's global warming gospel will prove to be just as empty as was the global cooling gospel of the 1970s. Danger to the current generation lies with the hundreds, if not thousands, of misguided policy makers who have fallen under the spell of Gore's charismatic religion. The folks who hold positions in state legislatures and in Congress can inflict major damage on the economy and the lifestyle of America, all the while thinking they are doing something good. Hitler – and his eugenics advocates – were absolutely convinced that they were doing something good. Introduced by scientists, advanced by politicians, popularized by the media, embraced as a moral necessity, resulted in severe consequences, rejected as harmful hogwash Global warming: the new eugenics By Henry Lamb Sunday, December 28, 2008 Eugenics pioneer, Francis Galton, defined eugenics as: “the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations.” Global warming can be defined as: “the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the environmental quality of future generations.” The eugenics movement and the global warming movement are similar in many respects. Both ideas were introduced by scientists, advanced by politicians, popularized by the media, embraced as a moral necessity, resulted in severe consequences, and eventually rejected as harmful hogwash. Eugenics, thankfully, has run its course. Global warming, however, is approaching its zenith, just before imposing severe consequences, and is, perhaps, still a generation away from being rejected as the hogwash it is. Early in the last century, eugenics was called a science that justified public policies that promoted selective breeding among humans and attempted to force sterilization among the “lower classes” of people who did not fit the vision of popular eugenicists. In this century, what is called science is used to justify public policies that promote prescribed life styles and attempts to penalize people whose choices do not fit the vision of popular global warming zealots. Scientists, politicians, preachers, and ordinary people who doubt the doctrine of global warming are outcasts, ridiculed, and worse. The eugenics movement, carried to its logical conclusion by Hitler, killed millions of innocent people. Global warming, when carried to its logical conclusion, will kill far more people than eugenics, and cause incomprehensible agony to people who desperately need affordable energy to survive and prosper. The goal of the global warming movement is to end the use of fossil fuel. Proponents of this movement claim that fossil fuel use is “killing God’s green earth,” as one popular TV ad declares. They claim that the use of alternative energy will save the planet for future generations. Eugenics proponents claimed that selective breeding would constantly improve society by eliminating the lower classes destined for perpetual poverty. They were wrong. Global warming proponents are also wrong in their claims. The use of fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide which certainly does not kill God’s green earth – it enhances it. Carbon dioxide is to vegetation what oxygen is to people – essential to life. It is an indisputable fact that vegetation growth and production is enhanced in direct proportion to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. The idea that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is “killing God’s green earth,” is as preposterous as the idea that society would be better if it consisted only of blond-haired, blue-eyed Aryans. Were President-elect Obama taking office a hundred years ago, he would undoubtedly be filling his cabinet with eugenics experts. This is a reasonable conclusion because he has obviously bought into the popular global warming movement, and is filling his cabinet with people who share his vision. The more than 31,000 scientists who reject this vision are outcasts, and are ridiculed by the elite politicians who are caught up in the global warming movement. More than 650 climate scientists, many of whom have been a part of the U.N. global warming studies, have publicly renounced the claims of the global warming movement. These people too, are outcasts, ridiculed by the Obama global warming elite. The tragedy is that the consequences of the proposed global warming policies will be as painful as the consequences of eugenics policies. People will die. Many more millions will be denied access to energy that could provide affordable life-saving refrigeration, heat, transportation, and energy for industry. These consequences are unnecessary. Fossil fuel energy is affordable and available for at least another century. Laws that arbitrarily deny use of this available resource are as unconscionable as the laws that forced sterilization a hundred years ago. Society was not made better by the eugenics movement; the planet will not be made better by the global warming movement. From all the studies produced by billions of dollars of research in the last two decades, the only thing that has been learned for sure is that climate change is a natural function which the human race has not begun to comprehend. Science has barely scratched the surface. It is the height of arrogance to think that Congress can enact laws that will be obeyed by nature. As it always has, the climate will change according to the dictates of the architect of the universe, not according to the dictates of Barack Obama, Al Gore, Carol Browner, the U.S. Congress, or even the U.N.’s International Panel on Climate Change. The climate change movement is, indeed, quite similar to the eugenics movement. In a generation or two, people will look back and wonder what on earth was wrong with this generation, to get caught up in such foolishness. http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/7188 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLM4wFapUnU http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d93_1207319140 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 03:23:19 pm All this blar blar blar and now you've even got GB's of emails which supposedly support your message (I've given up asking for any science... largely because I know just as well as you that there is none) - could you please AT LEAST supply the emails which point to doctored reports on which any policy is based?!
Quote Those emails are proving to be more and more useful all the time. How exactly?! ??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 03:25:13 pm The Reality of 'Climategate'
At a Danish climate summit this week, one subject will certainly be raised: The theft of thousands of private e-mails and files recently hacked from computers at East Anglia university, a leading climate research center. The e-mails, which were made public and appear to show scientific misconduct, have fueled a firestorm among those who believe that global warming is not chiefly driven by human influences. The case is still unfolding, and East Anglia has launched an investigation "to determine whether there is any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice." On the surface, it seems that there was in fact misconduct of some sort. In some cases, words and phrases (such as "trick") were used out of their academic context to make them seem duplicitous. Other cases are more serious: Scientist Phil Jones was quoted as stating that he would attempt to keep papers whose conclusions argued against a connection between warming and human activity out of an important climate panel report. Researcher Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University was quoted as discussing a boycott of an academic journal because of its "troublesome editor." These actions certainly seem improper, and in one case may have been illegal. The question is not whether at least some of the scientists quoted in the private e-mails exhibited poor judgment or even scientific misbehavior. The real question is whether that misconduct is relevant to the larger issue of whether there is solid evidence for global warming. For all the furor and controversy, what has not been found among the decade's worth of stolen e-mails is revealing. If the e-mails truly are the "smoking gun" that the critics of global warming claim them to be — revealing the tip of the melting iceberg of scientific fraud regarding climate change data — then it is puzzling that no one has yet identified the numerous faked studies. For all the innuendo and accusations, the scientists' critics have yet to locate a single instance of fraudulent research exposed in the e-mails. Personal e-mails between climate scientists may be ill-advised and embarrassing, but by themselves do not provide hard evidence of scientific fraud. The fact is that the evidence for climate change does not hinge upon data from the East Anglia University researchers whose e-mails were exposed. Data supporting the global warming hypothesis has been collected over decades from a wide variety of independent organizations around the world, including NASA, the Met Office Hadley Centre in England, the Meteorological Office in Germany, and many others. To use an analogy, it would be like if, during a worldwide eclipse of the sun, one observatory was accused of faking the telescopic images it showed visitors during the event. Even if that were true, it wouldn't change the fact that the eclipse happened, nor that dozens of other observatories recorded the same thing. Many of the claims made by the so-called global warming skeptics have been raised and addressed (see, for example, http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php). None of this excuses the scientist's alleged behavior. They should not suppress nor delete data they disagree with. Scientists, like people in every other profession, sometimes act unprofessionally and maliciously. Fortunately the data they produce stands or falls on its own merits. If the scientists' data is revealed to have been faked, they will undoubtedly be charged with scientific misconduct, their papers recalled, and their careers ruined. So far, however, the only crime known to have been committed is the original hacking of the university's private e-mails. http://www.livescience.com/environment/091206-climategate-emails.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 03:30:40 pm Not according to Gavin Smidt. Realclimate got it first (and then deleted it), so your claim that it was commissioned by some Oil Baron is on thin ice. So you are now saying that Gavin 'Smidt' from GISS hacked the East Anglia University?! Lol... has anyone let him know this? There are more planets (and objects) than Mars or Pluto that are experiencing global warming. Name them - and then let me know where you get your data from and what you think is causing it. :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 03:46:09 pm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd7M4Hqwdbg&feature=player_embedded#
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZBP-JYzQKg&feature=related Shocking UN Document Divulges Climate Cult Brainwashing Paul Joseph Watson on 01 December, 2009 10:33:55 | 101 times read Kids coerced into performing global warming song as strategy document reveals plan to greenwash young minds by turning environmentalism into gaia religion - PrisonPlanet - With the reverberations of climategate still echoing, it has now emerged that children are being greenwashed in public schools by being forced to sing climate cult ditties and hate their parents as part of a United Nations propaganda program aimed at capturing young minds, as the UN itself officially acknowledges the global warming mantra as a new religion. A shocking new UN strategy document also reveals how elitists are recruiting members of academia from all over the globe in an effort to hide the “end-run” around national sovereignty that their program represents. “When did global warming turn into a forced religion?,” asks the New York Post’s Andrea Peyser as she tells the story of how her daughter came home from school singing the words ” . . . You can hear the warning — GLOBAL WARMING . . . “. “All the kids had been coerced into singing this catchy ditty, which we called “The Warming Song,” at a concert for parents. Further song lyrics scolded selfish adults (that would be us) for polluting our planet and causing a warming scourge that would, in no short order, kill all the polar bears and threaten the birds and bees,” writes Peyser. That’s right, in the spirit of the Club of Rome’s 1991 resolution to make humanity the enemy in creating the contrived threat of environmental armageddon, children have been turned against their own parents in the service of a new gaia religion. “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.,” they wrote in a report entitled “The First Global Revolution”. “Our children are on the front lines of the warming hysteria, a place where “experts” from Al Gore to the president leave no room for dissent or even the slightest skepticism, despite claims that are no more provable than the Earth is flat.,” says Peyser. A newly uncovered document sheds some light on the genesis of how such brainwashing found its way into our schools. A strategy paper for the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), the world’s would-be environmental watchdog, reveals how the global elite in charge of the green takeover resolved that, “Environmentalism should be regarded on the same level with religion “as the only compelling, value-based narrative available to humanity,” according to a Fox News report. This approach follows a similar tack to the new methods adopted by Al Gore, who in his recent presentations has delivered his message as a kind of religious sermon, acknowledging, “Simply laying out the facts won’t work.” The UN planning paper outlines a program of implementing a global system of governance based around environmental regulations and laws, stressing the agenda for the “evolutionary nature of strengthening international environmental governance.” Participants included Janos Pasztor, currently head of the team pushing U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s unprecedented Seal the Deal lobbying campaign to pressure U.N. member governments into signing a new environmental agreement at Copenhagen, Dominic Waughray, currently head of environmental initiatives at the World Economic Forum; and Maria Ivanova, and Bulgarian academic Maria Ivanova, director of the Global Economic Governance Project at the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy. A core element of the program includes, “an extensive propagandizing role for UNEP that reaches beyond its member governments and traditional environmental institutions to “children and youth”. “Civil society, including children and youth, and the private sector will be reached through tailor-made outreach products and campaigns,” states the document. The document discusses recruiting academia to further the power of UNEP, noteworthy in light of the recent climategate scandal where scientists at major universities were caught hiding evidence of global cooling. As the Swiss paper puts it, UNEP “should pioneer a new style of work. This requires going beyond a narrow interpretation of UNEP’s stakeholders as comprising its member states — or even the world’s governments — and recruiting a far wider community of support, in civil society, the academic world and the private sector.” At the same time the paper warns that these groups need to be “harnessed to the UNEP mission without appearing to make an end-run around the member governments.” This passage is fairly damning, as the UN is all but admitting that the program does represent an “end-run around member governments,” and that they have to do their best to hide the fact. The goals enshrined in the document, a counterpart to the globally binding agreement the UN is seeking to achieve in Copenhagen next month, are “certain to remain a UNEP rallying cry long after the Copenhagen meeting is over — and while the other brainstorming ideas that went into the new four-year strategy, not to mention the strategy itself, go into effect,” writes Fox News’ George Russell. This document represents yet another smoking gun proving that the climate cult movement is all about expanding the power of a dictatorial, unelected global government, diluting powers of nation states, seizing control of the global economy, eviscerating the middle class with a raft of new regulations and laws, and shutting down industry with impossible CO2 reduction mandates, while erecting environmentalism, which is really a thin veil for global fascism, as the new universal religion. This has nothing to do with saving the earth and, as the climategate scandal has illustrated, nothing to do with the real science – but everything to do with a relatively small clique of globalists running roughshod over humanity itself in pursuit of their malthusian control freak agenda. http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/1989.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 07, 2009, 03:52:20 pm Yawn. That pathetic "counter" is more "Move along, nothing to see here". The reality however is very different. Refusing FOI is a serious crime. Not even Gavin was/is capable of defending that (though he's trying with the other material). Emails discussing deleting that data and of course that raw data has now been "lost" (apparently) with only the adjusted CRU figures remaining (how convenient.) And so on and so forth.
I also never said Gavin hacked the East Anglian propaganda unit. You were the one claiming that some anonymous Oil Baron had commissioned this "thing" and you offered proof that his was the first place the upload happened. Which of course is bovine scatology as frothing at the mouth Gavin's site was earlier (unless he's this Oil Baron you're whining about.) It doesn't surprise me that you're ignorant of the other objects in this solar system going through global warming. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 04:39:29 pm One last time - where is the science?????
??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 05:01:23 pm Five-Year Average Global Temperature Anomalies from 1880 to 2006. By: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization
The story of manmade global warming is over. In reality it never existed except in the minds and hearts of grant-seeking scientists and academics, ratings-obsessed television networks and their misinformed viewers and opportunistic eco-activists. That said, climate change is real. The earth has been coming out of a 450-year cold era known as the “Little Ice Age” since it bottomed out in the late 1600s. Hundreds of studies have verified the existence of this cold period. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tried to erase the climate history of the last 1,000 years in its 2001 report. They replaced all the peer-reviewed studies of past climate with one that fit their needs. The now-discredited “hockey stick” graph showed virtually no significant change in temperature of the world over the last 1,000 years. Conveniently, the graph then showed a rapid and abrupt increase in global temperature during the last 100 years. This is, of course, due to our sin of burning fossil fuels and stoking the fires of global warming. The only evidence that human activity is causing global warming comes from computer models. These models take what the people who develop them know about how the earth’s climate system works and attempt to predict the future. Computer models are not evidence. Evidence is something real, something concrete that is not subject to change. Computer models can be changed by their creator. In fact the creator of the model can make it say whatever the creator wants it to say by adjusting parameters. That is not evidence. In 2007, a study showed the failings of computer model forecasts. The models showed that there exists a global warming “fingerprint” in the air. This fingerprint is a dramatic warming of the atmosphere, not on the ground, but 20,000 to 50,000 feet in the air above the tropics. The 2007 study revealed that real-world temperature observations by weather balloons over a 50-year period showed no global warming fingerprint at all, none. The computer models had grossly overestimated the warming over the tropics. Real world observations trump computer models. Despite this revelation the climate alarmists continued to trumpet the coming doom if we don’t change our sinful ways. To do otherwise would threaten government grants to colleges and universities, research facilities and government agencies. Large corporations are developing eco-friendly technologies to replace fossil fuels and brokerage houses are looking to cash in big time on the evolving carbon trading markets. The United Nations is looking to use climate treaties to wrestle control of carbon emissions from independent nations. This will elevate the United Nations and its leaders to the role of effectively ruling the world’s energy consumption through one world-government authority. The greenhouse/global warming theory states that as more carbon dioxide is pumped into the air, the atmosphere’s ability to vent excess heat to space will diminish. This is the mantra of global warming alarmism. More carbon dioxide means more heat gets clogged up in the climate system and the earth gets warmer and warmer. From this we have conjured up all the various climate disasters, movies, concerts, fixes, and swindles, with their varied political and economic benefactors and victims. Enter 2009 and a new study by Dr. Richard Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi from MIT that uses temperature data from satellites. As background we start with the predictions. The climate models say that as the oceans warmed by one degree Celsius from the 1980s into the 1990s, the amount of heat escaping to space would decrease. More heat would be trapped in the atmosphere, ultimately due to the burning of fossil fuels. The warming of the oceans was natural and part of the large multi-decadal temperature changes that have been known for years. Now if only we had a way to measure the amount of heat going out to space, then we could get some answers. We do, it’s called the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment Satellite (ERBE). It was in orbit above the earth measuring outgoing long wave radiation (heat) for 16 years from the mid 1980s to the late 1990s. This is very significant. Now we had a tool, and real world data, that we could compare to the computer model predictions. It is the ultimate climate system umpire. The results from the Lindzen and Choi study were stunning. The computer models, all 11 of them, predicted that as the oceans and atmosphere warmed, the amount of heat escaping to space should decrease by 3 watts per square meter. If this were true, then the theory of manmade global warming would have a strong footing. But the satellite data used by the Lindzen and Choi inflicted a bone crushing blow to this assumption. As the oceans and atmosphere warmed, the measurements showed that the amount of heat escaping to space increased by 4 watts per square meter from the mid 1980s to the late 1990s. All the computer models were wrong. If the atmosphere is not trapping heat generated by warming oceans then there is no manmade global warming taking place. The atmosphere compensated for the additional heat by opening the window a little more. The theory of global warming is lying on the canvas bloodied and dying. Alarmists will attempt to revive the carcass with even louder cries of impending doom and calls to repent. But this clamoring will fall on deaf ears. Science will ultimately prove the winner and the world will bury global warming in an icy grave where it belongs. http://energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2665 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oVDC2IKPpg&feature=player_embedded Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 05:39:18 pm Editorial: The Great Global Warming Hoax?
Sorry folks, but we're not exactly buying into the Global Hysteria just yet. We know a great deal about atmospheric physics, (bio) and from the onset, many of the claims were just plain fishy. The extreme haste with which seemingly the entire world immediately accepted the idea of Anthropogenic ( man-made ) Global Warming made us more than a little bit suspicious that no one had really taken a close look at the science. We also knew that the catch-all activity today known as "Climate Science" was in its infancy, and that atmospheric modeling did not and still does not exist which can predict changes in the weather or climate more than about a day or two in advance. So the endless stream of dire predictions of what was going to happen years or decades from now if we did not drastically reduce our CO2 production by virtually shutting down the economies of the world appeared to be more the product of radical political and environmental activism rather than science. Thus, we embarked on a personal quest for more information, armed with a strong academic background in postgraduate physics and a good understanding of the advanced mathematics necessary in such a pursuit. This fundamental knowledge of the core principles of matter and its many exceptionally complex interactions allowed us to research and understand the foundations of many other sciences. In short, we read complex scientific articles in many other scientific disciplines with relative ease and good understanding - like most folks read comic books. As our own knowledge of "climate science" grew, so grew our doubts over the "settled science". What we found was the science was far from "settled".. in fact it was barely underway. It was for a while a somewhat lonely quest, what with "all the world's scientists" apparently having no doubt. Finally, in December 2007 we submitted an article to one of our local newspapers, the Addison Independent, thinking they would be delighted in having at minimum an alternative view of the issue. Alas, they chose not to publish it, but two weeks after our submission (by the strangest coincidence), published yet another "pro-global-warming" feature written by an individual whom, to the best we could determine, had no advanced training in any science at all, beyond self-taught it would appear. Still, the individual had published a number of popular books on popular environmental issues, was well-loved by those of similar political bent, and was held in high esteem among his peers. We had learned a valuable lesson: Popular Journalists trump coupled sets of 2nd-order partial differential equations every time. Serious science doesn't matter if you have the press in your pocket. In fairness to the Addison Independent and its editors, our article was somewhat lengthy and technical, and presumably the average reader most likely could not follow or even be interested in an alternative viewpoint, since everyone knew by now that the global warming issue was "settled science". And we confess that we like the paper, subscribe to it, and know a number of folks who work there personally. They're all good folks, and they have every right to choose what does or doesn't go in their publication. They also have a right to spin the news any direction they choose, because that's what freedom of the press is all about. Seems everyone, both left and right, does it - and it's almost certain we will be accused of doing the same here. And we just may be, as hard as we may try to avoid it. We humans aren't all shaped by the same cookie cutter, and that's a blessing that has taken us as a species to the top of the food chain. But by then we had been sharing our own independent research of the literature with others via email, and receiving a surprising amount of agreement back in return. (We're in contact with a large number of fellow scientists around the country, dating back to our college days in the 17th century when beer was a quarter a bottle). One local friend, in particular, kept pressing us to publish, and even offered to set up a "debate" with the Popular Journalist who had usurped our original article. This we politely declined, arguing that "debate" cannot prove or disprove science...science must stand on its own. But then something unusual happened. On Dec. 13, 2007, 100 scientists jointly signed an Open Letter to Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, requesting they cease the man-made global warming hysteria and settle down to helping mankind better prepare for natural disasters. The final signature was from the President of the World Federation of Scientists. At last, we were not alone... We decided to publish the results of our counter-exploration on the internet - but in a somewhat uniquely different fashion. Knowing that most folks aren't geeks, and may have little understanding of science or math, we're going to attempt to teach some of the essential physics and such as we go along. Readers with little or no mathematical or scientific training may find it challenging, but if you have a general understanding of introductory college or even solid high school level chemistry or physics, you should have no problem in following this amazing tale. The brighter readers, even without a science background, should be able to follow, as well. Smart folks learn faster than most. What follows is a tale gleaned from many sources over what turned out to be an unreasonably long period of time. We'll be first examining a "worst case" scenario, using very simple math at first, in order to arrive in a ballpark that will tell us if we need to go further and pull out long strings of complicated equations, which we don't want to have to resort to because we're writing for the average layman who is not a rocket scientist. This is a valid scientific method despite its apparent simplicity, for if one can first determine that a person does not own a motorcycle, then you don't have to spend a lot of time calculating how likely he is to crash while riding it. Reducing it to the simplest of terms for the average person to understand was a daunting task. Below is an example of what "real" Climate Scientists have to deal with on a daily basis. Is it any wonder that the most popular majors in college are liberal arts? Snipped from an article entitled Solar-Cycle Warming at the Earth’s Surface and an Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity. By Ka-Kit Tung and Charles D. Camp Department of Applied Mathematics University of Washington, Seattle Washington Let's take a short glance at the equation at the left, because you're never going to see anything like it again in this editorial. To most of you, it is gobbly-gook, but to a physicist, it is part of a mathematical proof accompanying a particular study done on the sun's role in Global Warming. What the authors are explaining is they have found that the total solar irradiance (TSI) has been measured by orbiting satellites since 1978 and it varies on an 11-year cycle by about 0.07%. So, from solar min to solar max, the TSI reaching the earth’s surface increases at a rate comparable to the radiative heating due to a 1% per year increase in greenhouse gases, and will probably add, during the next five to six years in the advancing phase of Solar Cycle 24, almost 0.2 °K to the globally-averaged temperature, thus doubling the amount of transient global warming expected from greenhouse warming alone. Whew.... Don't fret - neither Al Gore nor any of the Popular Journalists can understand it either. We'll try to reference most of the material, but if we miss a credit, or use a photograph someone didn't want to share with the world (OK, we wonder why the photo was on the web if that were the case) we'll quickly remove it with our apologies. And let's freely admit up front that what we offer here is a dissenting opinion, and surely we have "cherry-picked" the articles of others which are also contrary to the widely held current beliefs. A bit of this is original on our part, but most of it comes from others around the globe. We have tried to present work from what we believe to be credible, thoroughly diligent scientists actively engaged in current research. Let's get started: We're reminded of an earlier story, which happened back in 1912. This was the amazing discovery of a skull and jawbone in which was quickly named the Piltdown Man and which all the world's archaeologists immediately accepted as a hitherto unknown form of early human. It appears no one bothered to examine it closely, assuming that other scientists had thoroughly investigated and vetted it. The hoax wasn't uncovered until 1953, when it was learned that the skull was that of a modern man and the jaw that of an orangutan. Seems no one had ever bothered to take a really close look at the artifact. Well, folks, it does appear we have a new, 21st Century Piltdown Man, and this time we know his name. He's called "Anthropogenic Global Warming" It's hard to nail down exactly when the sky started falling, but certainly the work of Michael Mann provided its first global exposure. Michael Mann, a paleoclimatologist ( one who attempts to interpret the past climate through certain Paleolithic records, such as ice core samples, sea bed sediments, coral heads, and tree ring growth ), submitted a paper to Nature magazine in 1998 which, unfortunately, was not subjected to peer review before publication. In it, he offered what has now become known as the famous "hockey stick" chart, showing the earth's temperature having been relatively constant for the past thousand years before suddenly skyrocketing upward at the dawn of the 20th century. His interpretation was that man's production of CO2 in the modern age was obviously responsible for the sudden increase. It turned out to be one of the biggest scientific blunders of all time. You wanted some science its here http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 05:46:27 pm That's it - I have better things to spend my time on.
What you guys don't realize is that my responses are mostly thought out and researched, I cross check pretty much everything I post and that consumes my time. We have gone from talking/debating about this to posting absolute rubbish to being deliberately misleading, telling outright lies, right though to the point of defaming large US govt departments. Take the above for example, Titled: Five-Year Average Global Temperature Anomalies from 1880 to 2006. By: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Again - By: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center A very quick search of NASA's website it becomes VERY clear that NASA has said no such thing - in fact, they are screaming just the apposite. Five-Year Average Global Temperature Anomalies from 1880 to 2006 Because of a rapid warming trend over the past 30 years, the Earth is now reaching and passing through the warmest levels seen in the last 12,000 years. This color-coded map shows a progression of changing global surface temperatures from 1880 to 2006, the warmest ranked year on record. And more can be found here (plus the images): http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003300/a003375/ The stench of desperation here is almost overwhelming! So once again and in typical fashion the skeptics among us have shown without a doubt that there is no science what-so-ever in their claims, they have shown that they will deliberately try to mislead the lesser informed and will even scoop as low as to out-rightly lie in an attempt to get their point across. Their motives are self centered, self serving and they pay absolutely no regard at all to either all life on earth today, the younger human generation alive today or the generations following them. In other words: THEY DON'T CARE. I find it very hard to believe that the masses will pay little heed to those among who only care is themselves when it's the entire planets population which needs saving. What's even funnier - what's REALLY cracking me up right now - the skeptics (having realized they actually have no science to stand on) lunched a attack against the global climatology community by hacking and stealing 10 YEARS of emails - they foolishly made a big noise about this but then to their absolute horror realized they hadn't found one signal thing - because there's nothing to be found! PMSL!! That's a fine candidate for the "Oh Bugger!" thread I reckon. ;D Sure is mildly entertaining... but like I said, I have better things to do... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 05:48:41 pm That's not science sexy - that's someone opinion.
Hang on a sec and I'll show you science looks like... :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2009, 05:57:20 pm Wellington could be more like Venice by 2100 By EMILY WATT - The Dominion Post | 5:00AM - Saturday, 05 December 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/Wellington_2100.jpg) SEA RISE SCENARIO: The computer graphic shows that low-lying parts of central Wellington are at risk of flooding if the sea level rises one metre. If you want to go to the library, you'll get your feet wet, Wellington police will need boats to get to work, and parts of Customhouse Quay might get a bit soggy. Wellington City Council has issued a graphic to show how rising sea levels would affect the capital. "It's important to remember that, for areas such as the CBD, doing nothing is clearly not an option," councillor Ray Ahipene-Mercer said. "Tools like this help us to assess a range of appropriate response options, and will also help people understand why it is important to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." Local authorities should be preparing for a rise of up to one metre in sea levels by 2100, he said. The council was shown the computer-generated graphic this week. It showed, if nothing was done to protect the city centre, low-lying parts were at risk of flooding. Sea level rise could also increase erosion and the effects of storm surge. The council's strategy and policy committee considered this week the draft 2010 climate change action plan. It looked at cutting greenhouse gas emissions and preparing for a rise in temperature and sea level. Mr Ahipene-Mercer said Wellington had assets worth billions of dollars which could be affected, including roads, railway lines and the city centre. The council planned to shift the focus to community emissions rather than just the actions of businesses and organisations. It has set a target to cut community emissions by 3 per cent by June 2013 and committed $35 million towards plans with a climate change focus in its 2009-19 Long-Term Council Community Plan. Projects include walking and cycling plans, intensifying development in the city centre and retro-fitting homes with better insulation. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3129355/Wellington-could-be-more-like-Venice-by-2100 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3129355/Wellington-could-be-more-like-Venice-by-2100) See the following interesting pages on the Wellington City Council website:
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2009, 05:57:34 pm Region at risk from rising sea levels By NAOMI ARNOLD - The Nelson Mail | 1:00PM - Monday, 07 December 2009 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/3134137s-07Dec09.jpg) BEACH FRONT: Kaye McNabb, general manager for Nelson Airport, and Andy Booth, of Nelson company SolarCity, with a red ribbon that signifies the predicted rise in sea levels over the next 100 years and the impact it will have on Nelson Airport which is less than one metre above the present sea level. — MARTIN DE RUYTER/The Nelson Mail. Large parts of Motueka, central Nelson, the Wood and Tahunanui may be drowned by rising sea levels in 100 years, putting a billion dollars' worth of assets at risk, a new Cawthron Institute climate change report warns. The report, commissioned by Nelson solar company SolarCity, also shows that Nelson Airport, the Boulder Bank, Trafalgar Park, Waimea Estuary and large parts of Farewell Spit will be at risk. Cawthron Institute sustainable business group manager Jim Sinner said the estimates "could be considered a worst-case scenario". "But it's in the likely range of facts if the world continues to experience rapid economic growth based on fossil fuel," he said. The report was based on new scientific research from Greenland and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, including that of Victoria University's Tim Naish. It found sea levels were more likely to rise quicker, contrary to earlier projections. SolarCity chief executive Andrew Booth said there had been little attention on how much climate change was going to cost communities like Nelson. He commissioned the report because he wanted to know what would happen to Nelson if carbon emissions were not drastically cut by 2020. Mr Booth, whose business is as a provider in the Nelson City Council's solar-city scheme, hoped to encourage community action and business planning over climate change. "I don't think any community wants to deal with the types of consequences that Cawthron Institute highlights," he said. "I think everyone would much prefer to pull together to try to reduce their own personal emissions now as much as they can to try to stop it happening." The report said ratepayers would bear the cost of protecting or relocating community assets vulnerable to flooding. Mr Sinner said if there was a billion dollars at risk, "you don't just plan for the most likely scenarios; you also need to consider the plausible range of effects of what could happen". However, Nelson MP and Environment Minister Nick Smith said putting the community to "huge expense" on the basis of one scientific report would be "unwise", although town planners needed to take long-term projections into account. Dr Smith said a rise of 1.9m was significantly more than Niwa was advising the Government. Its prediction was between 0.5m and 0.8m. However, although there was uncertainty about the extent of sea levels rising, climate change still needed to be taken seriously. "Nelson is responsible for only a fraction of global emissions ... but we still need to do our fair share," he said. The report also showed a 1m sea-level rise would have water lapping the runways of Nelson Airport, while 1.9m would swamp them. Nelson Airport chief executive Kaye McNabb said that although the area had been flagged as an inundation area for a while, it was the first time she had seen such a "graphic" representation and the report was "sobering reading". Nelson Chamber of Commerce chief executive Dot Kettle said the chamber welcomed the report, not least because it spelled out the consequences of climate change on the Nelson region very simply. Ms Kettle urged all business to "take heed of emerging science". A business sustainability audit would help reduce energy costs as well as making a contribution on a bigger scale, she said. Nelson Marlborough Seafood Cluster executive chairman Ron Heath said the report was based on extreme estimates. Mr Heath, who is a former assistant vice-chancellor of sciences at Otago University, said the report was based on the Antarctic ice shelves melting, and there was conjecture over whether that would actually happen. "The estimates are only as good as we understand the models themselves but we just don't understand all the processes. There is still a lot of work to be done." Nelson city councillor Ian Barker said he thought the evidence to support the conclusions was not credible. There had been an effort in recent years to manipulate the record of temperature to show that there had been a rise in temperature when there had been none. "So a pragmatic person like myself questions whether man-made emissions have had the effect that could lead to predictions like this. I think we should be more worried about how the world is going to be spending billions of dollars to try to fix something that is not a problem." AT A GLANCE Nelson in 100 years – impact of a 1.9m rise in sea level and a 2.5-degree rise in temperature:
Source: Cawthron Report 1699: Effects of Climate Change on the Nelson-Tasman Region (http://static.stuff.co.nz/files/Cawthronreport.pdf). http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/3133937/Region-at-risk-from-rising-sea-levels (http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/3133937/Region-at-risk-from-rising-sea-levels) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 06:01:13 pm [Climate data (raw)
Paleo Reconstructions (including code)
These are weather models which have the real world observations assimilated into the solution to provide a ‘best guess’ of the evolution of weather over time (although pre-satellite era estimates (before 1979) are less accurate).
These is output from the large scale global models used to assess climate change in the past, and make projections for the future. Some of this output is also available via the Data Visualisation tools linked below.
Downloadable codes for some of the GCMs.
This category include links to analysis tools, simpler models or models focussed on more specific issues.
These sites include some of the above data (as well as other sources) in an easier to handle form.
Much bigger indexes of data sources:
Sorry - I would format it nicer - but then again that would be just wasting even more time. Have fun! :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 06:18:52 pm List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming I reckon Global warming is natural and not man made. You may not agree but neither do a lot of scientist on this same subject ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 07:06:40 pm Dazza your trying to blind me with science aye? ;D
Oh thats right if most scientist can't agree on something that means they are already half blind. Lucky for us we have those non experts like the stream media and politicians they are happy to come to our aid and save us all from our future doom and destruction. They are saying us humans are to blame for it all, Oh yeah they will need to change our whole way of life,maybe we will all need to ride bicycles and pay for climate change with our hard earned cash, We will also need to give up our freedom to a UN world body that will be responsible for providing us with new laws that will control every aspect of our life. Does that sound like a World government to you ? This carbon tax bullshit idea seems like a crock full of shit to me ;D In our not too distant future thats when they find out global warming is not a threat, Will they return back to us the human rights,the ones we all gladly gave up to save the planet? and also will they give back all our money? I don't think so Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2009, 07:51:11 pm This carbon tax bullshit idea seems like a crock full of shit to me ;D Ignore it and watch consumers in other countries boycott NZ products, then when our exports collapse and our jobs disappear in vast numbers, you can try to claim you are right as you starve. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 08:48:00 pm Greenpeace Leader Admits Organization Put Out Fake Global Warming Data
Greenpeace leader Gerd Leipold has been forced to admit that his organization issued misleading and exaggerated information when it claimed that Arctic ice would disappear completely by 2030, in a crushing blow for the man-made global warming movement. In an interview with the BBC’s Stephen Sackur on the “Hardtalk” program, Leipold initially attempted to evade the question but was ultimately forced to admit that Greenpeace had made a “mistake” when it said Arctic ice would disappear completely in 20 years. The claim stems from a July 15 Greenpeace press release entitled “Urgent Action Needed As Arctic Ice Melts,” in which it is stated that global warming will lead to an ice-free Arctic by 2030. Sackur accused Leipold and Greenpeace of releasing “misleading information” based on “exaggeration and alarmism,” pointing out that it was “preposterous” to claim that the Greenland ice sheet, a mass of 1.6 million square kilometers with a thickness of 3 km in the middle that has survived much warmer periods in history, would completely melt when it had stood firm for hundreds of thousands of years. “There is no way that ice sheet is going to disappear,” said Sackur. “I don’t think it will be melting by 2030. … That may have been a mistake,” Leipold was eventually forced to admit. However, Leipold made no apologies for Greenpeace’s tactic of “emotionalizing issues” as a means of trying to get the public to accept its stance on global warming. He also argued that economic growth in the United States and around the world should be suppressed and that overpopulation and high standards of living should be combated because of the perceived damage they were doing to the environment, eugenicist rhetoric which will be familiar to our readers and anyone who has watched Alex Jones’ Endgame documentary. As the Watts Up With That blog highlights, “Leipold’s admission that Greenpeace issued misleading information is a major embarrassment to the organization, which often has been accused of alarmism but has always insisted that it applies full scientific rigor in its global-warming pronouncements.” Similar claims that the north pole will be “ice free” crop up almost every summer yet are routinely disproved. Indeed, it was discovered that during August 2007 to August 2008, Arctic ice had in fact grown by around 30 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of Germany. A new peer reviewed study has also discovered, “Total annual precipitation in Greenland ice sheet for 1958-2007 to be up to 24% and surface mass balance up to 63% higher than previously thought.” As we reported last year, climate scientists allied with the UN IPCC were also caught citing fake data to make the case that global warming is accelerating, in another shocking example of mass public deception. In November 2008, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), run by Al Gore’s chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, announced that the previous month had been the hottest October on record. It later emerged that the data produced by NASA to make the claim, and in particular temperature records covering large areas of Russia, was merely carried over from the previous month. NASA had used temperature records from the naturally hotter month of September and claimed they represented temperature figures in October. Watch a clip from the Sackur- Leipold interview below. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC7bE9jopXE&feature=player_embedded Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 08:58:24 pm I - for one - am ignoring.
It's a waste of time even talking about this subject with some members in here. When their reasons become personal and they have no scientific support AT ALL to their view in what is solely a scientific arena - then it's just blar blar blar... Lucky for us we have those non experts like the stream media and politicians they are happy to come to our aid and save us all from our future doom and destruction. The above quote sums it up actually - the skeptics are more concerned about their personal well-being than the well-being of ALL life on planet earth and the human race as a whole. IMO - that's incredibly selfish. That's a big downer on you skeptic lot. Major browny point loss... I'm ashamed I'm a member of the same race as yourself to be honest. I find it absolutely and utterly inhumane. (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/40emthdown.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 08:59:13 pm Could this thread be on it's way to beating roger?
;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 07, 2009, 09:05:20 pm Off to bed Sexy... if you post something worth while then I might respond tomorrow.... if it's just blar blar blat thou - expect nothing in return.
;) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 10:33:16 pm The globalist warming scum want to make us feel guilty for drinking our water using power, eating food, breathing, and even farting (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/07emangry.gif);D
They are saying humans are a parasite and a pox on the planet. And you GW religion people buy into all this boggy man scare mongering nature worshiping bullshit,And your even willing to pay your hard earned money to try and stop nature in it tracks; Trying To Stop Nature In Its Tracks Good Luck With That baaa haha (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) The earth is a big planet it will survive,The reason it will survive is because its been through much worse changes in its past history. If humans are all dead and gone tomorrow thats just too bad, but at least it might make the greens happy.(https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/uglystupid2.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2009, 10:39:45 pm Co2 Don't plants just thrive on that stuff (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/afro.gif) Plants need more CO2, not less By: H. Leighton Steward OpEd Contributor November 4, 2009 Congress and federal regulators are poised to make a misguided and reckless decision that will stifle our economy recovery and spur long-term damage to plant and animal life on earth. In the coming months, the Environmental Protection Agency will hold hearings to justify the movement to brand carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant. Congress will also consider cap-and-trade legislation that, if enacted, could also regulate CO2 as pollution. Why is it such a catastrophic decision? Because there is not a single piece of evidence that CO2 is a pollutant. In fact, lower levels of carbon dioxide actually inhibit plant growth and food production. What we see happening in Washington right now is the replacement of politics for science in conversations about CO2. For plants, CO2 is the greatest, naturally occurring air-borne fertilizer that exists. Even schoolchildren learn in elementary science class that plants need carbon dioxide to grow. During photosynthesis, plants use this CO2 fertilizer as their food and they “breathe out” oxygen into the air so humans can inhale it, and in turn exhale CO2. This mutually beneficial and reinforcing cycle is one of the most basic elements of life on earth. An article appeared recently in the Environment and Energy Daily that claimed a “modeled” nitrogen deficiency will occur as CO2 rises. Well, CO2 has already risen over 37%, 105 parts per million, and where is the real world nitrogen deficiency? Why are Earth’s forests lush if the added growth that has already occurred, due to big bursts of CO2, has depleted the nitrogen supply? The nitrogen supply of pristine ecosystems has been resupplied through natural processes for eons. Computer models, manipulated to produce desired results, can generate catastrophic, front page, forecasts. We encourage our government’s scientists to step back from their models and observe what is and what has happened in the real world, as well as in actual plant experiments. Doesn’t anyone recognize the good news that is staring them in the face? It simply defies imagination, let alone science, that the United Nations has now backed an arbitrary limit on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. The chairman of the politically charged Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said he supports efforts to reduce carbon dioxide to 10% below current levels. In the context of today’s political conversations, this recommendation may sound like an acceptable position to save the environment. But the scientific reality of such a step is quite the opposite. Lowering carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have catastrophic affects on our food supply. Higher concentrations of carbon dioxide support plant life and helps plants thrive. If our food supply is reduced, the hunger crisis in many parts of the world will worsen. Not only would lowering CO2 levels be wrong, one can make the argument that even higher levels would be desirable. Greenhouse operators routinely increase CO2 to about three times the current level in earth’s atmosphere in order to encourage plant growth. We know CO2 is vital for plants, but what about the argument that it is a dominant contributor to the greenhouse effect? Again, science does not support this argument. CO2 is not even close to being the most important of the greenhouse gases. Most of the greenhouse effect is due to water vapor, which is more than 30 times as abundant in the atmosphere as CO2. As further evidence, we find that as the post-war industrial boom began to put significant volumes of CO2 into the atmosphere, global temperatures did not rise. Since 1945, there have been about 40 years of cooling trend and only 20-plus years of warming. While the warming is significant, it followed an unusually high period of solar activity. Temperature did rise steeply in the 1920’s and in the 1930’s in the U.S. and 1934 was the warmest year of the 20th century. The rate of warming then was also higher than in the 1980’s and 1990’s, even though CO2 levels were lower. Many in the scientific community reject reducing atmospheric CO2 to 350 parts per million, as Dr. Pachauri of the U.N. wishes. Thousands of peer-reviewed experiments have demonstrated CO2’ s ability to “green” the earth dramatically. Nonetheless, Dr. Pachauri and those who prefer to debate science with politics are sticking to their old story and clinging to their inadequate climate models and their headline-grabbing catastrophic forces. Do Americans want to see their government spend trillions of dollars removing CO2 that will not lower the Earth’s temperature but absolutely will risk harming ecologies, economies and mankind itself? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/Plants-need-more-CO2-not-less-69158857.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 08, 2009, 05:23:01 am One last time - where is the science????? ??? I wouldn't worry too much about "science" sexy. It's a pity I don't have the time to debate this topic like I used to, but Daz and I have thrashed this out several times over. It usually ends with Daz proclaiming that these scientists have no motivation to fudge the data. Except of course this time round (which is the pity) as we now know that Dr Phil Jones has received ₤13,700,000 for doing his research on this topic. We also now know that they have been adjusting the data to suit their hypothesis, e.g. "Used Mike's [Michael Mann] trick for hiding the decline." Interestingly enough when Jones defended this recently he said he had to adjust the figures; apparently tree ring data before 1960 was accurate, but magically tree ring data is wrong post 1960. For those that don't know Michael Mann is the person who fudged the data to get the "hockey stick" graph. A bit of work even other warmist have stepped away from (though there is the "Hockey team" who still support Mann and his special way of analysing data): a fantastic bit of work that dismisses the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age in his thousand year myopic view of the past. Other warmists have been unable to repeat Mann's work, which should ring alarm bells. Obviously Mann's standard of analyses is what the East Anglian CRU team uses to give us our doom and gloom prophecies from the IPCC (Jones is an important contributor to the IPCC message) given the leaked emails and the correspondence with him. It would be interesting to know if our own NIWA used Mann's standard for their own adjustments of the raw data. Especially since NIWA's adjusted figures paint an even greater level of warming of the 20th century than their warmist mates overseas. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 08, 2009, 10:03:53 am Ignore it and watch consumers in other countries boycott NZ products, then when our exports collapse and our jobs disappear in vast numbers, you can try to claim you are right as you starve. Yes, and that would have to be the sole reason to buy into the scam; just like the story of the Emperor's new clothes people are too gutless to state the obvious because it would impinge on their livelihoods. Sad really. Still, a gullible tax is the reasonable solution. All those that are gullible should pay the air tax, and those that aren't can keep our money. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 10:21:27 am I wouldn't worry too much about "science" sexy. ...you wouldn't worry about the science of your claims in what is solely a scientific matter?! ??? PMSL!!!! That my friends - that one sentence alone sums up the skeptics perfectly. (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 08, 2009, 11:02:41 am I wouldn't worry too much about "science" sexy. ...you wouldn't worry about the science of your claims in what is solely a scientific matter?! ??? PMSL!!!! That my friends - that one sentence alone sums up the skeptics perfectly. (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) Note the quotes. I know it's hard for you to fathom Daz, but hope springs eternal. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Crusader on December 08, 2009, 12:11:20 pm This is the biggest scam since the Y2K bug.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 08, 2009, 01:34:15 pm (http://green-agenda.com/images/banner.gif) “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself." - Club of Rome The First Global Revolution The environmental movement has been described as the largest and most influential social phenomenon in modern history. From relative obscurity just a few decades ago it has spawned thousands of organisations and claims millions of committed activists. Reading the newspaper today it is hard to imagine a time when global warming, resource depletion, environmental catastrophes and 'saving the planet' were barely mentioned. They now rank among the top priorities on the social, political and economic global agenda. Environmental awareness is considered to be the mark of any good honest decent citizen. Multi-national companies compete fiercely to promote their environmental credentials and 'out-green' each other. The threat of impending ecological disasters is uniting the world through a plethora of international treaties and conventions. But where did this phenomenon come from, how did it rise to such prominence, and more importantly, where is it going? While researching for these articles, and during my academic studies, I have come across many references to the The Club of Rome (CoR), and reports produced by them. Initially I assumed that they were just another high-level environmental think-tank and dismissed the conspiracy theories found on many websites claiming that the CoR is a group of global elitists attempting to impose some kind of one world government. I am not a conspiratorial person by nature and was faced with a dilemma when I first read their reports. But it's all there - in black and white. The CoR claims that "we are facing an imminent catastrophic ecological collapse" and "our only hope is to transform humanity into a global interdependent sustainable society, based on respect and reverence for the Earth." In the end I came to the conclusion that there are two possibilities – either the CoR wrote all these reports and setup a vast network of supporting organisations just for fun or they actually believe what they have written and are working hard to fulfill their role as the self-appointed saviours of Gaia. Based on my close observation of their actions, and watching the recommendations made by the CoR many years ago now being adopted as official UN and government policy – well, I have become personally convinced that they are deadly serious. On this website I try to use quotes and excerpts as much as possible and let the reader reach their own conclusions. So, what exactly is the Club of Rome and who are its members? Founded in 1968, the CoR describes itself as "a group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity." It consists of current and former Heads of State, UN beaureacrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe. The Club of Rome subsequently founded two sibling organizations, the Club of Budapest and the Club of Madrid. The former is focused on social and cultural aspects of their agenda, while the latter concentrates on the political aspects. All three of these 'Clubs' share many common members and hold joint meetings and conferences. As explained in other articles on this website it is abundantly clear that these are three heads of the same beast. The CoR has also established a network of 33 National Associations. Membership of the 'main Club' is limited to 100 individuals at any one time. Some members, like Al Gore and Maurice Strong, are affiliated through their respective National Associations (e.g. USACOR, CACOR etc). I would like to start this analysis of the Club of Rome by listing some prominent members of the CoR and its two sub-groups, the Clubs of Budapest and Madrid. Personally it isn’t what the CoR is that I find so astonishing; it is WHO the CoR is! This isn’t some quirky little group of green activists or obscure politicians. They are the most senior officials in the United Nations, current and ex-world leaders, and the founders of some of the most influential environmental organisations. When you read their reports in the context of who they are – its gives an entirely new, and frightening, context to their extreme claims. Some current members of the Club of Rome or its two siblings: Al Gore – former VP of the USA, leading climate change campaigner, Nobel Peace Prize winner, Academy Award winner, Emmy winner. Gore lead the US delegations to the Rio Earth Summit and Kyoto Climate Change conference. He chaired a meeting of the full Club of Rome held in Washington DC in 1997. Javier Solana – Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, High Representative for EU Foreign Policy. Maurice Strong – former Head of the UN Environment Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit, co-author (with Gorbachev) of the Earth Charter, co-author of the Kyoto Protocol, founder of the Earth Council, devout Baha’i. Mikhail Gorbachev – CoR executive member, former President of the Soviet Union, founder of Green Cross International and the Gorbachev Foundation, Nobel Peace Prize winner, co-founder (with Hidalgo) of the Club of Madrid, co-author (with Strong) of the Earth Charter. Diego Hidalgo – CoR executive member, co-founder (with Gorbachev) of the Club of Madrid, founder and President of the European Council on Foreign Relations in association with George Soros. Ervin Laszlo – founding member of the CoR, founder and President of the Club of Budapest, founder and Chairman of the World Wisdom Council. Anne Ehrlich – Population Biologist. Married to Paul Ehrlich with whom she has authored many books on human overpopulation. Also a former director of Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club, and a member of the UN's Global Roll of Honor. Hassan bin Talal – President of the CoR, President of the Arab Thought Forum, founder of the World Future Council, recently named as the United Nations 'Champion of the Earth'. Sir Crispin Tickell – former British Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Permanent Representative on the Security Council, Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, Chairman of the Board of the Climate Institute, leading British climate change campaigner. Kofi Annan – former Secretary General of the United Nations. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. Javier Perez de Cuellar – former Secretary General of the United Nations. Gro Harlem Bruntland – United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Change, former President of Norway Robert Muller – former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, founder and Chancellor of the UN University of Peace. The Dalai Lama – The 'Spiritual Leader' of Tibet. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. Father Berry Thomas – Catholic Priest who is one of the leading proponents of deep ecology, ecospirituality and global consciousness. David Rockefeller – CoR executive member, former Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, founder of the Trilateral Commission, executive member of the World Economic Forum, donated land on which the United Nations stands. Stephen Schneider – Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC reports. Bill Clinton – former President of the United States, founder of the Clinton Global Iniative. Jimmy Carter – former President of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. Bill Gates – founder of Microsoft, philanthropist Garret Hardin – Professor of Human Ecology. Originator of the 'Global Commons' concept. Has authored many controversial papers on human overpopulation and eugenics. Other current influential members: (these can be found on the membership lists of the COR (here, here, and here), Club of Budapest, Club of Madrid and/or CoR National Association membership pages) Ted Turner – media mogul, philanthropist, founder of CNN George Soros – multibillionare, major donor to the UN Tony Blair – former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Deepak Chopra – New Age Guru Desmond Tutu – South African Bishop and activist, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Timothy Wirth – President of the United Nations Foundation Henry Kissinger – former US Secretary of State George Matthews – Chairman of the Gorbachev Foundation Harlan Cleveland – former Assistant US Secretary of State and NATO Ambassador Barbara Marx Hubbard – President of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution Betty Williams – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Marianne Williamson – New Age 'Spiritual Activist' Robert Thurman – assistant to the Dalai Lama Jane Goodall – Primatologist and Evolutionary Biologist Juan Carlos I – King of Spain Prince Philippe of Belgium Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands Dona Sophia – Queen of Spain José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero – current Prime Minister of Spain Karan Singh – Former Prime Minister of India, Chairman of the Temple of Understanding Daisaku Ikeda – founder of the Soka Gakkai cult Martin Lees – CoR Secretary General, Rector of the UN University of Peace Ernesto Zedillo – Director of The Yale Center for the Study of Globalization Frithjof Finkbeiner – Coordinator of the Global Marshall Plan Franz Josef Radermacher – Founder of the Global Marshall Plan Eduard Shevardnadze – former Soviet foreign minister and President of Georgia Richard von Weizsacker – former President of Germany Carl Bildt – former President of Sweden Kim Campbell – former Prime Minister of Canada and Senior Fellow of the Gorbachev Foundation Vincente Fox – former President of Mexico Helmut Kohl – former Chancellor of Germany Romano Prodi – former Prime Minister of Italy and President of the European Commission Vaclav Havel – former President of the Czech Republic Hans Kung – Founder of the Global Ethic Foundation Ruud Lubbers – United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Mary Robinson – United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Jerome Binde – Director of Foresight, UNESCO Koïchiro Matsuura – Current Director General of UNESCO Federico Mayor – Former Director General of UNESCO Tapio Kanninen – Director of Policy and Planning, United Nations Konrad Osterwalder – Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations Peter Johnston – Director General of European Commission Jacques Delors – Former President of the European Commission Domingo Jimenez-Beltran – Executive Director of the European Environment Agency Thomas Homer-Dixon – Director of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto Hazel Henderson – Futurist and 'evoluntionary economist' Emeka Anyaoku – former Commonwealth Secretary General, current President of the World Wildlife Fund Wangari Maathai – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, founder of the Green Belt Movement and many more…. The concept of 'environmental sustainability' was first brought to widespread public attention in 1972 by the Club of Rome in their book entitled The Limits to Growth. The official summary can be read here. The report basically concluded that the growth of the human population, and an increase in prosperity, would cause an ecological collapse within the next hundred years: “If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.” “It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his individual human potential.” “The overwhelming growth in world population caused by the positive birth-rate loop is a recent phenomenon, a result of mankind's very successful reduction of worldwide mortality. The controlling negative feedback loop has been weakened, allowing the positive loop to operate virtually without constraint. There are only two ways to restore the resulting imbalance. Either the birth rate must be brought down to equal the new, lower death rate, or the death rate must rise again.” “The result of stopping population growth in 1975 and industrial capital growth in 1985 with no other changes is that population and capital reach constant values at a relatively high level of food, industrial output and services per person. Eventually, however, resource shortages reduce industrial output and the temporarily stable state degenerates.” “Man possesses, for a small moment in his history, the most powerful combination of knowledge, tools, and resources the world has ever known. He has all that is physically necessary to create a totally new form of human society - one that would be built to last for generations. The two missing ingredients are a realistic, long-term goal that can guide mankind to the equilibrium society and the Human Will to achieve that goal.” “Without such a goal and a commitment to it, short-term concerns will generate the exponential growth that drives the world system toward the limits of the earth and ultimate collapse. With that goal and that commitment, mankind would be ready now to begin a controlled, orderly transition from growth to global equilibrium.” So as you can see the even back in 1972 the Club considered modern industrial society to be completely unsustainable. They state that even if population was frozen at 1975 levels, and industrial activity at 1985 levels, then the earth’s ecosystems would still ultimately collapse. The CoR has not changed these views in the slightest, in fact, in the last three decades their warnings have become increasingly more urgent and alarmist. They call this imminent collapse the ‘World Problematique’ and their proposed solution the ‘World Resolutique.’ The Limits to Growth is considered to be the most successful environmental publication ever produced and propelled the Club of Rome to its current position of an environmental thought-leader and a major consultant to the United Nations. It has been translated into more than forty languages and sold more than 30 million copies. Throughout the 1970s and 80s the concept that humanity was irreparably damaging the earth gained popularity and facilitated the formation of mainstream and activist environmental groups. All meetings of the CoR are held ‘behind closed doors’ and no public records are kept. However the Club does produce many ‘discussion reports’ that can be found on its website. The United Nations contracts the Club of Rome to prepare ‘Policy Guidance Documents’ which it uses in formulating its policies and programmes. A quick search for Club of Rome on the UNESCO publications site reveals 250 such documents. There are many other documents there authored by CoR members acting in other capacities. As many high ranking UN officials are actually CoR members, this is like a man asking himself for advice, and then agreeing with that advice. Not very objective! Various UN organisations also hold joint conferences with the CoR. While checking the Club of Rome website this morning the first item in their ‘current news’ section refers to a briefing delivered by the CoR to G8 officials in preparation for the upcoming G8 meeting. The second item is a summary report from the Club of Romes ’strategy planning retreat’ with 150 senior UNESCO officials. The joint CoR/UNESCO communique states: “We are at the end of an era – a turning point in history. We are approaching the threshold of runaway climate change. We underline the urgency of radical action to reduce emissions, by both immediate action and longer-term measures; to stress to political leaders the non-linear nature of the processes at work which will generate sudden change; and to assert that the overriding priority must be to avert the impending risk of catastrophic climate change.” - CoR/UNESCO communique Twenty years after the Limits to Growth the CoR published another major report that became an instant best-seller. In The First Global Revolution the Club of Rome claimed that the time to act had run out. It was now or never. Delay in beginning corrective measures will increase the damage to the world ecological system and ultimately reduce the human population that will eventually be supportable. They also stated that democratic governments are far too short-sighted to deal with the ‘problematique’ and new forms of governance are urgently required. In order not too violate any copyright protection I will not reproduce the text of the book on this site. However, it is permissible for me to quote a brief excerpt in the context of this wider discussion. The complete text (third ed.) can be read and searched online at Google Books. As you read the following quote (from page 75, first ed.), please remember the names of the leaders listed above. This is not some quirky little cult. This is the stated agenda of the leaders of the environmental movement: “This is the way we are setting the scene for mankind’s encounter with the planet. The opposition between the two ideologies that have dominated the 20th century has collapsed, forming their own vacuum and leaving nothing but crass materialism. It is a law of Nature that any vacuum will be filled and therefore eliminated unless this is physically prevented. “Nature,” as the saying goes, “abhors a vacuum.” And people, as children of Nature, can only feel uncomfortable, even though they may not recognize that they are living in a vacuum. How then is the vacuum to be eliminated? It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose. New enemies therefore have to be identified. New strategies imagined, new weapons devised. The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself. The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.” So, long before Global Warming became a well known issue Al Gore and his Club of Rome colleagues stated that they would use the threat of global warming to unite humanity and "set the scene for mankind's encounter with the planet." In the same way that shamans and sooth-sayers in medieval times used their advance knowledge of when eclipses would occur to control and terrify their followers, they would use a natural phenomenon as their 'enemy' to achieve their objectives. But then they state that although Global Warming would be presented as the initial enemy, the real enemy of humanity would be portrayed as man himself. I am already noticing how frequently the terms climate change and overpopulation are being uttered in the same breath. Having discovered that all these influential environmental leaders were associated with the Club of Rome I set about reading all the reports, lectures and speeches on their website as well as the reports commissioned by the UN. I was amazed to find that they lay out their entire agenda for anyone who has eyes to see. Exactly the same themes, concepts and phrases are repeated continuously throughout their publications. They are full of references to 'imminent collapse', 'dying planet', 'our mother Gaia', 'wrenching transformation', 'united global society', 'global consciousness', 'new forms of governance' etc. They truly intend to bring about the world's First Global Revolution. The Kosmos Journal provides perhaps the best insight into their worldview. This Journal was founded by the Club of Rome in partnership with with several of its sibling organizations. As described in my article, The Green Web, the CoR has established a network of supporting organizations, each focusing on a different aspect of their agenda. The Kosmos Journal contains many articles written by CoR members. The basic premise of their worldview is: "Modern industrial civilisation is fast outstripping the Earth's natural regenerative and life-supporting capacity..." "At current rates of resource depletion and environmental degradation a near complete collapse of ecological integrity will occur within the next 100 years..." "Gaia, our Mother, who nutured humanity for countless millenia within her womb of evolution, is dying..." “A small window of opportunity now exists to transform humanity into a sustainable global interdepedant society based on respect and reverence for Earth..." "A radical change from the current trajectory is required, a complete reordering of global society..." "Humans only truly unite when faced with a powerful external enemy..." "At this time a new enemy must be found, one either real or invented for the purpose..." "Democracy has failed us, a new system of global governance, based on environmental imperatives, must be implemented quickly..." Now that Obama is firmly ensconced in the White House the Club of Rome and its affiliates are swinging into high gear. The CoR recently unveiled a new 3-year programme entitled A New Path for World Development. The Club of Madrid has launched the Road to Copenhagen, a joint programme with the UN Environment Programme intended to facilitate a binding global climate change treaty in 2009. Perhaps most interesting is the State of Global Emergency declared by the Club of Budapest in October 2008. The declaration states that we only have four or five years to prevent a total collapse of the Earth's ecosystems. To quote from the document: “If we continue on our present unsustainable path, by mid-century the Earth may become largely uninhabitable for human and most other forms of life. Such a total systems collapse could occur much sooner, however, due to runaway global warming or other ecocatastrophes, and/or by nuclear wars triggered by religious, ethnic or geopolitical conflicts or access to diminishing natural resources. The macro-trends driving these global threats and challenges have been apparent for decades and are now building toward a threshold of irreversibility. The scientific modeling of complex systems shows that when systems reach a state of critical instability, they either break down to their components or break through to a higher order of integral functioning. At these “points of no return” maintaining the status quo, or returning to a previous mode of organization and functioning, are not a feasible option. The acceleration of critical trends and cross-impacts among them indicates that the ‘window of opportunity’ for pulling out of the present global crisis and breaking through to a more peaceful and sustainable world is likely to be no more than four to five years from the end of 2008. This is close in time to the Mayan 2012 prophecy for the end of the current world. The period around the end of 2012 is likely to be a turbulent one for this and other reasons. Predictions coming from the physical sciences foresee disturbances in the geomagnetic, electromagnetic and related fields that embed the planet causing significant damage to telecommunications and impacting many aspects of human activity and health. For the esoteric traditions the end of 2012 will be the end of the known world, although the more optimistic intepretations speak of a new world taking the place of the old.” This may seem very strange – a group of prominent world leaders talking about ancient Mayan prophecies, but as I describe in my article, Gaia's Gurus, many leading global warming activists openly advocate earth-reverence and other New Age philosophies. Gaia, Global Warming, and Global Governance are intricately entwined, if one truly believes in Gaia, and that she is being fatally harmed by the current system, then a new system of global governance and control would appear to be the only answer. Global Warming provides the ideal 'enemy' to bring about this objective. It is easy for these global elitists to talk about sacrifice, wrenching transformation, population reduction and eliminating the use of fossil fuels but the implications are truely horrendous. Even if you think this is all nonsense I would ask you to at least read these quotes and excerpts, and think about the implications of their agenda. Everyday I am amazed at how quickly things are changing. It is coming hard and fast. It's almost like reading a book and then watching the television adaptation, except that this adaptation is not a movie - it's on the evening news. As Al Gore said in the closing sentence of his statement after he won the Nobel Peace Prize ... "This is just the beginning." http://green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 04:59:42 pm Blar blar blar....
Watch this - and give a shit, just for a moment...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPI04IPiwbg Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 05:10:56 pm And for a splash of logic....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 06:19:34 pm And I feel - sadly - the hope of the entire human race now lays in one mans hands....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYga2qRnY2w :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 06:52:39 pm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IaJsplm83c
:) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 08, 2009, 09:08:13 pm Where’s the global warming? Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is One World Government SUNDAY, 18 OCTOBER 2009 12:14 NEWS FROM JERUSALEM (http://www.thejerusalemgiftshop.com/israelnews/images/stories/nwo/global-warming-question.jpg) A former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government. "At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed," Monkton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience on Thursday at Bethel University in St. Paul. "Your president will sign it. Most of the Third World countries will sign it, because they think they're going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won't sign it," he told the audience of some 700 attendees. "I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word 'government' actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. "The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to Third World countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, 'climate debt' – because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't. We've been screwing up the climate and they haven't. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government is enforcement." In an hour and a half lecture illustrated by slides featuring scientific data on a wide range of climate issues, Monkton refuted claims made by former Vice President Al Gore in his movie and book entitled "An Inconvenient Truth," as well as scientific arguments made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Monckton argued that President Obama will sign the Copenhagen treaty at the December meeting, without seeking a two-thirds ratification of the treaty by the Senate, or any other type of Congressional approval. "So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free," he continued. "But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. "But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire – it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with the climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it." Moncton is a well-known critic of the theory of anthropogenic causes for global warming who has argued repeatedly that global warming hysteria is an ideological position of the political Left advanced in the interest of imposing global taxes on the United States in the pursuit of international control of the U.S. economy under a one-world government to be administered by the U.N. Monkton's lecture can be viewed online and his slides also can be accessed on the Internet. As evidence mounts that the United States is headed toward a cooling cycle that may last decades, global alarmists within the Obama administration remain resolved to push cap-and-trade legislation through Congress on the increasingly dubious theory that man-made carbon emissions are creating global warming. In what has to be seen as increasingly bad news for global warming alarmists, scientific evidence is mounting that temperatures in the United States have cooled at a rate that would be projected to lower temperatures 7.3 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century. (http://www.thejerusalemgiftshop.com/israelnews/images/stories/general/climateb.jpg) Source. U.S. National Climate Data Center and www.c3headlines.com Maybe Obama’s Science Czar is Right: Is a New Ice Age on the Horizon? WND has reported White House science czar John Holdren's prediction that one billion people will die in "carbon-dioxide induced famines" in a coming new ice age by 2020. Even though Holdren's current position is that the U.S. needs to enact cap-and-trade to slow global warming, Holdren predicted in a 1971 textbook co-authored with Paul Ehrlich that global over-population was heading the Earth to a new ice age unless the government mandated urgent measures to control population, including the possibility of involuntary birth control measures such as forced sterilization. Holdren's prediction that one billion people would die from a global cooling "eco-disaster" was announced by Malthusian population alarmist Ehrlich in his 1986 book entitled, "The Machinery of Nature." Holdren based his prediction on a bizarre theory that human emissions of carbon dioxide would produce a climate catastrophe in which global warming would cause global cooling with a resultant reduction in agricultural production resulting in widespread disaster. On pages 273-274 of "The Machinery of Nature," Ehrlich explained Holdren's theory by arguing "some localities will probably become colder as the warmer atmosphere drives the climactic engine faster, causing streams of frigid air to move more rapidly away from the poles." (Emphasis in original text.) The movement of the frigid air from the poles caused by global warming "could reduce agricultural yields for decades or more – a sure recipe for disaster in an increasingly overpopulated world," Ehrlich wrote. http://www.thejerusalemgiftshop.com/israelnews/new-world-order-news/60-nwo/1968-thatcher-adviser-copenhagen-goal-is-one-wor Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 09:18:57 pm thejerusalemgiftshop.com ?!?!
PMSL!! (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 09:23:44 pm (http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/get-file.php?report=national&image=timeseries02&byear=2008&bmonth=11&year=2009&month=10&ext=gif&id=110-00)
;) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 08, 2009, 09:34:13 pm Dazza do you think a one world government is a good idea ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddQvhdCyhe4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_zzqvlslj4&annotation_id=annotation_681710&feature=iv http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfl2b3cHP8A&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTOlnVG9wGc&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqIeZXoQaPo&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmLJ2qogW2Q&NR=1 http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 09:54:23 pm Dazza do you think a one world government is a good idea ;D Abso-bloody-lutly! That would suggest that humans have grown up and finally learnt to live together as one - it would end wars, famine, poor country/rich country... the whole lot! Christ - the advantages are to numerous to list! The day we all stand united and as one on this ball of rock will be a major turning point for the human race. Sure - we will still have our problems and still have our differences - but it would be a major turning point and a giant leap in the maturing of the race. Bring it on I say!! (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/afro.gif) In reality though - do I think we would ever get there? Sadly no - climate change is going to stress the geopolitical climate so much we are much more likely to be blowing each other to bits in the next 50 odd years... India is already running out of water - 1.2 billion people. China is having the same problems - 1.4 billion. Just where are they all going to go and who's going to feed them - and how? That's one thing I've always maintained - the real threat here isn't climate change, it's the human reaction to change which holds more potential for disaster. If only we had the ability to learn from others mistakes... :-X Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 08, 2009, 10:04:37 pm Lol... I just looked up "Lord Christopher Monckton" in your you tube post above.... bloody funny!
The guy's a complete nut case! In 1987 he had this to say about AIDS: "there is only one way to stop AIDS. That is to screen the entire population regularly and to quarantine all carriers of the disease for life. Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month ... all those found to be infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately, and permanently." And people listen to him?! ??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 12:33:46 am Dazza
I too would also like to see an end to wars.I would like to see a sharing of the worlds wealth. But do I trust a One World Government that would control every aspect of my life= Shit No If I wanted that kind of life I would move to China A One World Government would be a totalitarianism regime A totalitarian regime is a government which controls every aspect of the life of the people. People living under a totalitarian regime generally also support it, sometimes almost cultishly, thanks to extensive propaganda missions which are designed to promote a positive view of the government. Citizens are also usually afraid to criticize the government, so they may be outspoken supporters to avoid closer scrutiny. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 12:43:38 am Here's some more science for Dazza ;D
Richard S. Lindzen (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/05emsmilep.gif) Professor Lindzen is a dynamical meteorologist with interests in the broad topics of climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability. His research involves studies of the role of the tropics in mid-latitude weather and global heat transport, the moisture budget and its role in global change, the origins of ice ages, seasonal effects in atmospheric transport, stratospheric waves, and the observational determination of climate sensitivity. He has made major contributions to the development of the current theory for the Hadley Circulation, which dominates the atmospheric transport of heat and momentum from the tropics to higher latitudes, and has advanced the understanding of the role of small scale gravity waves in producing the reversal of global temperature gradients at the mesopause, and provided accepted explanations for atmospheric tides and the quasi-biennial oscillation of the tropical stratosphere. He pioneered the study of how ozone photochemistry, radiative transfer and dynamics interact with each other. He is currently studying what determines the pole to equator temperature difference, the nonlinear equilibration of baroclinic instability and the contribution of such instabilities to global heat transport. He has also been developing a new approach to air-sea interaction in the tropics, and is actively involved in parameterizing the role of cumulus convection in heating and drying the atmosphere and in generating upper level cirrus clouds. He has developed models for the Earth's climate with specific concern for the stability of the ice caps, the sensitivity to increases in CO2, the origin of the 100,000 year cycle in glaciation, and the maintenance of regional variations in climate. Prof. Lindzen is a recipient of the AMS's Meisinger, and Charney Awards, the AGU's Macelwane Medal, and the Leo Huss Walin Prize. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, and the Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters, and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society. He is a corresponding member of the NAS Committee on Human Rights, and has been a member of the NRC Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate and the Council of the AMS. He has also been a consultant to the Global Modeling and Simulation Group at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. (Ph.D., '64, S.M., '61, A.B., '60, Harvard University) Richard Lindzen, Ph.D. Lecture Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria (High Quality Version) www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw&feature=channel www.youtube.com/ watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw&feature=channel Funny it wont play in here. I broke it up a bit you can reconstruct it and paste it in the top bar Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in climate debate says MIT Scientist August 18, 7:39 AMPortland Civil Rights ExaminerDianna Cotter In a study sure to ruffle the feathers of the Global Warming cabal, Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT has published a paper which proves that IPCC models are overstating by 6 times, the relevance of CO2 in Earth’s Atmosphere. Dr. Lindzen has found that heat is radiated out in to space at a far higher rate than any modeling system to date can account for. Editorial: The science is in. the scare is out. Recent papers and data give a complete picture of why the UN is wrong. The pdf file located at the link above from the Science and Public Policy Institute has absolutely, convincingly, and irrefutably proven the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming to be completely false. Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT’s peer reviewed work states “we now know that the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is having very little effect on the climate.” The global surface temperature record, which we update and publish every month, has shown no statistically-significant “global warming” for almost 15 years. Statistically-significant global cooling has now persisted for very nearly eight years. Even a strong el Nino – expected in the coming months – will be unlikely to reverse the cooling trend. More significantly, the ARGO bathythermographs deployed throughout the world’s oceans since 2003 show that the top 400 fathoms of the oceans, where it is agreed between all parties that at least 80% of all heat caused by manmade “global warming” must accumulate, have been cooling over the past six years. That now prolonged ocean cooling is fatal to the “official” theory that “global warming” will happen on anything other than a minute scale. - SPPI Monthly CO2 Report: July 2009 If for no other reason than this: the IPCC assumes that the concentration of CO2 in 2100 will be 836 ppmv (parts per million volume). However, current graphs based on real data show that CO2 concentrations will only be 570 ppmv in 2100, cutting the IPCC’s estimates in half right there. Another nail in the coffin of Global Warming is the observed rate of temperature change from 1980, which is observed to be 1.5 degrees C per century. The IPCC modeling calls for a range of 2.4 to 5.3 degree increase per century, which is far above what is observed in real data collected between 1980 and 2009. The graph below clearly represents a far different reality as opposed to the predictions. Graph A (http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/Global_Temp_Anomalies.jpg) Not only is the IPCC basing its predictions on data that has been doubled from observed data, it is overstating the role of CO2 in Climate altogether. As the graph seen below shows, when charted for the years between 2002 and 2009, that solid red median line is going down, indicating global cooling. Graph B (http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/Last_7_years.jpg) As significant as the above results are, it is not the Pièce de résistance. What is - the curious minded what to know? It is the ERBE results. The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment with 15 years worth of data. The ERBE result is absolutely devastating to the entire Global Warming Theory. The following graph (Graph C) shows the ERBE results in the upper left hand corner, which is real recorded data, not a computer model. The 11 other graphs are the results from the models used by the UN and everyone else which state that more radiation should be held within Earth’s system, thereby causing warming of the climate. More simply put, the UN results illogically predict that as the oceans got warmer, the earth would simply hold more heat. The UN explains that it is CO2 which is holding this extra energy. This theory is not supportable by the simple fact that CO2 cannot hold that much heat, it is a very poor greenhouse gas compared with water. If anything, more clouds -water vapor- would conceivably hold the extra heat, but the corresponding rise in global temperatures this would cause have not been observed. This leaves only one conclusion, the Earth is radiating the extra heat into space, and this is supported by the data. The ERBE results, which are factual data from real measurements made by satellite, show the exact opposite result from the UN/IPCC Projections (computer models which are not real data). As seas warm on earth, the earth releases more heat into space and the satellite results prove it. Graph C (http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/ERBE_1.jpg) The mismatch between reality and prediction is entirely clear. It is this astonishing graph that provides the final evidence that the UN has absurdly exaggerated the effect not only of CO2 but of all greenhouse gases on global mean surface temperature. - Lindzen & Choi (2009). For the sake of making the above graphs clear in their meanings, the term ?SST stands for Change in Sea Surface Temperature measured in Kelvin (A unit of temperature like to Celsius and Fahrenheit), and is a measurement of change in sea temperatures. A -1.0 number would indicate cooling, a zero reflects no temperature change, and a +1.0 would indicate an increase in temperature. ?Flux, The Vertical line in these graphs, measures the change in the amount of radiation released by the planet in the infra-red spectrum, heat in other words. From zero to +6 shows more heat radiated out into space. From zero to -6 shows less heat being radiated into space. 0 change in ?SST equals 0 change in ?Flux or no change. Less infra-red heat radiation going out into space should correlate to cooler sea surface temperatures, as there is less heat available to radiate out. More heat radiating out appears when sea surface temperature increases have occurred and more heat is available to radiate. Heat is radiated out into space as seas warm, and this overall maintains a climate equilibrium, This is proven by the ERBE graph in Graph C above as well as the other graphs presented in this article, which are based on observed data, not computer models. Graph D (http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/Ocean_Temps.jpg) The 3300 Argo bathythermograph buoys deployed throughout the world’s oceans since late in 2003 have shown a slight cooling of the oceans over the past five years, directly contrary to the official theory that any “global warming” not showing in the atmosphere would definitely show up in the first 400 fathoms of the world’s oceans, where at least 80% of any surplus heat would be stored. Source: ARGO project, June 2009. All of this data leads to the conclusion that the UN/IPCC models are not only wrong, they are so far off the mark as to be laughable. The satellite and bathythermograph data clearly do not match the IPCC theory, which means that the theory is incorrect. What this data does tell us is if CO2 concentration should double, global temperatures will not rise by the devastating 6 degrees F the UN predicts, but by a completely harmless 1 degree F. The ERBE data shows an Earth system that is radiating more heat into space as sea surfaces warm, in other words a system at equilibrium, and is clearly demonstrated by observed data. The UN theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming is dead wrong. The UN/IPCC have been using models that give a result that allow them to tell Nation States they must reduce and cap Carbon Emissions or the earth’s climate will warm by a devastating 6 degrees F. When in reality, more heat is simply radiated out into space as the ERBE OBSERVED DATA (Not a computer model) PROVES. The United States House of Representatives has passed a Carbon tax (Cap and Trade) as have other governments in Europe, based on these completely erroneous models. There are only a couple of conclusions to be made of this. Either the world has been misled by scientists working for the UN and IPCC due to faulty science, or faulty science has been deliberately used in a global scheme to generate tax revenues for the Governments instituting Cap and Trade Taxation policies. Either way, the world has been the victim of some very bad science. The results of which can be seen in drastically reduced GDP in countries with the Cap and Trade laws in place, as well a a 5 - 10% decrease in standard of living for those citizens living there (Taxing Carbon designed to fail.), all with little or no effect on emissions globally. Perhaps this will finally end the attempt by the Obama Administration as well as congress to tax a substance that trees need to survive, the very air we exhale thousands of times a day. Thank you Professor Richard Lindzen, Dr. Ferenc M. Miskolczi, Dr. Miklós Zágoni, Dr. Mike Fox here in Oregon, and a great many other Scientists the world over, who decided to look at facts, instead of playing with models. Science is based on data, facts not theories. They took the facts, and let the theory write itself. The IPCC took theories and tried to cherry pick only the details that fit, and in the end failed to do even that. Public policies should also be based on facts, not on unproven and in the end disproven theories. The United States and indeed the world is in the debt of these and other scientists, who relied on data and facts to describe our world and its climate! We are in their debt! For more info: Science and Public Policy Institute, Editorial: The science is in. the scare is out. Recent papers and data give a complete picture of why the UN is wrong. Climate change? Not so fast say Scientists, Have it your way - Global warming is baloney, Einstein-like breakthrough in Climate Science (Part 1), Einstein-like breakthrough in Climate Science (Part 2), Oregon legislature plays Cap-n-Trade shell game, Democrats say Cap and Trade is a big tax, Taxing Carbon designed to fail Updated to clarify sourcing. All information in this article is directly from SPPI June Report. as is stated in the beginning of article. 8-18-2009 2:02pm Pacific http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2009m8d18-Carbon-Dioxide-irrelevant-in-climate-debate-says-MIT-Scientist Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on December 09, 2009, 05:12:17 am A One World Government would be a totalitarianism regime So long as the drum beat was to a socialist ditty Chicken Little would support it. Anyway, while this may or may not cause an one world socialist Once you allow a politician to tax something, it doesn't go away. For example, Napoleon has long since been defeated. Europe has long since cleaned up the aftermath of Napoleon's "freedom" rampage. Yet we still pay income tax. Why? Closer to home: almost immediately in her power the Clark's regime instituted a new "excise" on petrol (apparently that excise wasn't a tax) to pay for Auckland's motorways. They've finished that part of it. Has the excise been revoked? In the same way we've allowed the pond scum to tax air, so get used to having yet another choker chain on. When they get all frantic when the cooling cycle continues on longer they're willing to admit (at the moment) don't ever expect the air taxes to be revoked. No, expect them to go up as they spin the story in yet another direction. But that's all right. So long as we march to the socialist beat played by the Chicken Littles of this world everything will be fine. No doubt they'll come up with a new word for us rather than used the tainted ones of serfs or slaves. The Ministry of Truth will make sure of it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 07:34:24 am Dazza I too would also like to see an end to wars.I would like to see a sharing of the worlds wealth. But do I trust a One World Government that would control every aspect of my life= Shit No If I wanted that kind of life I would move to China A One World Government would be a totalitarianism regime A totalitarian regime is a government which controls every aspect of the life of the people. People living under a totalitarian regime generally also support it, sometimes almost cultishly, thanks to extensive propaganda missions which are designed to promote a positive view of the government. Citizens are also usually afraid to criticize the government, so they may be outspoken supporters to avoid closer scrutiny. To a point sexy I have to agree - there's always a risk factor. However I think the picture you paint is a bit more bleaker than it would be in reality - local govt would likely remain fairly similar to what it is today. One fact we must all accept thou is that as the world population continues to grow unchecked there will come moments were we all lose more and more freedoms, we can see this happening today. It stands to reason and is perfectly logical. I think that's one of the things I don't like about Auckland (or any city) to be honest - the freedoms are limited up here, and they are limited only because of the larger population. Everyone demands their human rights - yet what's a 'right' to some is a 'restriction' to others - and every 'right' has it's backside as we'll, much like in physics were every action has a reaction. The only way to fight this 'freedom loss' is to stop having kids and apply population control. Hardly something which could be blamed on any govt - the people just wont accept that. Yet. They will in the future - they will have no choice, but just not yet. Maybe in 30-40 years time. :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 07:47:31 am Here you go guys - here's the "mother load" of lists you've being seeking...
List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 08:23:50 am When I talk about sharing the worlds wealth i am meaning to take back some of the estimated 400 trillion net worth of the Rothschild's banking dynasty and also take some of the wealth back from their filthy rich friends ,Its those kind of people they have taken the whole world ransom,destroyed nations for greed and power.
by charging huge interest on loans to governments around the world,they have done this unabated for over 250 years. These sort of people have no interest in feeding the worlds starving,and have no cares for people who lack clean drinking water,These people believe the masses of the great unwashed should be culled like pests The people who need water and food All that would be needed for the thirsty nations water supply problems is huge engineered salt water distillation plants,with huge irrigation pipelines this would need big money.Also they would need to replant tree's in the earths Barron regions,and sustainable farming projects,These 3 things alone would be good for the planet and the people. Dazza I still believe the GW carbon tax is propaganda and alarmist bullshit. I would like you to watch these 2 videos then tell me if what they say is right or wrong. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs6ofn46xUY&feature=player_embedded Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 08:52:00 am I agree with some of the above - especially that around the mega rich and water management/sustainability...
If just 1/4 of the money spent killing up Iraqis was spent on projects like you mention above then things would be much better for many billions of people right around the world. Carbon Tax is about the only fair way to force emissions down across the board - make things like fuel more expensive, then people will consider more wisely how they use it. I don't like it either - hell I wish it was free - but that's not reality. It will drive new advances in energy technologies, spur change in an industry which hasn't changed in principle since it's creation. That's a good thing in my books. You show some concern about the people who need water/food now - their situation is now dire, it's those very same areas who are most suspectable. Yet - they are also mostly the very same people who have contributed the least to creating the problem... Will try to watch the above now... if it's just dribble thou (and most are these days, paying no respect to observed changes or the science behind them), then I cant promise to sit though all of it. I will try though. But if they are science based and present new ideas, discoveries or theory's then they will certainly hold my attention. :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 09:05:53 am The lower one is rubbish - will watch the top one when I get a moment (it's almost an hour long...)
:) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 09:37:03 am The lower one is rubbish - will watch the top one when I get a moment (it's almost an hour long...) :) The top one is about the science. I was thinking about some of those poor country's Wouldn't mind betting lot of those dry places around the world were more than likely once covered in lush forests that were devastated and used up by past and long gone civilizations,maybe some was burnt to make room for farming,and some used for building and construction and heating,some exported to other country's and some used for weapons for war maybe thats why a lot of the rain forests are gone.History often has a bad habit of repeating itself. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 12:30:02 pm Giant 19km iceberg B17B heading for Western Australia
A GIANT iceberg bigger than Sydney harbour is drifting north from Antarctica towards Western Australia, scientists have revealed. The iceberg, which is 19km long by 8km wide and known as B17B, was spotted by Australian Antarctic Division glaciologist Neal Young using satellite images taken by NASA and the European Space Agency. Dr Young told The Courier-Mail the iceberg was about 1700km south-south-west of the West Australian coast and moving north with the ocean current and prevailing wind. “B17B is a very significant one in that it has drifted so far north while still largely intact. "It’s one of the biggest sighted at those latitudes, now 48.8º S and 107.5º E. Dr Young said the iceberg was slowly breaking up, resulting in hundreds more smaller icebergs in the area. B17B calved from the eastern end of the Ross Ice Shelf nearly 10 years ago. http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/giant-19km-iceberg-b17b-heading-for-western-australia/story-e6frfku0-1225808551351 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 01:47:49 pm Thats one big mother of an iceberg. why can't we cover it with a big thermal blanket.hook it up to a couple of big tug boats tow it and sell it ti the Arabs.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 01:50:42 pm Any pictures
Does it have any polar bears on it ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2009, 02:52:20 pm WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 2007
The trouble with science Science has revolutionized life since at least the age of exploration, through the industrial revolution, and to an unprecedented degree in the 20th century. Science generally, and physics in particular, got a vast boost in credibility and in government funding following the ability of physicists to develop weapons of unprecedented power in the Manhattan Project. Scientists and their engineering brethren also developed modern electronics, sent men and machines into the cosmos, and much else that would have seemed like miracles and prophecy in prior centuries. Sciences such as psychology and evolutionary theories of behavior have at least potentially revolutionaized our understanding of ourselves. Now we have a large number of self-styled "social sciences" that attempt to understand social behavior and societies through scientific methods. Instead of priests prophecying and invoking miraculous thunderbolts through mumbo-jumbo, our modern scientific priesthood helps create real technology and tells us what to think about social systems and political options by what seems to most people (and even to most scientists outside the particular specialty in question) equally mystical mumbo-jumbo. This scientific elite is supposed to be all quite different from the priesthoods of old because it is supposed to adhere to scientific methods rather than superstition and dogma. The scientific method developed from several sources, but one that is particularly interesting is the law of evidence in medieval and Renaissance Continental Europe. In English law, issues of fact were (and are) determined by a jury and the law of evidence is all about the general biases of juries and thus what lawyers are and are not allowed to present as evidence to them -- the basic rule to overcome juror bias being that the relevance and integrity of the information must outweigh its potential to prejudice the jurors. But in the neo-Roman law that dominated the Continent from the Late Middle Ages to this day, juries were rare and judges determined issues of fact as well as law. Thus there developed in Continental law elaborate doctrines about how judges were supposed to weigh factual evidence. Many Renaissance and Baroque era scientists, such as Galileo, Liebniz, and Pascal, had legal training and this Continental law of evidence was reflected in their methods. Most other early scientists had been exposed to law-derived doctrines simply by attending universities many of whose doctrines derived from the original universities which were essentially law schools. Soon, however, the scientific community was independently evolving its own cultural norms from this starting point. The ideal was to seek the truth. Experiment became the sine quo non of scientific credibility, along with mathmetical rigor and important applications in navigation, engineering, and medicine. Scientific funding came from a variety of sources; when governments funded scientists they were expected to solve important problems such as those raised by navigation of the seas, not merely to theorize. After the Englightenment governments started to separate themselves from the social dogmas of their day -- religions -- by making secularizing government and allowing freedom of religion. Today a wide variety of important political issues are dominated by ideas from scienitific communities (or at least communities that style themselves as scientific): economists, climate scientists, and many others. But there is no separation of science from government. Like the state-sponsored religions of yore, most modern scientists derive both their education and their ongoing livelihood from government funding of the theories with which they are taught and on which they work. The old state-sponsored religions, and the resulting ideas about politics and society, were funded by governments. Not surprisingly, as such governments took over religion it became sacreligious to criticize the importance of government generally and often specific governmental institutions in particular. Under the nationalizers of dogma such as Henry VIII, who nationalized the lands and priests of the Catholic Church in England, "render under Caeasar" became more important than "render under God." Despite the advantages of better funding these state-sponsored sects have been in decline ever since governments stopped otherwise suppressing their competitors. The state sponsored churches mostly taught uncritical worship of authority whereas their private competitors added much more spiritual value to their adherent's lives. The simplest science is physics. In some sense all other sciences are just a variety of complex models of what happens when various kinds of complex physical systems interact. Physics itself is the simple core of science. Thus physics has been hailed as the "hardest" of the "hard sciences" -- sciences where evidence trumps bias and the truth always outs sooner or later, usually sooner, despite the biases of the individuals or institutions involved. Hard scientists will often admit that the use of the scientific method in "soft sciences" such as economics and other intersubjective areas can be problematic and subject to great bias. If any science can rise above self-serving biases and efficiently search for the truth, it should be physics. But the recent history of physics casts some rather disturbing shadows on the integrity of even this hardest of sciences. Lee Smolin in The Trouble with Physics lays out a picture of an unprecedented group of geniuses, the string theorists, who have wasted the last twenty years, largely at taxpayer's expense, basically producing nothing except a vast number of highly obscure but, in certain senses, quite elegant theories. The number of possible string theories is so vast that string theory can, like "intelligent design," explain anything -- it is unfalsifiable. It is "not even wrong," to take Wolfgang Pauli's phrase about an earlier unfalsifiable theory of his era. String theory's main rivals over the last two decades are not much better. Theoretical physics for the last twenty years has mostly not been science at all, but rather has been a large group of geniuses working on their own cabalistic variety of sudoku puzzles at taxpayer expense in the name of science. If this is the state of physics -- if even the hardest of sciences can be taken over by a thousand-strong cabal of geniuses who produce nothing of value except wonderful-sounding untestable theories whose main success has been in garnering their community more of our tax dollars -- what hope do we have that government-funded climate scientists, economists, and others purporting to do science in areas far more complex or subjective than physics are actually producing relatively unbiased truths? If we took a poll of theoretical physicists, they might well have (up until quite recently) reached a remarkable degree of "consensus" on the truth of string theory -- just as global warming scientists have reached a "consensus" on global warming and (it is implied) on the various bits of the speculative nonsense surrounding global warming. Does such consensus mean us lay people should automatically believe this consensus of experts? Or should we demand more? Shouldn't we rather, when deciding on which theories or predictions of climate science or economics to believe, act like a Continental judge or a common-law jury and demand to actually see the evidence and weigh it for ourselves? Shouldn't we demand to hear from the defense as well as from the prosecution? Experiment, multiple points of view, and critical analysis are, after all, the real scientific method -- as opposed to the ancient religious method of uncritically trusting a single hierarchy of experts. Today's ideas about politics and society -- "scientific theories" if you agree with them, "dogmas" if you don't -- are funded by the very governmental entities that stand to benefit from increased government power. Just as it was taboo under Henry VIII to "deny" the authority of either Christ or the King, it has now become taboo in many of these modern intellectual communities to "deny" a variety of scientific theories that are now supposed to be "beyond debate," not just things like the basic idea of global warming caused at least in part by anthropogenic carbon dioxide(which this author finds sound and quite probable, but nevertheless believes should remain like all true scientific theories open to further inquiry and debate) but also the variety of extreme speculations that have grown up around it (regarding the severity of storms, projections of droughts, floods, etc., most of which are pseudoscientific nonsense). I'm hardly the only person who recognizes this problem with science. Indeed, the opinion expressed above is quite mild compared to an increasing number of conservatives who are coming to reject big chunks of good science along with the bad -- not just the many florid speculations surrounding global warming, but global warming itself, evolution, and other products of the expert priesthood that threaten long-established (and often, ironically, highly evolved) beliefs. Conservatives, and more than a few libertarians, feel that modern science is becoming increasingly dominated by government funding and thus becoming dominated by the interests of government in gaining more dominance over our lives. With opposing ideas increasingly unable to access to this research and education funding themselves, the easiest way for those opposed to increasing state power to effectuate their beliefs is to reject the theories of the scientific communities that promote this power. This, and not sheer cave-man irrationality, is why many conservatives are increasingly throwing out the baby with the bathwater and rejecting science generally. Both trends -- the increased government dominance over science and the increasing rejection of science generally by those who oppose increased government controls which scientists increasingly promote -- are disturbing and dangerous. Science, once a method of weighing evidence that called for the opinions of both prosecution and defense, is increangly being dominated by the prosecution. We need a return to science with a diversity of funding and thus a diversity of biases. This is much more important to the health of science than the absolute level of funding of science. Reducing government funding of science would thus increase the quality of science -- by making the biases of scientific communities more balanced and thus more likely to cancel each other out, just as the biases of the defense generally cancel out the biases of the prosecution. Where government does fund science, it should demand strict compliance to the basic evidentiary principles of science, such as falsifiability. All government-funded theorists should be required to design experiments that can be conducted relatively inexpensively and in the near future, that would strongly tend to verify or falsify their proposed theories. More speculative theories -- such as those that rely on unobserved or worse, unobservable entities -- simply should not be funded by governments. There are a wide variety of private entities that are happy to fund such speculations; this variety of funding sources is more important to reducing bias the further one gets away from strictly controlled experiment. Any time government funds science we should ask, does the utility of the potential discoveries and the integrity of the scientific methods being used -- their ability to find the truth even in the face of high institutional bias -- outweigh the potential for the funding by one dominant source to prejudice the opinions of the fund recipients? Science has benefited our lives in incalculable ways for many centuries. Increasingly we inform our political decisions with the discoveries and theories of science. As sciences ranging from climatology to economics play an increasing role modern politics, this task of building a wall of separation between government and science -- or at least not allowing states to sponsor particular scientific theories at the expense of others with comparable weights of evidence, and not allowing states to fund some biased speculations at the expense of others -- is one of our most important and urgent tasks. If we are to remain living in democracies we voters must learn once again to weigh some of the evidence for ourselves, even if this means we gain our understanding through the lossy communications of popularizers. It does not work to trust a theory, no matter how scientific it may sound, based on a "consensus" or "lack of debate" among experts who mostly derive their funding from a single biased source. We democratic jurors must demand to hear from the defense -- really from a variety of parties whose biases largely cancel each other out -- rather than from just the prosection. We must redesign our scientific institutions to minimize the biases that come from a single dominant source of funding if we are to achieve good solutions to our important problems -- solutions that are not dominated by the biases of that dominant entity. http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2007/03/trouble-with-science.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 07:24:43 pm Aussies swelter through hottest six months on record
AUSTRALIA has recorded its hottest six months ever and is well on track to have the second hottest year since records began, the Bureau of Meteorology said. The World Meteorological Organisation's annual climate statement released at Copenhagen found temperatures in 2009 reached 0.44C above the 1961-1990 annual average. "The decade 2000-2009 is very likely to be the warmest on record," WMO secretary general Michel Jarraud told reporters at the Copenhagen climate summit late yesterday, Australian time. Australia was singled out for its wild weather in 2009. "Australia had the third-warmest year on record with three exceptional heatwaves," Mr Jarraud said. The WMO report said the heatwaves happened in January/February, when the hot weather contributed to the disastrous Victorian bushfires, in August and again in November. The presence of El Nino conditions underway in the Pacific saw near-record rises in sea surface temperatures and most parts of Australia experienced an exceptionally mild winter. Maximum temperatures were also well above the national average, with 3.2C above normal, the largest ever recorded in any month. Dr David Jones, head of climate analysis at the Bureau of Meteorology's national climate centre, said one of the biggest impacts in the last year had been the absence of cold, with a massive decline in sea ice in the Arctic. "The last six months have been the warmest six months on record for Australia," Dr Jones said. "We expect 2009 will be either the second warmest year on record for Australia or the third warmest." He said the results were not surprising. "Every decade's been getting warmer for the last 70 years. "Clearly climate change hasn't stopped, global warming hasn't stopped." The outlook for the summer is consistent, Dr Jones said, with warm daytime conditions in northeast Australia forecast to continue. http://www.news.com.au/national/aussies-swelter-through-hottest-six-months-on-record/story-e6frfkvr-1225808646463 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 09, 2009, 07:29:17 pm Fourteen days to seal history’s judgment on this generation
Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency. Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year’s inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage. Yet so far the world’s response has been feeble and half-hearted. Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone. The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea. The controversy over emails by British researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these predictions are based. Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty; real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of US obstructionism. Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics, for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the US Congress has done so. But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree the essential elements of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it into a treaty. Next June’s UN climate meeting in Bonn should be their deadline. As one negotiator put it: “We can go into extra time but we can’t afford a replay.” At the deal’s heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be divided — and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or so tonnes of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous levels. Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the accumulated carbon in the atmosphere – three-quarters of all carbon dioxide emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade to very substantially less than their 1990 level. Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will be hardest hit. But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the world’s biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps in the right direction. Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down – with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of “exported emissions” so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer than “old Europe”, must not suffer more than their richer partners. The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing. Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it. But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels. Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort to achieve collective salvation. Overcoming climate change will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of vision over short-sightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature”. It is in that spirit that 56 newspapers from around the world have united behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can too. The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history’s judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice. http://www.realclimate.org/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 09, 2009, 10:06:50 pm I wouldn't worry too much about "science" sexy. ...you wouldn't worry about the science of your claims in what is solely a scientific matter?! ??? PMSL!!!! That my friends - that one sentence alone sums up the skeptics perfectly. (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) HULLLOOOOOO - are you ignorant or just plain stupid? In light of the FIASCO thats surfaced re East Anglia (and others), IT'S THE "SCIENCE" THATS BLOODY WELL BEING QUESTIONED!!! Its all very well posting this and that but dont lose sight of the fact that the spotlight is on bogus and illegal! And Sexy - you are right that humans have been affected by climate and earth changes over history - port cities have become relegated where the sea has retreated a mile or more (Brugge is a good example of this), ancient cave art in areas that are now inhospitable parts of the planet are more evidence... I dont think humans will die out - more likely is a scenario where areas of the planet will not be able to support human life in increasing numbers. People rave about droughts and water shortages in Australia when Australia is and has been a semi arid place for millions of years - and has had to support tens of millions of people only in VERY recent history. The contradiction I find in your posts that suggest an agenda of world population reduction is that end is unlikely to occur as quickly under a rich nation wealth redistribution program (under the guise of climate taxes or whatever) - or perhaps the wealth redistribution program is only intended to benefit a few while many will die off through lack of access to water, food etc? The distribution of power in places like Asia and Africa has to be closely looked into - no way do I want any funding to go to despotic miscreants to load up on arms and munition to crush the citizens, to set up Swiss bank accounts and the like either to serve themselves or a select few in the West! Thats what dazza needs to realize too. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 10, 2009, 06:28:31 am HULLLOOOOOO - are you ignorant or just plain stupid? In light of the FIASCO thats surfaced re East Anglia (and others), IT'S THE "SCIENCE" THATS BLOODY WELL BEING QUESTIONED!!! Its all very well posting this and that but dont lose sight of the fact that the spotlight is on bogus and illegal! Jezz - not you as well Benny... You've been sucked into a ploy - the fact is (and it's easy to see if you bother looking) - they found nothing in any of the 10 years worth of private correspondence so they resorted to pulling words right out of context - hardly any sort of proof of some conspiracy is it? ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 10, 2009, 06:30:52 am People rave about droughts and water shortages in Australia when Australia is and has been a semi arid place for millions of years - and has had to support tens of millions of people only in VERY recent history. I don't Aussie has being mentioned once in this whole thread - until now... ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 10, 2009, 10:29:57 pm ::)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sHg3ZztDAw&feature=player_embedded Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 11, 2009, 01:12:33 am People rave about droughts and water shortages in Australia when Australia is and has been a semi arid place for millions of years - and has had to support tens of millions of people only in VERY recent history. I don't Aussie has being mentioned once in this whole thread - until now... ::) Post #135 - "Aussies swelter through hottest six months on record" - YOU POSTED IT. ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 03:29:08 pm Climate Change: The Role of Flawed Science
An analysis by Peter Laut – November 2009 “My findings do not by any means rule out the existence of important links between solar activity and terrestrial climate. Such links have over the years been demonstrated by many authors. The sole objective of the present analysis is to draw attention to the fact that some of the widely publicized, apparent correlations do not properly reflect the underlying physical data.” - From my article in Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 2003 (see link given below) At the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009 the nations of the world will discuss possible ways to slow down global climate change. The main goal will be to organize a coordinated reduction of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. With all nations contributing according to their ability. But: Is global warming perhaps caused by the sun? An important question concerns the physical cause of global warming. Is it primarily caused by changes in solar activity or by man-made greenhouse gasses? The answer has enormous consequences for the way mankind should react. If the dominant cause for global warming is solar activity, then there is no reason for mankind to waste resources in trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And no reason to have the climate conference in Copenhagen. If, however, the dominant cause is man-made greenhouse gasses, then a reduction of emissions may be absolutely necessary in order to prevent a global climate catastrophe. The overwhelming majority of scientists, represented by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has for many years collected and analyzed observational data and carried out model simulations in order to resolve this question and has arrived at the conclusion that the results overwhelmingly point at the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere as the cause. There are practically no observations which render it probable that solar influences play more than a minor role. Now, in spite of the almost unanimous message from the world’s scientific community, there is a small group of scientists who try to promote the solar theory. They are supported by a massive network of journalists, film makers, TV producers, authors, politicians and grass roots. This group is centered around two Copenhagen climatologists, Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen. Flawed science I have followed the scientific work of these two researchers over many years. In the 1990’s I was scientific advisor to the Danish Energy Agency. It was my task to scrutinize the steady flux of climate related scientific literature and keep the Agency informed about developments which should be taken into account in shaping Danish energy and climate policies. In 1991 Eigil Friis-Christensen together with Knud Lassen, another Danish researcher, published an article in the scientific journal Science which attracted worldwide attention. It seemed to document a close agreement between data representing solar activity (solar cycle lengths), and terrestrial temperatures. The agreement was displayed on a graph which showed a solar and a terrestrial curve closely intertwined. What made the graph a sensation, was the fact, that the steep rise in temperature from about 1970, the ‘global warming’, was closely matched by a corresponding steep rise of the solar curve. This was seen by many as proof that global warming was caused by the sun. The graph has been reproduced extensively all over the word, both in the mass media and in scientific literature, and has helped to create a large community of believers, who claim that the sun is causing the global warming. Regrettably, it took some years before a careful analysis of the article revealed that the conspicuous steep rise of the solar curve actually had nothing to do with the behavior of the sun, but had been created (accidentally?) by a change of the mathematical procedure used to calculate the points creating the steep rise. I published this finding in 2003 in The Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, but had already presented my critique in the year 2000 at a conference on “The Solar Cycle and Terrestrial Climate”, arranged by the European Space Agency. In the late 1990’s a series of articles seemed to provide additional credibility to the ‘solar theory’. In 1996 Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen presented observations which apparently lent support to the solar theory. At a conference in Birmingham they showed that some solar related data (this time the intensity of galactic cosmic rays) correlated strongly with some terrestrial data (total cloud cover). The agreement was striking for the years 1984-90, which was the period for which data were available. However, as every scientist knows, an agreement only extending over a short time span, here seven years, can be misleading. So, to test a possible causal relationship, the authors in their later publications, two articles published in 1997 and 1998 respectively, added some more recent data, which they claimed demonstrated that the close agreement extended beyond the seven years. However, close inspection of their work revealed two fatal flaws: 1) Most of the added data were totally irrelevant in the context of the article, but created the false impression that the close agreement with the solar curve did extend beyond the original seven years (see my paper for details). Actually, the authors’ procedure is like adding bananas to a statistic on apples and then claiming the statistic to be on apples alone. 2) However, the authors had also added relevant data. These were all displayed in the 1997-article, but some of them were removed again in the 1998-article. Strangely enough, the removed data were precisely those data which indicated a beginning disagreement with the solar theory, a disagreement that would become dramatic when more observational data became available in the following years (See my 2003-article for details). Svensmark has never tried to defend himself properly, i.e., by a peer reviewed reply article, against these serious charges. Friis-Christensen once tried to defend himself against the criticism of the 1991-Science article. However, the apparent rebuttal in his reply-article was only achieved by introducing two simple arithmetic errors, which were well hidden in the article and quite difficult to spot. The two arithmetic errors artificially created an agreement of the new observational data with the values of the 1991-article. Applying correct arithmetic the support of the solar theory totally vanishes (See my 2003-article for details). The strong human appeal of solar theory The solar theory apparently has a strong emotional appeal to an important segment of the public. And, opposition to it can lead to political reprisal with severe consequences for the funding of individual researchers and research institutes. Several books and many TV ‘documentaries’ have appeared, promoting the solar theory. To mention a few: The TV documentary ‘The Great Global Swindle’ by Martin Durkin was shown on UK’s Channel 4 in March 2007. And a whole series of films by Lars Mortensen: “The Climate Conflict” from 2001, broadcast in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, France, Germany, Belgium, Spain and Portugal . “Doomsday Called off” from 2004, broadcast in Denmark, Belgium, Finland, Canada, Norway, Middle East and Asia. And “The Cloud Mystery” from 2008, broadcast in Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, France, Belgium, Australia, Poland, Greece, Italy, Israel and France. Some readers may find this list long and boring. Others may find it scary. It can be seen as a threat to the authority of sound science, originating from a mixture of popular wishful thinking, populist deception and industrial interests. Many of these films are created with great artistic talent, and have – apparently – convinced millions of ordinary people and many political decision makers all over the world that global warming is caused by solar activity and not by human made greenhouse gasses. How can the world’s politicians make responsible decisions, when their voters are seduced to believe in fairytales? The myth – describing a small group of ingenious scientists, who have arrived at the ultimate truth about climate, who have identified the sun as the mighty culprit, and who are shunned by a stubborn, envious establishment of old, narrow-minded professors – has a strong appeal to many. It is good stuff for an artistic film maker. It can be molded into a moving story – mixing images of lonely heroes, brave, fighting underdogs, with beautiful pictures of the sun and clouds. And it turns out that neither the filmmaker nor the audience can be influenced by being told that the solemnly presented graphs on the screen are rigged. Who is to blame? Who is to blame for the development of this irrational cult of a postulated solar influence upon the Earth’s climate? The IPCC is not without responsibility for providing the free ride for solar crusaders. Because the IPCC has never made it clear, that the problem with the widely circulated, infamous figures of 1991 and 1998 -which probably have been the most important persuaders -is not a question of scientific uncertainty and differing opinion, but a case of manipulated data that have nothing to do with reality. Instead of merely describing Svensmark’s contributions as ‘controversial’, some stronger words from the IPCC would have been appropriate. In a language that could be understood by ordinary citizens. There are many other examples of the failure of the scientific community to prevent misinformation. On the website of the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), you can still find the original proposal for the so-called CLOUD project from 2000, an experiment designed to investigate a possible link between cosmic rays and clouds. An excellent scientific project. The front page of this proposal displays the names of 56 scientists -many of them well-known and well-regarded -from 9 countries. However, in the chapter describing the scientific motivation – which should contain the scientific essence of the proposal -the false conclusions of the manipulated articles from 1991 and 1998 are described in detail, illustrated by the misleading graphs. Without any cautioning of the unsuspicious reader! Did any of these scientists actually read the chapter on the scientific motivation for this multimillion Euro project? But, no matter what the scientists knew or did not know when this proposal was posted, for the ordinary visitor in year 2009 this inclusion must appear as a guarantee that the articles represent good science. Another example of a certain irresponsibility of the scientific community: The Danish Meteorological Institute for many years proudly displayed the misleading 1991-graph on its website, as an example of its pioneering achievements in climate research. The motivation for this misinformation may have been a belief that the solar credentials would generate political goodwill and attract funding. A question of trust So, it must be recognized that not all research institutions have accepted proper responsibility to maintain the trust which the general public traditionally places in them. In the modern world, many scientific results are extremely difficult to verify independently. They may be produced by a group of several researchers working for months or even years with vast amounts of data, which have to be calibrated employing especially tailored computer programs. Often it is practically impossible for an outsider to verify the conclusions. That applies also to the referees, who have to decide on the publication of the work. So, trust is in the short run often all we have to judge the authenticity of claimed new developments. Trust in fellow scientists and trust in research institutions. And, at the Copenhagen conference on global climate the decision makers of the world, must be able to trust the scientific basis which is presented to them. They must be able to rely on it when building a strategy to fend off catastrophic climate developments. So, the scientific community should be careful not to squander this trust. A few weeks ago, in Swedish Public Television, two of the world’s leading climatologists were asked about Svensmark and his solar theory. Now, scientific dispute has a long tradition for expressing disagreement in polite and neutral terms. Only in rare cases blunt words surface, as when Jon Egill Kristjánsson, professor at The University of Oslo concluded : “It should not be taken seriously – to put it plain and simple.” And Mike Lockwood of The Royal Society of London, who to begin with – years ago -supported the theory, said “.. the change in the magnetic field since 1985 – it’s moved in the wrong direction”, which means that according to Svensmark’s ideas we should have experienced a global cooling since then. And he added: “I would love it to be right! I would absolutely love it to be right! Unfortunately, wanting something doesn’t change the scientific reality. One can’t use spin or rhetoric or anything to change the scientific reality.” My 2003-article can be downloaded from the link: http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Laut2003.pdf Peter Laut Professor (emeritus) of physics at The Technical University of Denmark Former scientific advisor on climate change for The Danish Energy Agency Storskovvej 10, 8721 Daugaard, Denmark. Phone: +45 7589 6750. E-mail: peter@laut.dk Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 12, 2009, 05:06:02 pm Peer-Reviewed Study: Global Warming is Natural, Shows No Human Influence
December 10, 2007 Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that observed patterns of temperature changes (�fingerprints�) over the last thirty years are not in accord with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability. Therefore, climate change is �unstoppable� and More.. cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation. These results are in conflict with the conclusions of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and also with some recent research publications based on essentially the same data. However, they are supported by the results of the US-sponsored Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]. The authors are Prof. David H. Douglass (Univ. of Rochester), Prof. John R. Christy (Univ. of Alabama), Benjamin D. Pearson (graduate student), and Prof. S. Fred Singer (Univ. of Virginia). The fundamental question is whether the observed warming is natural or anthropogenic (human-caused). Lead author David Douglass said: �The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming.� Co-author John Christy said: �Satellite data and independent balloon data agree that atmospheric warming trends do not exceed those of the surface. Greenhouse models, on the other hand, demand that atmospheric trend values be 2-3 times greater. We have good reason, therefore, to believe that current climate models greatly overestimate the effects of greenhouse gases. Satellite observations suggest that GH models ignore negative feedbacks, produced by clouds and by water vapor, that diminish the warming effects of carbon dioxide.� Co-author S. Fred Singer said: �The current warming trend is simply part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that has been seen in ice cores, deep-sea sediments, stalagmites, etc., and published in hundreds of papers in peer-reviewed journals. The mechanism for producing such cyclical climate changes is still under discussion; but they are most likely caused by variations in the solar wind and associated magnetic fields that affect the flux of cosmic rays incident on the earth�s atmosphere. In turn, such cosmic rays are believed to influence cloudiness and thereby control the amount of sunlight reaching the earth�s surface and thus the climate.� Our research demonstrates that the ongoing rise of atmospheric CO2 has only a minor influence on climate change. We must conclude, therefore, that attempts to control CO2 emissions are ineffective and pointless. � but very costly. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 05:17:24 pm Link?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 12, 2009, 07:16:34 pm http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a8c_1197385712
The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]. Thats for my previous post. Any links to your oil baron computer hacker come to hand? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 07:24:34 pm Cheers.
:-) Re the oil dude - nar - I couldn't be assed hunting for it. I cant even remember which thread it was in. :) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 07:27:28 pm http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a8c_1197385712 The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]. Thats for my previous post. Why is everything related to that 'story' on that site related to other stories about Tax? And what's up with all the hard core porn videos? You don't seriously buy into sources like that do you? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 07:35:24 pm Got it...
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/ Talk about talking SHIT... gods. First of all - the man who hacked this database is a known skeptic AND (more importantly) has known strong connections to the oil industry. He was for many years a CEO of one such company. Quote McIntyre worked for 30 years in the mineral business,[1] the last part of these in the hard-rock mineral exploration as an officer or director of several public mineral exploration companies.[2] He has also been a policy analyst at both the governments of Ontario and of Canada.[3] He was the president and founder of Northwest Exploration Company Limited and a director of its parent company, Northwest Explorations Inc. When Northwest Explorations Inc. was taken over in 1998 by CGX Resources Inc. to form the oil and gas exploration company CGX Energy Inc., McIntyre ceased being a director. McIntyre was a strategic advisor for CGX in 2000 through 2003.[4] Prior to 2003 he was an officer or director of several small public mineral exploration companies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_McIntyre The guy is a self vested pig who (like many others) only has his own interests at heart. ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on December 12, 2009, 07:50:54 pm http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a8c_1197385712 The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]. Thats for my previous post. Why is everything related to that 'story' on that site related to other stories about Tax? And what's up with all the hard core porn videos? You don't seriously buy into sources like that do you? I think that "The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]" is credible enough. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on December 12, 2009, 08:14:21 pm Yer - but the first hurdle was the 2007 bit - and then there's the small problem of the Author working with/for the Heartland Institute (which is funded by Exxon - as are most skeptics).
:) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 13, 2009, 02:40:35 am http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPNiBVU2QIA&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts6D4bhgLCQ&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccEmGdhyWG8&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Lhs7VR52Bg&feature=related Antarctic Temperatures of the Past Two Centuries http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N40/EDIT.jsp In order to assess the uniqueness of the current temperature regime in any part of the world, it is important - nay, necessary - to know its past temperature history; and to determine if a region's current temperature regime may validly be attributed to CO2-induced global warming, it is important that its temperature history stretch as far back in time as possible. Consequently, and as "the temporal variability of Antarctic climate is not well known, as continuous meteorological observations in the Antarctic began only in the late 1950s," according to Schneider et al. (2006), this group of seven researchers decided to utilize 200 years of sub-annually-resolved δ18O and δD records from precisely-dated ice cores obtained from Law Dome, Siple Station, Dronning Maud Land and two West Antarctic sites of the United States component of the International Trans-Antarctic Scientific Expedition to create "a 200-year-long Antarctic temperature reconstruction (representing the main part of the continent) methodologically similar to temperature reconstructions covering other geographic regions." The results of this significant undertaking, following application of a multi-decadal low-pass filter to the yearly data, are presented in the figure below, along with the similarly-treated data of the Southern Hemisphere instrumental temperature record, where the zero line represents the 1961-1990 climatological means of the two records. We present the figure for the purpose of discussing what Schneider et al. have to say about it, much of which we consider to be rather disingenuous. (http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20061013/20061013_02_files/image002.jpg) Figure 1. Mean temperature histories of Antarctica (dark line) and the Southern Hemisphere (lighter line), adapted from the paper of Schneider et al. (2006). In reference to the figure, its creators say "it is notable that the reconstructed Antarctic temperature record is in phase with the Southern Hemisphere mean instrumental record." This statement roughly describes the relationship between the two histories, but only until 1990, after which the Antarctic temperature history takes a "nosedive" and dramatically diverges from the Southern Hemisphere record. The seven scientists also say the Antarctic temperature reconstruction "provides evidence for long-term Antarctic warming," and if all the data we had were those that stretch from 1840 to 1990, one might be inclined to believe them. However, when their "before and after" data are included, this statement is readily seen to be false. In fact, the entire record suggests the existence of a multi-decadal or centennial-scale cycling of climate, where Antarctic temperatures in the early 1800s were equally as warm as they were in the late-1930s/early-1940s, as well as in the late-1980s/early-1990s. We additionally note that a number of other analyses of Antarctic instrumental surface and air temperature data also indicate the continent has recently experienced a net cooling, which likely began as early as the mid-1960s (Comiso, 2000; Doran et al., 2002; Thompson and Solomon, 2002). Furthermore, it is obvious from the figure we adapted from Schneider et al. that there has been a net cooling over the entire course of their Antarctic temperature reconstruction of nearly 0.3°C. So what do Schneider et al.'s data really suggest? First of all, their data suggest there was nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about any Antarctic temperatures of any part of the 20th century. Second, their data demonstrate it was significantly colder in Antarctica near the end of the 20th century than it was in the early decades of the 19th century (when the atmosphere's CO2 concentration was about 100 ppm less than it is currently), while the data of others indicate it may be even colder there today. Finally, Schneider et al.'s data indicate there is something drastically wrong with the theory of anthropogenic-induced global warming, when a 100-ppm increase in the air's CO2 concentration leads to a large decrease in air temperature in a part of the world (one of earth's two polar regions) where CO2-induced greenhouse warming is predicted to be most dramatic and most readily detected. Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso References Comiso, J.C. 2000. Variability and trends in Antarctic surface temperatures from in situ and satellite infrared measurements. Journal of Climate 13: 1674-1696. Doran, P.T., Priscu, J.C., Lyons, W.B., Walsh, J.E., Fountain, A.G., McKnight, D.M., Moorhead, D.L., Virginia, R.A., Wall, D.H., Clow, G.D., Fritsen, C.H., McKay, C.P. and Parsons, A.N. 2002. Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response. Nature advance online publication, 13 January 2002 (DOI 10.1038/nature710). Schneider, D.P., Steig, E.J., van Ommen, T.D., Dixon, D.A., Mayewski, P.A., Jones, J.M. and Bitz, C.M. 2006. Antarctic temperatures over the past two centuries from ice cores. Geophysical Research Letters 33: 10.1029/2006GL027057. http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20061013/20061013_02.html Mysterious warm periods found in Antarctic history 20 November 2009, by Tamera Jones Temperatures in Antarctica during the warm periods between ice ages, called interglacials, may have been higher than previously thought. The findings, reported in Nature today, could help researchers better understand more about how the climate can quickly change on the continent. Antarctica Until now, scientists thought maximum temperatures during interglacials were a little warmer than today's temperatures. But they now think they may have been up to 6ºC warmer. 'Our results suggest that Antarctica warmed rapidly in the past, but at the moment we don't know why,' says lead author, Dr Louise Sime from the British Antarctic Survey. 'It might be that at higher CO2 levels Antarctic temperatures are more sensitive to small variations, due to regional warming feedbacks.' Climate has flipped Scientists have known that the climate has flipped between ice ages and interglacials over the last few million years for some time. Fossils of animals that lived during warm or cool climates in deep-sea sediments and rocks reflect changing temperatures. 'Our results suggest that Antarctica warmed rapidly in the past, but at the moment we don't know why.' Dr Louise Sime, British Antarctic Survey Ice cores tell a similar story. Changes in the proportion of different types of atoms of the same chemical element, or isotope, in ancient ice give researchers detailed information about how temperatures varied. When it's cold, water made with the heavy version, or isotope, of hydrogen - deuterium - falls out of the sky as snow sooner than water made with normal hydrogen, because it's heavier than normal water. Ice cores containing ancient ice record this, so they tell scientists what the temperature was thousands of years ago. 'Isotopes in ice cores are a very neat temperature proxy, because you're using fairly simple physics,' says Sime. To figure out average changes in temperature each year, scientists have assumed that the way snowfall records annual temperatures each year hardly varies over East Antarctica. But when Sime and scientists from the Open University and the University of Bristol analysed ice cores from three regions of East Antarctica containing 340,000-year-old ice, they found differences in the way snowfall records annual temperature. Sime says, 'It's unlikely that all of the differences in ice cores depend on temperature. Instead there are also likely to be some changes in snowfall.' 'Further data on interglacial climates from Greenland would be invaluable to help understand what's going on,' she adds. The world has seen cycles of glaciation with ice sheets advancing and retreating on 100,000-year time scales. These periods are called glacials and interglacials respectively. We're currently in an interglacial, which started around 11,000 years ago. http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/news/story.aspx?id=602 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 13, 2009, 03:02:14 am (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0608/sunprom_soho.jpg)
An erupting solar prominence photographed by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) Scientists Predict Big Solar Cycle 12.21.2006 Dec. 21, 2006: Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one. Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 "looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. He and colleague Robert Wilson presented this conclusion last week at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco. . Their forecast is based on historical records of geomagnetic storms. Hathaway explains: "When a gust of solar wind hits Earth's magnetic field, the impact causes the magnetic field to shake. If it shakes hard enough, we call it a geomagnetic storm." In the extreme, these storms cause power outages and make compass needles swing in the wrong direction. Auroras are a beautiful side-effect. Hathaway and Wilson looked at records of geomagnetic activity stretching back almost 150 years and noticed something useful:. "The amount of geomagnetic activity now tells us what the solar cycle is going to be like 6 to 8 years in the future," says Hathaway. A picture is worth a thousand words: (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/images/cycle24/hathaway1_strip2.jpg) Above: Peaks in geomagnetic activity (red) foretell solar maxima (black) more than six years in advance. [More] In the plot, above, black curves are solar cycles; the amplitude is the sunspot number. Red curves are geomagnetic indices, specifically the Inter-hour Variability Index or IHV. "These indices are derived from magnetometer data recorded at two points on opposite sides of Earth: one in England and another in Australia. IHV data have been taken every day since 1868," says Hathaway. Cross correlating sunspot number vs. IHV, they found that the IHV predicts the amplitude of the solar cycle 6-plus years in advance with a 94% correlation coefficient. "We don't know why this works," says Hathaway. The underlying physics is a mystery. "But it does work." (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/images/cycle24/hathaway2_med.gif)According to their analysis, the next Solar Maximum should peak around 2010 with a sunspot number of 160 plus or minus 25. This would make it one of the strongest solar cycles of the past fifty years—which is to say, one of the strongest in recorded history. Left: Hathaway and Wilson's prediction for the amplitude of Solar Cycle 24. [More] Astronomers have been counting sunspots since the days of Galileo, watching solar activity rise and fall every 11 years. Curiously, four of the five biggest cycles on record have come in the past 50 years. "Cycle 24 should fit right into that pattern," says Hathaway. These results are just the latest signs pointing to a big Cycle 24. Most compelling of all, believes Hathaway, is the work of Mausumi Dikpati and colleagues at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. "They have combined observations of the sun’s 'Great Conveyor Belt' with a sophisticated computer model of the sun’s inner dynamo to produce a physics-based prediction of the next solar cycle." In short, it's going to be intense. Details may be found in the Science@NASA story Solar Storm Warning. "It all hangs together," says Hathaway. Stay tuned for solar activity. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 04, 2010, 11:53:09 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202010/1029_700pxWhileClimateChangeDeniers.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2010, 04:19:21 pm (http://www.gwinnettforum.com/images/05images/05.0708.cartoon_large.gif).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2010, 04:34:31 pm (http://jeremysarber.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/stop-global-warming-cartoon.gif).
(http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2009/07/06/InconvenientTruth.jpg) Proponents of Man-Made Climate Fears Enjoy Monumental Funding Advantage over Skeptics source: ICECAP (http://ihatealgore.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Global-cooling-Al-Gore-300x266.jpg) Often when I or any other skeptic are quoted in a newspaper, do a TV interview that is carried on the station’s or network’s web site or get mentioned in an alarmist blog, the first knee jerk reactions of some commenters is to accuse us of being part of some far right wing conspiracy to preserve the status quo (many of us are independent or even left of center politically – it is not about politics but about science) and continue our polluting ways (CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant fertiilzer), or most commonly of being a shill for big oil, or dirty from coal, or bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry. That is clearly not the case. Compared to the proponents riding the big grant money gravy train we are the person on the corner with a tin cup. Marc Morano did a comparison of the funding received by the proponents in comparison to the smaller funding for objective scientists who take a more skeptical or open minded position (the way science used to be before the lure of money corrupted it). Marc did not include the funding the alarmists blogs get from folks like George Soros, Fenton Communications, convicted Canadian felons, environmental groups and activists which runs in the many millions of dollars. Here is Marc’s summary. You may have other examples. If so please email me (jdaleo@icecap.us). Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter, who has testified before the Senate Environment & Public Works committee, explained how much money has been spent researching and promoting climate fears and so-called solutions. “In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more than $US50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one,” Carter wrote on June 18, 2007. (LINK) The U.S. alone has spent $30 billion on federal programs directly or indirectly related to global warming in just the last six years, according to one estimate. (LINK) ($5.79 billion in 2006 alone). Adding to this total is funding from the UN, foundations, universities, foreign governments, etc. Huge sums of money continue to flow toward addressing climate fears. Even if you factor in former Vice President Al Gore’s unsubstantiated August 7, 2007 assertion that $10 million dollars a year from the fossil fuel industry flows into skeptical organizations, any funding comparison between skeptics and warming proponents utterly fails. Gore launched a $100 million a year multimedia global warming fear campaign. Gore alone will now be spending $90 million more per year than he alleges the entire fossil fuel industry spends, according to an August 26, 2007 article in Advertising Age. (LINK) Meteorologist Dr. Roy W. Spencer, formerly a senior scientist for climate studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center and currently principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, “Of course, the vast majority of mainstream climate researchers receive between $100,000 to $200,000 from the federal government [to conduct research in] support of manmade global warming,” Spencer wrote in an August 15, 2007 blog post. (LINK) James Spann, a meteorologist certified by the American Meteorological Society, suggests scientific objectively is being compromised by the massive money flow to proponents of man-made climate fears. “Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story,” Spann wrote on January 18, 2007. (LINK) “Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab,” Spann added. The well-heeled environmental lobbying groups have massive operating budgets compared to groups that express global warming skepticism. The Sierra Club Foundation 2004 budget was $91 million and the Natural Resources Defense Council had a $57 million budget for the same year. Compare that to the often media derided Competitive Enterprise Institute’s small $3.6 million annual budget. In addition, if a climate skeptic receives any money from industry, the media immediately labels them and attempts to discredit their work. The same media completely ignore the money flow from the environmental lobby to climate alarmists like James Hansen and Michael Oppenheimer. (ie. Hansen received $250,000 from the Heinz Foundation and $500,000 from the David Foundation and Oppenheimer is a paid partisan of Environmental Defense Fund) The most repeated accusation is that organizations skeptical of man-made climate fears have received $19 Million from an oil corporation (ExxonMobil) over the past two decades. To put this $19 Million over two decades into perspective, consider: One 2007 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) grant of $20 million to study how “farm odors” contribute to global warming exceeded all of the money that skeptics reportedly received from an oil giant in the past two decades. To repeat: One USDA grant to study the role of “farm odors” in global warming exceeded ALL the money skeptics have been accused of receiving from an oil giant over the past two decades. (Excerpt from article: “The United States Department of Agriculture has released reports stating that when you smell cow manure, you’re also smelling greenhouse gas emissions.” http://images.google.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=http://ihatealgore.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Global-cooling-Al-Gore-300x266.jpg&imgrefurl=http://ihatealgore.com/%3Fp%3D1062&usg=__ye0vByPVovw8l0C6rGL5KNHeijo=&h=266&w=300&sz=28&hl=en&start=38&um=1&tbnid=hR4UTu5RlfHr8M:&tbnh=103&tbnw=116&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dglobal%2Bcooling%2Bcartoons%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D20%26um%3D1 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2010, 05:16:52 pm (http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/al-gore-speech.gif).
(http://www.basinpipes.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/gore-cartoon.jpg) (http://www.moonbattery.com/al-gore_snake-oil-salesman.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on January 05, 2010, 05:33:36 pm Yer - but the first hurdle was the 2007 bit - and then there's the small problem of the Author working with/for the Heartland Institute (which is funded by Exxon - as are most skeptics). :) Hang on a sec - sure you're not confusing the Author"s" (there's more than one) workplace when its their findings from academic work presumably carried out at their various institutions? The fact that Heartland finds the research convenient for their view is of no surprise (if it was contradictory then we'd assume they wouldnt be published by Heartland) but I dont think you can say these people are working with/for Heartland... and the same could be said of govt funded programs used to peddle IPCC/human induced global warming/climate change agendas... and we've seen the failed hockey sticks, we've seen evidence of data manipulation, we're seeing too many scientists speaking out against the assumptions and basis of human caused global warming/climate change for the debate to be over despite the attempts to hurry things along while trying to drown out opposing views. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2010, 05:45:25 pm (http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/gore_robot.jpg).
(http://www.moonbattery.com/panic_button.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on January 07, 2010, 02:29:16 pm “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.”
Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=af3_1228946683 http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/simpson_bio.html http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/02/27/now-this-is-interesting-pielke-on-dr-joanne-simpson/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on January 07, 2010, 02:44:08 pm Hmmm. A new fly-on-the-wall TV series "When scientists go bad" perhaps??? ....Michael Mann – creator of the incredible Hockey Stick curve and one of the scientists most heavily implicated in the Climategate scandal – is about to get a very nasty shock. When he turns up to work on Monday, he’ll find that all 27 of his colleagues at the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University have received a rather tempting email inviting them to blow the whistle on anyone they know who may have been fraudulently misusing federal grant funds for climate research. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100021135/climategate-michael-manns-very-unhappy-new-year/ More on Michael Mann: http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=2&oq=michael+mann+hock&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4DKUK_enGB324GB324&q=michael+mann+hockey+stick+hoax Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on January 07, 2010, 11:08:43 pm “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” –
Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ. "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp … Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/36010144.html The full report here: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008 & 2009 http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9&CFID=29582132&CFTOKEN=14381516 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 08, 2010, 07:10:37 am Airport chaos as icy weather grips northern Europe
The icy weather gripping northern Europe has disrupted flights at airports in the UK, France, the Irish Republic and the Netherlands. Many flights were delayed or cancelled at Orly airport in Paris, Dublin airport and Amsterdam-Schiphol, as well as major UK airports. In Germany, at least nine homeless men aged from 42 to 62 froze to death. A Eurostar train was stuck for about two hours in the Channel Tunnel on Thursday. It later reached the UK. Four other Eurostar trains were cancelled, a company spokesman said. Last month the Eurostar service was suspended for three days after several trains broke down in the tunnel. Powdery snow getting into the engines was identified as the cause. Widespread delays Many parts of Germany saw temperatures fall below -10C on Thursday, the Deutsche Welle news website reports. Grit supplies for clearing snow are running very low in many parts of Germany. Traffic jams around Schiphol airport made road gritting difficult In the North Rhine-Westphalia region two derailments in as many days have caused havoc with the rail timetable, triggering cancellations and delays. In the Irish Republic, Dublin airport is open but Knock airport has suspended flights. All roads into Dublin are extremely icy and hundreds of Irish schools have closed, the Irish Times reports. Heavy snow caused big traffic jams around Amsterdam and Haarlem on Wednesday evening, Radio Netherlands reports. Few buses were running in the affected areas. Icy roads have disrupted road freight deliveries to France's Channel ports. Snow is blanketing a large swathe of France, reaching as far south as Bordeaux. In Hemavan, in the far north of Sweden, a new winter low of -40.8C (-41.4F) was recorded overnight, Radio Sweden reports. The Arctic freeze has also seen temperatures in central Sweden plummet to between -30 and -40C - the coldest weather since the mid-1980s. The winter death toll in Poland has reached 122 - most of the victims reportedly homeless people. In Burzyska nad Bugiem, in the east of the country, the army has installed makeshift bridges after flooding and ice split the village in two. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/10/cold_weather/img/weather_maps_1.gif) The current big chill is a result of high pressure over the polar region, which has pushed cold air out of the Arctic towards much of northern Europe, parts of Asia and the US. Winds from the north and north east, rather than the south and south west, have brought freezing temperatures to the UK. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/10/cold_weather/img/weather_maps_2.gif) Provisional Met Office figures for December show temperatures for much of the UK were 1.5C and 2.5C below the mean temperatures for the last 30 years. Scotland saw temperatures dip still lower - from 2.5C to 3.5C. On Tuesday, temperatures in Scotland plunged to -15C in places. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/10/cold_weather/img/weather_maps_3.gif) Winds from the north also brought cold weather to parts of Asia, with Beijing receiving its heaviest snowfall for nearly 60 years. At the weekend, up to 30cm (12in) of snow fell in China's capital and its neighbouring port city of Tianjin. Dozens of people have also died in a cold snap in northern India. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/10/cold_weather/img/weather_maps_4.gif) However, while parts of the world suffer freezing temperatures, the seesaw patterns mean other areas are warmer than usual, including Alaska, northern Canada and the Mediterranean. Met Office figures for the end of 2009 show some places dropped 10C below the average, while others were 10C above. Global Brrrrrrrrrr wwww Warming Is blown Away By The Cold Wind ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 08, 2010, 07:45:43 am Global Cooling? Saudi Arabia covered with snow in coldest winter for 20 years
RIA Novosti Friday January 11, 2008 Northern parts of Saudi Arabia are covered with snow with schools, mosques and administrative bodies paralyzed, local media reported Friday. The oil-rich kingdom is being hit with subzero temperatures and snow storms with freezing winds of up to 50 km/h (30mp/h). Some regions have been experiencing problems with water supplies as pipes have frozen, and livestock has died from the cold. The Saudi Gazette reported late in December that the winter was expected to last 89 days, with temperatures reaching below zero. National media said the winter is the coldest in the country for 20 years. Morning and afternoon prayers are being combined in many mosques because of the morning cold and some schools will reopen later than scheduled. The bad weather is fun for children and teenagers, however, who have been making snowballs and building snowmen with enthusiasm. http://infowars.net/articles/january2008/110108Cooling.htm Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: bennyboo on January 11, 2010, 10:53:05 pm Some pretty pictures of Europe and US under the snow. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/image.cfm?c_id=2&gal_objectid=10619048&gallery_id=108765 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/image.cfm?c_id=2&gal_objectid=10619048&gallery_id=108765 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Sir Blodsnogger on January 12, 2010, 02:03:17 am The net effect of the recent snow storms in Europe will be more global warming because the sun will melt the snow and it will get warmer.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 12, 2010, 05:59:28 am The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.
Their predictions – based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans – challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy’s most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in summer by 2013. According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 12, 2010, 07:06:40 am awww sheesh I think I have had the equivalent of a religious conversion --- I've advanced to two layers of thermals, plus one acrylic and one woollen over the last week --- was thinking it might be the draught from them iceburgers that are on their way to Aussie now we gotta phart more and cut down all the trees we planted The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the worlds most eminent climate scientists. Their predictions based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans challenge some of the global warming orthodoxys most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in summer by 2013. According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this. more the link ain't working (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/11emcry.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 12, 2010, 07:21:29 am awww sheesh I think I have had the equivalent of a religious conversion --- I've advanced to two layers of thermals, plus one acrylic and one woollen over the last week --- was thinking it might be the draught from them iceburgers that are on their way to Aussie now we gotta phart more and cut down all the trees we planted the link ain't working (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/11emcry.gif) "Oh Bother!" said Pooh as he chambered another round.......... Should be OK now - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 12, 2010, 08:03:56 am "Oh Bother!" said Pooh as he chambered another round.......... Should be OK now - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html tnx, that one didn't misfire. I think this fits here now http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,211.0/msg,65994.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 12, 2010, 12:27:22 pm (http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/al-gore-speech.gif).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Magoo on January 22, 2010, 05:59:23 am http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/3251967/Apology-for-errors-in-key-climate-change-report
Apology for errors in key climate change report AP Last updated 00:00 22/01/2010 Share Text Size Relevant offers Five glaring errors were discovered in one paragraph of the world's most authoritative report on global warming, forcing the Nobel Prize-winning panel of climate scientists who wrote it to apologise and promise to be more careful. The errors are in a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN-affiliated body. All the mistakes appear in a subsection that suggests glaciers in the Himalayas could melt away by the year 2035 - hundreds of years earlier than the data actually indicates. The year 2350 apparently was transposed as 2035. The climate panel and even the scientist who publicised the errors said they are not significant in comparison to the entire report, nor were they intentional. And they do not negate the fact that worldwide, glaciers are melting faster than ever. But the mistakes open the door for more attacks from climate change skeptics. "The credibility of the IPCC depends on the thoroughness with which its procedures are adhered to," Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, told The Associated Press in an e-mail. "The procedures have been violated in this case. That must not be allowed to happen again because the credibility of climate change policy can only be based on credible science." The incident follows a furor late last year over the release of stolen e-mails in which climate scientists talked about suppressing data and freezing out skeptics of global warming. And on top of that, an intense cold spell has some people questioning whether global warming exists. In a statement, the climate change panel expressed regret over what it called "poorly substantiated estimates" about the Himalayan glaciers. "The IPCC has established a reputation as a real gold standard in assessment; this is an unfortunate black mark," said Chris Field, a Stanford University professor who in 2008 took over as head of this part of the IPCC research. "None of the experts picked up on the fact that these were poorly substantiated numbers. From my perspective, that's an area where we have an opportunity to do much better." Patrick Michaels, a global warming skeptic and scholar at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, called on the head of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, to resign, adding: "I'd like to know how such an absurd statement made it through the review process. It is obviously wrong." However, a number of scientists, including some critics of the IPCC, said the mistakes do not invalidate the main conclusion that global warming is without a doubt man-made and a threat. The mistakes were found not by skeptics like Michaels, but by a few of the scientists themselves, including one who is an IPCC co-author. The report in question is the second of four issued by the IPCC in 2007 on global warming. This 838-page document had chapters on each continent. The errors were in a half-page section of the Asia chapter. The section got it wrong as to how fast the thousands of glaciers in the Himalayas are melting, scientists said. "It is a very shoddily written section," said Graham Cogley, a professor of geography and glaciers at Trent University in Peterborough, Canada, who brought the error to everyone's attention. "It wasn't copy-edited properly." Cogley, who wrote a letter about the problems to Science magazine that was published online Wednesday, cited these mistakes: - The paragraph starts, "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world." Cogley and Michael Zemp of the World Glacier Monitoring System said Himalayan glaciers are melting at about the same rate as other glaciers. - It says that if the Earth continues to warm, the "likelihood of them disappearing by the 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high." Nowhere in peer-reviewed science literature is 2035 mentioned. However, there is a study from Russia that says glaciers could come close to disappearing by 2350. Probably the numbers in the date were transposed, Cogley said. - The paragraph says: "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035." Cogley said there are only 33,000 square kilometres of glaciers in the Himalayas. - The entire paragraph is attributed to the World Wildlife Fund, when only one sentence came from the WWF, Cogley said. And further, the IPCC likes to brag that it is based on peer-reviewed science, not advocacy group reports. Cogley said the WWF cited the popular science press as its source. - A table says that between 1845 and 1965, the Pindari Glacier shrank by 2840 metres. Then comes a mathematics mistake: It says that's a rate of 135.2 metres a year, when it really is only 23.5 metres a year. Still, Cogley said: "I'm convinced that the great bulk of the work reported in the IPCC volumes was trustworthy and is trustworthy now as it was before the detection of this mistake." He credited Texas state climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon with telling him about the errors. However, Colorado University environmental science and policy professor Roger Pielke Jr said the errors point to a "systematic breakdown in IPCC procedures," and that means there could be more mistakes. A number of scientists pointed out that at the end of the day, no one is disputing the Himalayan glaciers are shrinking. "What is happening now is comparable with the Titanic sinking more slowly than expected," de Boer said in his e-mail. "But that does not alter the inevitable consequences, unless rigorous action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is taken." Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 22, 2010, 06:33:00 am Quote The IPCC has established a reputation as a real gold standard in assessment; (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Magoo on January 22, 2010, 06:41:23 am Quote But the mistakes open the door for more attacks from climate change skeptics Oh!!! did they think the door was shut at some time? (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/undecided.gif)Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on January 22, 2010, 10:24:00 am Oh!!! did they think the door was shut at some time? (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/undecided.gif) Apparently the 'science' was settled... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 22, 2010, 03:10:52 pm They must be global cooling skeptics
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 27, 2010, 12:51:43 pm Bill McKibben — Climate Change's O.J. Simpson Moment posted February 25, 2010 | TomDispatch.com (http://www.tomdispatch.com/) “In early 2009,” writes Bill McKibben in a soon-to-be-published new book, “just as Obama was getting set to unveil his energy plans, word came that 2,340 lobbyists had registered to work on climate change on Capitol Hill (that’s about six per congressman), 85 percent of them devoted to slowing down progress.” By early 2010, you can see the results of such efforts, multiplied many times over by the staggering levels of support available for anti-climate-change work from the richest industry on the planet: the energy business. All this was not helped, of course, by the much hyped “climate-gate” which proved that climate-change scientists were fallible human beings and not simply extraterrestrial super-brains. These “scandals” were, in turn, blown up to proportions that seemed to blot out the very image of the disappearing Arctic icepack. Not surprisingly, perhaps, the latest poll (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-hoggan/new-poll-results-reveal-t_b_439593.html) on the American public’s attitude toward climate change shows startling drops in the belief in the very existence of climate change, in humanity's role in causing it, and in its import for the planet: a 14-point drop since October 2008 in Americans who believe climate change is happening at all (to 57%), a 10-point drop in those who believe that human activity is at the root of the problem (to 47%), and a 13-point drop in those who claim to be “somewhat” or “very” worried about the problem (to 50%). What’s strangest in all this is that the evidence for our changing planet seems to stare us in the face — from the previously mythical, now navigable Northwest Passage to melting glaciers just about everywhere to more intense storms (including, of course, more intense snowstorms because, despite the name “global warming,” no one has yet banished winter from the planet). What makes this sadder yet is that, if the U.S. refuses to deal with our planet’s health and well-being (and ours), everything becomes so much harder, so much less likely. If you want to put all of this into some reasonable perspective, when you’ve finished Bill McKibben’s latest piece, think about ordering his new book Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805090568/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20) (to be published this April). The title is unsettling — especially for an editor, with those two “a”s in Eaarth — and the book more so, but it’s not without hope and it could be the necessary guide to, and text for, the new planet with ever quirkier weather on which, after so many thousands of years, we humans suddenly find ourselves. It’s as if we’ve landed on Pandora (http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175210/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_another_planet_for_james_cameron/) without any of the charm. (By the way, don’t miss the latest TomCast (http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/bill-mckibben-on-creating-climate_24.html), the site’s accompanying audio interview with Bill McKibben on what to make of climate-science scandals.) — Tom Engelhardt The Attack on Climate-Change Science Why It’s the O.J. Moment of the Twenty-First Century By Bill McKibben (http://www.tomdispatch.com/authors/billmckibben) Twenty-one years ago, in 1989, I wrote what many have called the first book for a general audience on global warming. One of the more interesting reviews came from the Wall Street Journal. It was a mixed and judicious appraisal. “The subject,” the reviewer said, “is important, the notion is arresting, and Mr. McKibben argues convincingly.” And that was not an outlier: around the same time, the first president Bush announced that he planned to “fight the greenhouse effect with the White House effect.” I doubt that’s what the Journal will say about my next book when it comes out in a few weeks, and I know that no GOP presidential contender would now dream of acknowledging that human beings are warming the planet. Sarah Palin is currently calling climate science “snake oil” and last week, the Utah legislature, in a move straight out of the King Canute playbook, passed a resolution condemning "a well organized and ongoing effort to manipulate global temperature data in order to produce a global warming outcome" on a nearly party-line vote. And here’s what’s odd. In 1989, I could fit just about every scientific study on climate change on top of my desk. The science was still thin. If my reporting made me think it was nonetheless convincing, many scientists were not yet prepared to agree. Now, you could fill the Superdome with climate-change research data. (You might not want to, though, since Hurricane Katrina demonstrated just how easy it was to rip holes in its roof.) Every major scientific body in the world has produced reports confirming the peril. All 15 of the warmest years on record have come in the two decades that have passed since 1989. In the meantime, the Earth’s major natural systems have all shown undeniable signs of rapid flux: melting Arctic and glacial ice, rapidly acidifying seawater, and so on. Somehow, though, the onslaught against the science of climate change has never been stronger, and its effects, at least in the U.S., never more obvious: fewer Americans believe humans are warming the planet. At least partly as a result, Congress feels little need to consider global-warming legislation, no less pass it; and as a result of that failure, progress towards any kind of international agreement on climate change has essentially ground to a halt. Climate-Change Denial as an O.J. Moment The campaign against climate science has been enormously clever, and enormously effective. It’s worth trying to understand how they’ve done it. The best analogy, I think, is to the O.J. Simpson trial, an event that’s begun to recede into our collective memory. For those who were conscious in 1995, however, I imagine that just a few names will make it come back to life. Kato Kaelin, anyone? Lance Ito? The Dream Team of lawyers assembled for Simpson’s defense had a problem: it was pretty clear their guy was guilty. Nicole Brown’s blood was all over his socks, and that was just the beginning. So Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro, Alan Dershowitz, F. Lee Bailey, Robert Kardashian et al. decided to attack the process, arguing that it put Simpson’s guilt in doubt, and doubt, of course, was all they needed. Hence, those days of cross-examination about exactly how Dennis Fung had transported blood samples, or the fact that Los Angeles detective Mark Fuhrman had used racial slurs when talking to a screenwriter in 1986. If anything, they were actually helped by the mountain of evidence. If a haystack gets big enough, the odds only increase that there will be a few needles hidden inside. Whatever they managed to find, they made the most of: in closing arguments, for instance, Cochran compared Fuhrman to Adolf Hitler and called him “a genocidal racist, a perjurer, America’s worst nightmare, and the personification of evil.” His only real audience was the jury, many of whom had good reason to dislike the Los Angeles Police Department, but the team managed to instill considerable doubt in lots of Americans tuning in on TV as well. That’s what happens when you spend week after week dwelling on the cracks in a case, no matter how small they may be. Similarly, the immense pile of evidence now proving the science of global warming beyond any reasonable doubt is in some ways a great boon for those who would like, for a variety of reasons, to deny that the biggest problem we’ve ever faced is actually a problem at all. If you have a three-page report, it won’t be overwhelming and it’s unlikely to have many mistakes. Three thousand pages (the length of the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)? That pretty much guarantees you’ll get something wrong. Indeed, the IPCC managed to include, among other glitches, a spurious date for the day when Himalayan glaciers would disappear. It won’t happen by 2035, as the report indicated — a fact that has now been spread so widely across the Internet that it’s more or less obliterated another, undeniable piece of evidence: virtually every glacier on the planet is, in fact, busily melting. Similarly, if you managed to hack 3,000 emails from some scientist’s account, you might well find a few that showed them behaving badly, or at least talking about doing so. This is the so-called “Climate-gate” scandal from an English research center last fall. The English scientist Phil Jones has been placed on leave while his university decides if he should be punished for, among other things, not complying with Freedom of Information Act requests. Call him the Mark Fuhrman of climate science; attack him often enough and maybe people will ignore the inconvenient mountain of evidence about climate change that the world’s scientific researchers have, in fact, compiled. Indeed, you can make almost exactly the same kind of fuss Johnnie Cochran made — that’s what Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) did, insisting the emails proved “scientific fascism,” and the climate skeptic Christopher Monckton called his opponents “Hitler youth.” Such language filters down. I’m now used to a daily diet of angry email, often with subject lines like the one that arrived yesterday: “Nazi Moron Scumbag.” If you’re smart, you can also take advantage of lucky breaks that cross your path. Say a record set of snowstorms hit Washington D.C. It won’t even matter that such a record is just the kind of thing scientists have been predicting, given the extra water vapor global warming is adding to the atmosphere. It’s enough that it’s super-snowy in what everyone swore was a warming world. For a gifted political operative like, say, Marc Morano, who runs the Climate Depot website (http://www.climatedepot.com/), the massive snowfalls this winter became the grist for a hundred posts poking fun at the very idea that anyone could still possibly believe in, you know, physics. Morano, who really is good, posted a link to a live webcam so readers could watch snow coming down; his former boss, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), had his grandchildren build an igloo on the Capitol grounds, with a sign that read: "Al Gore’s New Home." These are the things that stick in people’s heads. If the winter glove won’t fit, you must acquit. Why We Don’t Want to Believe in Climate Change The climate deniers come with a few built-in advantages. Thanks to Exxon Mobil and others with a vested interest in debunking climate-change research, their “think tanks” have plenty of money (http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/exxon-secrets), none of which gets wasted doing actual research to disprove climate change. It’s also useful for a movement to have its own TV network, Fox, though even more crucial to the denial movement are a few rightwing British tabloids which validate each new “scandal” and put it into media play. That these guys are geniuses at working the media was proved this February when even the New York Times ran a front page story (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/09/science/earth/09climate.html), “Skeptics Find Fault With U.N. Climate Panel”, which recycled most of the accusations of the past few months. What made it such a glorious testament to their success was the chief source cited by the Times: one Christopher Monckton, or Lord Monckton as he prefers to be called since he is some kind of British viscount. He is also identified as a “former advisor to Margaret Thatcher,” and he did write a piece for the American Spectator during her term as prime minister offering his prescriptions for “the only way to stop AIDS”: “...screen the entire population regularly and… quarantine all carriers of the disease for life. Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month... all those found to be infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately, and permanently.” He speaks with equal gusto and good sense on matters climatic — and now from above the fold in the paper of record. Access to money and the media is not the only, or even the main reason, for the success of the climate deniers, though. They’re not actually spending all that much cash and they’ve got legions of eager volunteers doing much of the internet lobbying entirely for free. Their success can be credited significantly to the way they tap into the main currents of our politics of the moment with far more savvy and power than most environmentalists can muster. They’ve understood the popular rage at elites. They’ve grasped the widespread feelings of powerlessness in the U.S., and the widespread suspicion that we’re being ripped off by mysterious forces beyond our control. Some of that is, of course, purely partisan. The columnist David Brooks, for instance, recently said (http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/08/david-brooks-science-global-warming-is-real-manmade-nuclear-power-gail-collin/): “On the one hand, I totally accept the scientific authorities who say that global warming is real and it is manmade. On the other hand, I feel a frisson of pleasure when I come across evidence that contradicts the models… [in part] because I relish any fact that might make Al Gore look silly.” But the passion with which people attack Gore more often seems focused on the charge that he’s making large sums of money from green investments, and that the whole idea is little more than a scam designed to enrich everyone involved. This may be wrong — Gore has testified under oath that he donates his green profits to the cause — and scientists are not getting rich researching climate change (constant blog comments to the contrary), but it resonates with lots of people. I get many emails a day on the same theme: “The game is up. We’re on to you.” When I say it resonates with lots of people, I mean lots of people. O.J.’s lawyers had to convince a jury made up mostly of black women from central city L.A., five of whom reported that they or their families had had “negative experiences” with the police. For them, it was a reasonably easy sell. When it comes to global warming, we’re pretty much all easy sells because we live the life that produces the carbon dioxide that’s at the heart of the crisis, and because we like that life. Very few people really want to change in any meaningful way, and given half a chance to think they don’t need to, they’ll take it. Especially when it sounds expensive, and especially when the economy stinks. Here’s (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/David-Harsanyi-Who-doesnt-trust-science-now-84691762.html) David Harsanyi, a columnist for the Denver Post: “If they’re going to ask a nation — a world — to fundamentally alter its economy and ask citizens to alter their lifestyles, the believers’ credibility and evidence had better be unassailable.” “Unassailable” sets the bar impossibly high when there is a dedicated corps of assailants out there hard at work. It is true that those of us who want to see some national and international effort to fight global warming need to keep making the case that the science is strong. That’s starting to happen. There are new websites and iPhone apps (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/feb/22/skeptical-science-iphone-app) to provide clear and powerful answers to the skeptic trash-talking, and strangely enough, the denier effort may, in some ways, be making the case itself: if you go over the multi-volume IPCC report with a fine tooth comb and come up with three or four lousy citations, that’s pretty strong testimony to its essential accuracy. Clearly, however, the antiseptic attempt to hide behind the magisterium of Science in an effort to avoid the rough-and-tumble of Politics is a mistake. It’s a mistake because science can be — and, in fact, should be — infinitely argued about. Science is, in fact, nothing but an ongoing argument, which is one reason why it sounds so disingenuous to most people when someone insists that the science is “settled.” That’s especially true of people who have been told at various times in their lives that some food is good for you, only to be told later that it might increase your likelihood of dying. Why Data Isn’t Enough I work at Middlebury College, a topflight liberal arts school, so I’m surrounded by people who argue constantly. It’s fun. One of the better skeptical takes on global warming that I know about is a weekly radio broadcast (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=499357815712) on our campus radio station run by a pair of undergraduates. They’re skeptics, but not cynics. Anyone who works seriously on the science soon realizes that we know more than enough to start taking action, but less than we someday will. There will always be controversy over exactly what we can now say with any certainty. That’s life on the cutting edge. I certainly don’t turn my back on the research—we’ve spent the last two years at 350.org (http://www.350.org/) building what Foreign Policy called “the largest ever coordinated global rally” around a previously obscure data point, the amount of atmospheric carbon that scientists say is safe, measured in parts per million. But it’s a mistake to concentrate solely on the science for another reason. Science may be what we know about the world, but politics is how we feel about the world. And feelings count at least as much as knowledge. Especially when those feelings are valid. People are getting ripped off. They are powerless against large forces that are, at the moment, beyond their control. Anger is justified. So let’s figure out how to talk about it. Let’s look at Exxon Mobil, which each of the last three years has made more money than any company in the history of money. Its business model involves using the atmosphere as an open sewer for the carbon dioxide that is the inevitable byproduct of the fossil fuel it sells. And yet we let it do this for free. It doesn't pay a red cent for potentially wrecking our world. Right now, there’s a bill in the Congress — cap-and-dividend (http://cantwell.senate.gov/issues/CLEARAct.cfm), it’s called — that would charge Exxon for that right, and send a check to everyone in the country every month. Yes, the company would pass on the charge at the pump, but 80% of Americans (all except the top-income energy hogs) would still make money (http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15453166) off the deal. That represents good science, because it starts to send a signal that we should park that SUV, but it’s also good politics. By the way, if you think there’s a scam underway, you’re right — and to figure it out just track the money going in campaign contributions to the politicians doing the bidding of the energy companies. Inhofe, the igloo guy? Over a million dollars (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00005582) from energy and utility companies and executives in the last two election cycles. You think Al Gore is going to make money from green energy? Check out what you get for running an oil company. Worried that someone is going to wreck your future? You’re right about that, too. Right now, China is gearing up to dominate (http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/27/technology/china_clean_energy.fortune/) the green energy market. They’re making the investments that mean future windmills and solar panels, even ones installed in this country, will be likely to arrive from factories in Chenzhou, not Chicago. Coal companies have already eliminated most good mining jobs, simply by automating them in the search for ever higher profits. Now, they’re using their political power to make sure that miner’s kids won’t get to build wind turbines instead. Everyone should be mighty pissed — just not at climate-change scientists. But keep in mind as well that fear and rage aren’t the only feelings around. They’re powerful feelings, to be sure, but they’re not all we feel. And they are not us at our best. There’s also love, a force that has often helped motivate large-scale change, and one that cynics in particular have little power to rouse. Love for poor people around the world, for instance. If you think it’s not real, you haven’t been to church recently, especially evangelical churches across the country. People who take the Gospel seriously also take seriously indeed the injunction to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless. It’s becoming patently obvious that nothing challenges that goal quite like the rising seas and spreading deserts of climate change. That’s why religious environmentalism is one of the most effective emerging parts of the global warming movement; that’s why we were able to get thousands of churches ringing their bells 350 times last October to signify what scientists say is the safe level of CO2 in the atmosphere; that’s why Bartholomew, patriarch of the Orthodox church and leader of 400 million eastern Christians, said, “Global warming is a sin and 350 is an act of redemption.” There’s also the deep love for creation, for the natural world. We were born to be in contact with the world around us and, though much of modernity is designed to insulate us from nature, it doesn’t really work. Any time the natural world breaks through — a sunset, an hour in the garden — we’re suddenly vulnerable to the realization that we care about things beyond ourselves. That’s why, for instance, the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts are so important: get someone out in the woods at an impressionable age and you’ve accomplished something powerful. That’s why art and music need to be part of the story, right alongside bar graphs and pie charts. When we campaign about climate change at 350.org (http://www.350.org/), we make sure to do it in the most beautiful places we know, the iconic spots that conjure up people’s connection to their history, their identity, their hope. The great irony is that the climate skeptics have prospered by insisting that their opponents are radicals. In fact, those who work to prevent global warming are deeply conservative, insistent that we should leave the world in something like the shape we found it. We want our kids to know the world we knew. Here’s the definition of radical: doubling the carbon content of the atmosphere because you’re not completely convinced it will be a disaster. We want to remove every possible doubt before we convict in the courtroom, because an innocent man in a jail cell is a scandal, but outside of it we should act more conservatively. In the long run, the climate deniers will lose; they’ll be a footnote to history. (Hey, even O.J. is finally in jail.) But they’ll lose because we’ll all lose, because by delaying action, they will have helped prevent us from taking the steps we need to take while there’s still time. If we’re going to make real change while it matters, it’s important to remember that their skepticism isn’t the root of the problem. It simply plays on our deep-seated resistance to change. That’s what gives the climate cynics ground to operate. That’s what we need to overcome, and at bottom that’s a battle as much about courage and hope as about data. ______________________________________ • Bill McKibben is the author of a dozen books, including the forthcoming Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805090568/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20) (Times Books, April 2010). He’s a scholar in residence at Middlebury College in Vermont. Catch the latest TomCast (http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/bill-mckibben-on-creating-climate_24.html), TomDispatch.com’s audio interview with Bill McKibben on what to make of the climate-science scandals. http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175211/tomgram%3A_bill_mckibben%2C_climate_change%27s_o.j._simpson_moment (http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175211/tomgram%3A_bill_mckibben%2C_climate_change%27s_o.j._simpson_moment) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ballasted moth on February 27, 2010, 04:36:01 pm Socialists always use bogus scams to take more control of peoples lives
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 14, 2011, 09:32:41 pm Climate change and extreme weather link cannot be ignored By KIRAN CHUG - The Dominion Post | 3:05PM - Thursday, 14 July 2011 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202011/5285448s_14Jul11.jpg) EXTREME WEATHER: Scientists say more events like the tornado that caused this destruction in Waikanae will occur as a result of climate change. — ANDREW GORRIE/The Dominion Post. HUMAN-INDUCED climate change will see more disastrous storms, heatwaves and floods afflict the globe. Scientists have drawn the strongest link yet between climate change and extreme weather events, and say the connection can no longer be ignored. • Related story: Seven biggest storms to hit Wellington (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/4649819/Seven-biggest-storms-to-hit-Wellington) New Zealander Kevin Trenberth, scientist who is the head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, based in Colorado, said events of the past year and a half had been extraordinary. "It's as clear a warning as we're going to get about prospects for the future." Dr Trenberth said the world could expect more droughts, floods, intense storms, hurricanes and tornadoes. More heat waves would bring consequences such as wild fires in their wake. Although the scientific community had not reached a consensus yet on whether climate change was to blame, he said more work was being done in the area and it took scientists time to get to such a point. Since the 1970s, water vapour in the atmosphere had increased by about four per cent, and he said the world was now noticing that "when it rains, it pours." Professor Martin Manning of Victoria University's Climate Change Research Institute said countries were now looking at ways to prepare for the risks they faced, and the insurance industry in particular was taking notice. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/5285118/Climate-change-and-extreme-weather-link-cannot-be-ignored (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/5285118/Climate-change-and-extreme-weather-link-cannot-be-ignored) • While the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” fiddle, Rome burns! (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,6068.0.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 27, 2012, 01:54:45 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... California sea levels to rise 5-plus feet this century, study says As climate change expands the oceans, sea levels will rise more than average along the California coast because much of the state is sinking, according to a new report. By TONY BARBOZA | 10:30PM - Sunday, June 24, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_70670563_24may12.jpg) The destructive power of rising sea levels will be felt first when storms hit vulnerable places such as Newport Beach, said Gary Griggs, director of the Institute of Marine Sciences at UC Santa Cruz. Above, the Wedge at Newport Beach. — Photo: Luis Sinco/Los Angeles Times/September 01, 2011. SEA LEVELS Sea levels along the California coast are expected to rise up to 1 foot in 20 years, 2 feet by 2050 and as much as 5½ feet by the end of the century, climbing slightly more than the global average and increasing the risk of flooding and storm damage, a new study says. That's because much of California is sinking, extending the reach of a sea that is warming and expanding because of climate change, according to a report by a committee of scientists released Friday by the National Research Council. In Washington and Oregon, where geological processes are flexing the land upward, researchers predict a less dramatic sea level rise that will register below the global average. The report (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13389), commissioned by California, Oregon, Washington and several federal agencies, is the closest look yet at how global warming — which causes ocean water to expand and ice to melt — will raise sea levels along the West Coast. Tide gauges show that the world's oceans have risen about 7 inches in the last century, and that rate is accelerating, the report notes. "Sea level rise isn't a political question, it's a scientific reality," said Gary Griggs (http://www.latimes.com/topic/sports/gary-griggs-PESPT002809.topic), director of the Institute of Marine Sciences at UC Santa Cruz and a member of the committee that produced the report. Globally, the study predicts up to 9 inches of sea level rise by 2030, 1½ feet by 2050 and 4½ feet by 2100. The projections are largely in line with other recent scientific estimates but substantially higher than the 2007 figures by the United Nations (http://www.latimes.com/topic/crime-law-justice/international-law/united-nations-ORCUL000009.topic)' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change because they factor in a greater contribution from melting ice. The study was drafted by a committee of scientists formed as a result of a 2008 executive order by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, which directed state agencies to plan for the effects of sea level rise. The government agencies sponsored the study will use it to prepare for coastal erosion and flooding that is expected to threaten homes, businesses, roads, airports and other structures located within a few feet of the high-tide line. The California Natural Resources Agency said in a statement that the report "confirms the need to take action to address the impacts of rising sea level." The study shows how unevenly the sea will rise from place to place because of regional factors such as the movement of tectonic plates, climate patterns such as El Niño and the effects of melting glaciers and ice sheets in Alaska, Greenland and Antarctica. For instance, although tide gauges in California show sea levels rising over the last century, levels have been falling north of Cape Mendocino as geological activity pushes up the land. A major earthquake in the Pacific Northwest, such as a magnitude 8, could upend that trend, causing parts of the coast to sink and suddenly raising sea levels by 3 feet or more, the report says. The report is the latest to warn that the rising sea will place coastal communities at increasing risk, with most of the damage caused by a combination of big waves, storm surges and high tides. The warm ocean conditions of a strong El Niño can magnify those effects, the report says, expanding sea water and raising sea levels by about a foot for several months. Coastal California could see serious damage from storms within a few decades, especially in low-lying areas of Southern California and the Bay Area. San Francisco International Airport, for instance, could flood if the sea rises a little more than a foot, a mark expected to be reached in the next few decades. Erosion could cause coastal cliffs to retreat more than 100 feet by 2100, according to the report. For an idea of what's in store, the report says, look at what happened in the winter of 1983. That's when a series of potent El Niño-driven storms hit California's coast, causing more than $200 million in damage from flooding, high waves and erosion. More than 3,000 homes and businesses were damaged and 33 oceanfront homes destroyed. Although the rise in sea levels will happen gradually, Griggs said, its destructive power will be felt first when storms hit vulnerable places such as Newport Beach and the San Francisco Bay. "In the short term it's these severe storms in low-lying areas that are most problematic," Griggs said. "So we have to plan for that." http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-adv-sea-level-20120625,0,7840116.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-adv-sea-level-20120625,0,7840116.story) From the Los Angeles Times.... Hey, California, hot enough for ya? Just wait! By PAUL WHITEFIELD | 1:58PM - Monday, June 25, 2012 WITH APOLOGIES to Bob Dylan, do we need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows? Certainly it seems they don’t in North Carolina. There, lawmakers are considering a bill (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sea-level-20120624,0,3935676.story) that would essentially deny global warming and accompanying predictions of rising sea levels. All so developers can continue to make a buck off people who assume that if you build it, it must be safe — even if it isn’t. In California, we’re also facing the threat of rising sea levels. As The Times reported Friday (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/06/california-to-see-more-serious-sea-level-rise-report-says.html): Sea levels along the California coast are expected to rise as much as 1 foot in 20 years, 2 feet by 2050 and as much as 5½ feet by the end of the century, climbing slightly faster than the global average and increasing the risk of flooding and storm damage, a new study says. And it’s not just melting ice that’s working against us. Turns out the old saw about California sliding into the ocean is more accurate than you might’ve thought: Much of California is slowly sinking, extending the reach of a sea that is getting hotter and expanding due to global warming, according to a report by a committee of scientists released Friday by the National Research Council. But wait, there's more! It seems that the Golden State is going to get goldener (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/21/local/la-me-heat-20120621), as in burnt-toast gold: “By the middle of the century, the number of days with temperatures above 95 degrees each year will triple in downtown Los Angeles, quadruple in portions of the San Fernando Valley and even jump five-fold in a portion of the High Desert in L.A. County,” according to a new UCLA climate change study. Of course, I like to find silver linings in bad news. So here it is: We’ll be hot, but if we want to go to the beach to cool off, the ocean won’t be as far away. Still, it’s interesting to contrast the political reaction in L.A. to the climate news with that of the folks in North Carolina: Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/antonio-villaraigosa-PEPLT007500.topic) said the forecasts provide the groundwork for local governments, utilities, hospitals and other institutions to prepare for the hot spells to come. Villaraigosa said the region may have to strengthen building codes to reduce risk to residents. "That could mean replacing incentives with building codes requiring 'green' and 'cool' roofs, cool pavements, tree canopies and parks," he said. Which, I suspect, is going to be much more expensive than following North Carolina’s example and simply ordering the Earth to stand still. Silly liberals! Of course, the folks in North Carolina may yet have to deal with reality. The state's proposed law wants only past data to be used in assessing the future threat of rising seas. But on Monday, a report (http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sea-level-atlantic-20120625,0,5813153.story) was released that has sobering data, from the past, about the East Coast's future, North Carolina's in particular: Sea levels in a 620-mile "hot spot" along the Atlantic coast are rising three to four times faster than the global average, according to a new study by theU.S. Geological Survey. The sharp rise in sea levels from North Carolina to Massachusetts could mean serious flooding and storm damage for major cities such as New York, Philadelphia and Boston (http://www.latimes.com/topic/us/massachusetts/suffolk-county-%28massachusetts%29/boston-PLGEO100100501131244.topic), as well as threats to wetlands habitats, the study said. Since 1990, sea levels have risen 2 millimeters to 3.7 millimeters a year from Cape Hatteras (http://www.latimes.com/topic/us/north-carolina/dare-county/avon-%28dare-north-carolina%29/hatteras-PLGEO100100904010400.topic), North Carolina, on the Outer Banks (http://www.latimes.com/topic/travel/tourism-leisure/outer-banks-PLREC000005.topic), to Boston, said the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. The global average for the same two-decade period was 0.6 millimeters to 1 millimeters per year. Seems fairly conclusive to me. But I don't expect that this report will change the minds of ardent climate change deniers. So for them, I propose a simple test: Fill a glass of water nearly to the top. Put some ice cubes in it. Let the ice cubes melt. Observe what happens. And then, perhaps, think again about whether it’s really a good idea to continue to build at the ocean’s edge. Even in North Carolina. Oh, and if you live in California, keep that ice water handy. You're going to need it. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-climate-change-california-north-carolina-bad-news-20120625,0,7779214.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-climate-change-california-north-carolina-bad-news-20120625,0,7779214.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on June 27, 2012, 02:34:54 pm I get a sense of deja vu here. Sea levels were supposed to rise astronomically in the 1980's. They didn't, but were confidently predicted to rise in the 1990's - they didn't, but were inevitably going to rise in the 2000's - surprise, they didn't.
Its about time the warmalists took their agenda and fucked off, somewhere far away. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on June 27, 2012, 02:48:22 pm But Yak, if you don't believe in it you're a neanderthal. On the other hand, if you believe in the sky daddy (another unsupported theory) then you are a religious fuckwit.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on June 28, 2012, 08:45:07 am No, in North Carolina they've based a bill based on not using whacky models, but on actual observation.
California has not experienced any special sea level rise, but they're basing their stupidity on computer models that have been shown to be extremely flawed. For example they've realised that twenty years of models (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/25/antarctic_ice_not_melting/) have been completely wrong in Antarctica and doesn't reflect the reality down there at all. Let's not forget James Hansen's scenarios from 1988, where we've followed scenario A in GHG usage, but under scenario C in temperature increases; scenario C was if we gave up everything and lived in the (Computer models work fine when the parameters are known, otherwise they're a case of garbage in, garbage out) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 28, 2012, 10:30:15 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... USGS: Sea level in Atlantic ‘hot spot’ rising faster than world's By DAVID ZUCCHINO | 11:25AM - Monday, June 25, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_20120625a_25may12.jpg) A flooded road on Hatteras Island, North Carolina, after Hurricane Irene swept through the area. — Photo: Jim R. Bounds/Associated Press/August 28, 2011. SEA LEVELS in a 620-mile “hot spot” along the Atlantic coast are rising three to four times faster than the global average, according to a new study by theU.S. Geological Survey. The sharp rise in sea levels from North Carolina to Massachusetts could mean serious flooding and storm damage for major cities such as New York, Philadelphia and Boston, as well as threats to wetlands habitats, the study said. Since 1990, sea levels have risen 2 millimeters to 3.7 millimeters a year from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, on the Outer Banks, to Boston, said the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. The global average for the same two-decade period was 0.6 millimeters to 1 millimeters per year. Experts at the Geological Survey, along with other scientists, say that climate change and other factors will likely produce an average global sea level rise of two to three feet by 2100, said Asbury Sallenger, a USGS oceanographer who led the study, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. The study predicts that sea levels will rise an additional 8 inches to 11 inches in the Atlantic coast “hot spot”, he said. The main cause of recent sea level increases along the coast is the slowing of Atlantic currents caused by the arrival of fresh water from the melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet, the study said. “Cities in the hot spot, like Norfolk, New York and Boston, already experience damaging floods during relatively low-intensity storms,” Sallenger said. Accelerated sea level rise in the hot spot will raise the risk of flooding and the height of storm surges, he said. The USGS report follows a study by the National Research Council predicting that sea levels along the California coast will rise as much as one foot in just 20 years, two feet by 2050 and five-and-a-half feet by 2100. The report, released Friday, says the increases are caused by climate change and by the sinking of land masses in much of California. The study predicts that global sea levels will rise 9 inches by 2030, 18 inches by 2050, and four-and-a-half feet by 2100. Sea level rise is a sensitive subject for some political conservatives, who say that global warming is a hoax and that sea levels are not in danger of rising precipitously. The USGS study is significant because it provides data showing that sea levels have risen over the past two decades along the Atlantic Coast, regardless of the cause. This spring, Republicans in the North Carolina legislature introduced a bill that would require sea level rise forecasts to be based on past patterns and would all but outlaw projections based on climate change data. Using climate change and other data, a science panel with the state Coastal Resources Commission said that sea levels along the North Carolina coast could rise an average of 39 inches by 2100. Coastal business and development interests complained to the Republican-controlled legislature, saying the projections could trigger regulations costing businesses and homeowners millions of dollars. Sallenger called the North Carolina science panel’s 39-inch prediction “totally sensible”. http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sea-level-atlantic-20120625,0,5813153.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sea-level-atlantic-20120625,0,5813153.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 28, 2012, 10:30:34 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Mass evacuations ordered as wildfires rage in Colorado 32,000 people flee homes in the Colorado Springs area, including parts of the Air Force Academy, and Boulder is under threat. By JENNY DEAM and JOHN M. GLIONNA | 6:41PM - Wednesday, June 27, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_coloradosprings_26jun12.jpg) The Waldo Canyon fire roars through a neighboord in the foothills near Colorado Springs, Colorado. — Photo: Helen H. Richardson/Denver Post/June 26, 2012. COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado — Marking the worst fire season in Colorado history, three major blazes are burning uncontrolled in the Rocky Mountain state, destroying hundreds of homes, prompting mass evacuations in Colorado Springs and threatening the city of Boulder 100 miles away. For weeks, Colorado has been in a state of siege as the mammoth High Park fire raged unhindered in mountain wilderness west of Fort Collins, destroying 257 rural homesteads and cabins, while residents of cities and suburbs to the east held their collective breath and prayed that the flames would not reach them. Experts are warning already fire-weary Coloradans that this could be the new routine for their state — that the blazes could rage all summer until the arrival of the autumn rains. On Wednesday, the Waldo Canyon fire, named for a popular hiking area west of the state's second-largest city, Colorado Springs, continued to burn unchecked. It prompted the evacuation of 32,000 people in the metropolitan area of 600,000, including portions of the U.S. Air Force Academy. The fire, which ignited Saturday, exploded late Tuesday, doubling in size in just hours. Propelled by winds blowing 60 mph, the blaze jumped barriers to scourge neighborhoods, destroying dozens of homes as well as such landmarks as the historic Flying W Ranch, a popular tourist attraction that drew as many as 1,000 people a night for music and western-style dining. Susan Joy Paul had stood her ground inside the Colorado Springs home where she raised her now-grown children, until she heard the panic in a friend's voice on the phone. With the main highways clogged with 20,000 evacuees, she fled along back roads, finally reaching a vantage point where she could survey her Shadow Valley neighborhood. "It looked like big red torches going up," she said. "That's when it hit me: Those are houses." Tom Tidwell, chief of the U.S. Forest Service in Washington, said this year was the culmination of nearly a decade of record fire seasons. "Definitely we're having a changing climate," he said, adding that less snowfall in Colorado last winter brought the fire season to the state more than a month early. "This significantly exceeds what we saw 10, 20, 30 years ago," said Tidwell, a former firefighter. He said the Colorado fires were especially dangerous because they were so erratic, adding that large fires could create their own weather patterns, rendering traditional weather forecasts unreliable. Mammoth fires raged around the West in 2002, threatening giant sequoia groves in California, charring a million acres of southern Oregon forest land and forcing mass evacuations in New Mexico's high country. The amount of land burned nationally in wildfires declined later in the decade but then ballooned again last year, when parts of drought-stricken Texas were hit by waves of flames. Dry weather and high temperatures are again producing incendiary conditions, with forecasters predicting higher-than-normal wildfire potential in much of the West, including the Sierra Nevada and portions of the Southwest and the Rockies. In the Boulder area, residents have learned to keep a wary eye on the sky, watching not only the plume of smoke rising from the outskirts of town but also the slurry bombers roaring overhead to dump their loads. By Wednesday, the fire was just a mile and a half from town, and authorities had evacuated 28 households and warned another 2,500 to be ready to flee. Meanwhile, officials worry about the fatigue of thousands of firefighters on the line. In northern Colorado, where the 136-square-mile High Park fire has already destroyed hundreds of homes and killed one woman, fire managers offered to shift to Boulder and Colorado Springs to join the fights there. President Obama planned to visit the state's fire zones Friday to thank firefighters. Colorado's climate and vegetation have the capacity to create enormous fires. In summer 2002, the state's largest-ever blaze thwarted efforts to control it and marched ominously toward Denver with a fire front 20 miles long and 14 miles wide. Meteorologists said the 15,000-foot smoke plume from the Hayman fire spawned nightly thunderstorms in neighboring states and triggered two tornadoes that spun through Kansas. Ultimately the Hayman fire destroyed 133 homes, forced the evacuation of more than 5,300 people and cost $40 million. The newest blazes have sent Coloradans into a frenzied pitch of fire fear and loathing. Even outside the burn areas, days of record triple-digit heat and strong winds have created a dry-as-dust landscape. In a state where exercise is a way of life for residents, the unpredictable nature of the fires has hot-wired nerves. People watch as the flames destroy groups of houses but leave one untouched. Children call their parents — and vice versa — each time the fire changes direction or someone spots a lightning strike. Through tweets and dramatic fire pictures posted on social media sites, uneasy residents have reached out to friends and family — and anyone else who will listen to their stories of being in the path of unpredictable fires. Others talk about the panic they feel every time they see a firetruck hurry down the road. "Any time I see or hear a firetruck race by our house, my chest and stomach get tight, especially if there has been recent lightning," said Roxanne Hawn, who lives just outside Denver, miles from the blaze. "It's like being afraid of heights — the clenching inside feels the same." Felice Vigil, a mother of three, awoke Tuesday in the residential section of the Air Force Academy unable to breathe. Even though the fire was nearby, she had felt reassured that she and her family were safe because they were on a military installation. But when she looked outside, she said, the smoke swirling through her yard was so thick it looked like a solid object, waist-high. "It was like something out of a Freddy Krueger movie," she said Wednesday. By late afternoon, a sudden burst of wind had upended her patio furniture. The fire was racing toward the academy as military police rolled through the streets telling everyone to get out. "I tried to be calm for my kids," she said, standing outside a YMCA evacuation shelter, "but inside I was terrified, completely panicked." With no idea whether her house survived, she is now staying with family. She took her children to the shelter so they could swim and get their minds off what they had seen. There is little doubt this fire will stay with them, though. Gabe Vigil, 8, proudly held up a chalk drawing of a perfect house. "This is what I hope our house still looks like," he said. Susan Joy Paul symbolizes Colorado's angst of just not knowing. She had kept her eye on the Waldo Canyon fire since it started Saturday. On Tuesday, a friend told her the fire had jumped a nearby ridge, that the massive cloud of billowing smoke was heading her way. Already, daytime had turned to night as smoke blocked the sun. Giant flakes of ash — some as wide as her hand — swirled in her frontyard. She heard an explosion, maybe a generator, and then the lights and TV went out. "This is not right. We shouldn't be here," she told her roommate. "I feel like we're in hell." Two police cars drove down the street, bullhorns blaring for everyone to evacuate. "We had no time," she said. She threw her laptop, her notes for the book she is writing, some food, pictures of her children and a backpack into her compact car and started driving. "It was so confusing. Black ash was flying around like bats. At every corner there were cops yelling at me, waving me in different directions," she said. On Wednesday, Paul said she could almost forget about the nightmare that unfolded the night before. Almost, but not quite. "I need to cry," she said, her voice teetering on despair. "I need to but can't. Not yet. Not until I know." Paul was camped at a local library, trying to get some work done, fearing the worst, praying that life as she knew it wasn't over. "I want to see it, but I don't," she said of her home. "I want to see it like it was, but I know that's not going to happen." • Deam, a special correspondent, reported from Colorado Springs and Glionna from Las Vegas. • Times staff writers Julie Cart and Bettina Boxall in Los Angeles contributed to this report. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-colorado-fires-20120628,0,5014184,full.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-colorado-fires-20120628,0,5014184,full.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: AnFaolchudubh on June 29, 2012, 09:10:54 am There are a number of tree species in the US that only seed or at least their seeds won't germinate unless they have a wild fire...
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 01, 2012, 05:03:20 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Heat wave: 13 dead, 3 million lose power in Mid-Atlantic storms By MELANIE MASON and LAURA J. NELSON | 4:21PM - Saturday, June 30, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_20120630a_30jun12.jpg) An uprooted tree lies across a street near American University after a violent storm passed Friday through Washington, D.C. — Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/GettyImages/June 30, 2012. WASHINGTON — The violent storms that ripped through the eastern United States left at least 13 people dead and millions without power on a day when temperatures hovered in the triple digits. The Mid-Atlantic region had already been baking in 100-plus-degree heat when lightning storms and winds of up to 80 mph tore through the area Friday night. On Saturday, crews worked to fix broken traffic signals, repair utility poles and restore power — and air conditioning — to more than 3 million people. The high-speed winds are called a derecho, from the Spanish word for "straight ahead" — a long, bow-shaped band of storms that can hurtle across more than 240 miles in a matter of hours. The violent weather was blamed for 13 deaths, including six in Virginia; two in New Jersey; two in Maryland and one each in Kentucky, Ohio and Washington, according to the Associated Press. The dead included a 90-year-old Virginia woman who was sleeping when a tree fell on her house, and young cousins who were camping when their tent was crushed by a tree. At least 20 people were injured, according to the National Weather Service. The governors of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland and Ohio, as well as local officials in Washington, declared states of emergency. Such declarations clear the way for officials to seek financial assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other relief organizations. Officials said it could take utility companies days to restore power to the nine states affected, as far west as Indiana. In northwest Washington, where an outdoor thermostat read 103 degrees Farenheit in late afternoon, the streets were littered with tree branches and debris. In front of the Montenegro Embassy, yellow police tape cordoned off a patch of road and sidewalk where a sizable limb had snapped off a large tree and landed on a gray Infiniti sedan parked below, smashing the trunk. “There was literally downed trees in one of our major roads,” said Nicholas Legambi, who had driven in from Baltimore. “My power is still out. A lot of people are still without power today in the suburbs.” The Potomac Electric Power Company, which serves Washington and surrounding counties, estimated it would take several days, and perhaps up to a week, before power is fully restored. “As soon as the storm passed, we had crews starting to assess the damage,” Thomas H. Graham, Pepco’s president, said in a statement. “We'll continue conducting a comprehensive assessment, which we'll use to strategically deploy crews. We'll work full force and around the clock until every customer is restored.” Washingtonians found life turned upside down by inconveniences including spoiled food and delayed trains. Thousands of commuters were stranded after Amtrak suspended service between Washington and Philadelphia on Friday night. Trains were still not running Saturday afternoon. One in 3 Americans was in extreme heat Saturday in an area of nearly 600,000 square miles experiencing unusually warm weather. Washington and its suburbs were the hardest hit as temperatures soared above 104 degrees Friday, breaking the record for all-time highs. Officials encouraged residents to visit cooling centers, including libraries and public pools. They cautioned that the elderly, the sick and the very young are especially vulnerable to extreme temperatures. “I urge all district residents to look out after their neighbors,” said Chris Geldart, who directs the city's homeland security and emergency management agency, in a statement. “If you know of anyone in your neighborhood that might need assistance, please look in on them. This is especially important if you have elderly or disabled neighbors.” http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-dc-storms-13-dead-20120630,0,3915922.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-dc-storms-13-dead-20120630,0,3915922.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on July 01, 2012, 07:01:07 pm Ancient Antarctic warmer and wetter Home » News » Dunedin By John Gibb on Sun, 1 Jul 2012 University of Otago | News: Dunedin American research showing the ancient Antarctic was warmer and wetter than previously suspected highlights the value of the international Andrill scientific drilling project, University of Otago Prof Gary Wilson says. The research shows the ancient Antarctic supported stunted trees and vegetation along its edges. By examining the remnants of plant leaf wax found in sediment cores taken below the Ross Ice Shelf, scientists from the University of Southern California (USC), Louisiana State University and Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory determined summer temperatures along the Antarctic coast 15-20 million years ago were 11degC warmer than today. Temperatures reached up to about 7degC, with several times more rain. This occurred during a period of global warming in the middle Miocene epoch that coincided with increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Prof Wilson, who heads the University of Otago marine science department, said the outcomes showed the value of "the time and effort that it takes to get some of these answers". Prof Wilson has been a member of the Andrill project's international scientific committee and has been closely involved in the project's work in the Antarctic. "This is not about doing the easy work. It's about doing the important work," he said. He was interested in studying previous global warming to better understand how the world's climate was likely to operate later this century. At two sites in the Antarctic, in 2006 and 2007, Andrill, the Antarctic Drilling Project, gathered information about past periods of global warming and cooling. International scientists, including from New Zealand and the United States, drilled through ice, sea water, sediment and rock to a depth exceeding 1200m, recovering a core record nearly 20 million years old. Sarah Feakins, an assistant professor of earth sciences at USC, was the lead author of a paper on the research just published in Nature Geoscience. Scientists began to suspect that high-latitude temperatures during the middle Miocene were warmer than previously believed when Sophie Warny, co-author of the Nature Geoscience paper, and an assistant professor at Louisiana State University, discovered large quantities of pollen and algae in sediment cores taken in the Antarctic. Plant fossils in the Antarctic are hard to find because massive ice sheets covering the landmass grind away the evidence. Deep sea cores were ideal to look for "clues of past vegetation" because the fossils deposited were protected from ice sheets but were difficult to acquire and required international collaboration, Prof Warny said. Leaf wax found in the sediment cores acts as a record of climate change by documenting details about the hydrogen isotope ratios of water the plant drank while it was alive. - john.gibb@odt.co.nz http://www.odt.co.nz/campus/university-otago/215076/ancient-antarctic-warmer-and-wetter Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on July 01, 2012, 08:01:14 pm There are a number of tree species in the US that only seed or at least their seeds won't germinate unless they have a wild fire... Same applies for many Australian tree species as well. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on July 08, 2012, 02:42:07 pm OK, we've reduced too many greenhouse gas emissions
Bring back the Orion Coal range and the open fires (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/tickedoff.gif) Warning as waterways freeze Newstalk ZB July 8, 2012, 8:19 am As the cold snap continues, Queenstown's harbour master is warning people not to venture out onto frozen waterways. Marty Black says ice has affected some areas of the region's lakes and there are also a number of frozen over ponds around the district. He says parents need to remain vigilant around waterways . "Supervised by adults may be ok, but youngsters on their own - definitely a no-no." Marty Black says while ice could look thick enough to hold a lot of weight, that might not be the case in reality. http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14161165/warning-as-waterways-freeze/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 08, 2012, 03:11:37 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Heat wave: 13 dead, 3 million lose power in Mid-Atlantic storms You know, its strange, but there were wildfires that spanned whole American counties in the 1800's. Zane Grey wrote stories about them. I guess they're inconvenient memories now..... As is the fact that the population until recently, was a fraction of what it is now and people have expanded into danger areas - and also expanded their 'heat-sink' cities. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on July 08, 2012, 04:54:50 pm I often wonder if the story about the Spanish galleon found in the Texan desert several miles inland from the gulf is true. No record of the storm that carried it there of course so it didn't happen.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 09, 2012, 12:17:38 pm lol
Carbon tax cost added to family's funeral bill Simon Benson The Daily Telegraph July 09, 2012 12:00AM A GRIEVING family claims that a cemetery slapped them with a $55 carbon tax bill for burying a relative - saying "even the dead don't escape the carbon tax" - just days after the tax was introduced. The outraged family complained to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, describing it as a "tax on the dying". Erica Maliki said the Melbourne cemetery told her and two other relatives that a $55 charge would be applied to her father-in-law's burial due to the carbon tax. The director of the Springvale Cemetery did not return calls despite several attempts to contact management since last Friday. Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said it would be "reprehensible" if any cemetery took advantage of grieving families by misleading them over funeral expenses. It comes as three companies were reprimanded by the consumer watchdog for cashing in on the carbon tax. The ACCC said that it was investigating solar panel suppliers Polaris Solar and ACT Renewable Energy for providing false information on the cost impacts of the tax, while bakery chain Brumby's was caught advising outlets to raise prices and blame the carbon tax. While cemeteries are not liable entities under the carbon tax, the funeral industry has previously warned of indirect price rises for both burials as well as cremations through higher energy prices and councils passing on their carbon tax costs. But it said the impacts should not be immediate nor any greater than any other business. Ms Maliki, a mother and community worker, said her father-in-law died on June 30 - a day before the carbon tax came into operation - but was buried early last week. She said when her grieving family was discussing with the cemetery management the cost of a $600 retaining wall for the plot, which she claimed was never installed, they were informed that the price per plot had risen by $55 due to the tax. "I thought to myself what carbon could possibly be used by putting a man in a grave," Ms Maliki said. "All they did was put the dirt back in. How can they charge us a carbon tax for burying someone? "It is a tax for dying." Son Zaid Maliki said he was shocked when the receptionist at the cemetery informed the family that the cost of his father's burial had gone up because of the tax. He said the receptionist told his sister-in-law, " ... even the dead don't escape the carbon tax". "We are pretty upset ... that comment was a kick in the guts," he said. The ACCC said it would be willing to investigate the Malikis' claims. The issue has also been brought to the attention of several Labor MPs. The ACCC warned businesses generally that while they had a right to set their own prices, any claims made in relation to carbon tax must be "truthful and have a reasonable basis". An ACCC spokesman confirmed that any questionable claims about carbon tax increases did not necessarily have to be made in writing or included on a bill and even verbal claims would be investigated. NSW Funeral Directors Association spokesman John Kaus said: "We don't really see there will be a real impact on the funeral industry. We don't envisage an impact greater than any other business entity." Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt called for an immediate exemption for funerals. "The carbon tax is not just a farce but an insult. It is a tax that now follows you to the grave," Mr Hunt said yesterday. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/carbon-tax-cost-added-to-familys-funeral-bill/story-e6freuy9-1226420545281 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Newtown-Fella on July 09, 2012, 12:40:05 pm so when the body starts
dont they ooze out into the soil and rise up the 6 feet to the surface and enter the atmosphere ... ? isnt that what causes the greenhouse effect ..... ? seems to me that $55 is cheap as chips really compared to all the rest of the charges undertakers charge .... thank god for cremations less harm done to the atmosphere and the ashes dont take up much room in ther ground ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on July 12, 2012, 10:09:41 am I know I have commented on horticulturists pumping CO2 into greenhouses to increase plant growth before.
I just can't figure out which threat - I have searched. ...anyway this is a little more comformation the plants have a role in all this that will surprise some. Carbon dioxide intake soars PALOMA MIGONE Last updated 06:42 12/07/2012 Scientists have discovered that plants, trees and soil have abruptly increased their atmospheric carbon dioxide intake in the last 20 years. The land biosphere was taking in about one billion tonnes of carbon per year since 1988, equal to about 10 per cent of the global fossil fuel emissions for 2010. However, the sudden shift didn't mean people shouldn't worry about climate change in the future, Niwa atmospheric scientist Dr Sara Mikaloff-Fletcher said. Without nature's new uptake regime, the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would probably have increased even more rapidly over the last two decades. And if the change was temporary, reducing C02 levels in the future might get harder. ''At the end of the day there may have been this natural sink which has tremendously been to our advantage, but that has not stopped CO2 from increasing in the atmosphere,'' Dr Mikaloff-Fletcher said. ''It's not enough. CO2 is still increasing in the atmosphere at an alarming rate.'' The discovery was reported in the journal Global Biogeochemical Cycles, written by an international team of scientists including Dr Mikaloff-Fletcher. She said while the study showed there was a natural shift, scientists didn't know how it would change in the future. ''We don't yet know whether or not the natural process is going to cause a permanent shift towards this increase uptake or if that's something that could be reversed or something that can be enhanced. ''That's going to be the subject of the next series of studies on this topic.'' Scientists explored whether the increase could be explained by the EL Nino Southern Oscillation (Enso) - and it couldn't. ''We also tried volcanic activity. A little bit after the shift happened, in 1991, there was a big eruption, but the problem was that the shift happened too early,'' Dr Mikaloff-Fletcher said. Kevin Tate, research associate at Landcare Research, said he was ''intrigued'' by the findings. ''One thought struck me and that is that perhaps to this point we have underestimated the size of the terrestrial sink, and this work may be correcting that.'' He believed a number of factors could have contributed to the increase, such as CO2 fertilisation, and afforestation and reforestation. Some sources like deforestation and permafrost melting may have been overestimated previously as well. ''While this result is intriguing, it must be remembered that terrestrial sinks are finite, and there is a strong likelihood that the terrestrial sink will become increasingly saturated in coming decades.'' Researchers already knew that over half of the emissions of C02 from human activities were absorbed by the land biosphere and the oceans. But Dr Mikaloff-Fletcher said the ''natural sinks'' were difficult to quantify directly. Using data from 1958 and mathematical techniques that haven't been widely used in the field, scientists took the amount of emissions and subtracted what was retained in the atmosphere and what the oceans took up, leaving the land component for the study. They noticed the abrupt shift in 1988, when the intake of 0.3 billion tonnes of carbon per year surged to one billion tonnes. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was calculated from a global network of stations, including Niwa's sites in New Zealand and Antarctica. http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7265266/Carbon-dioxide-intake-soars (http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7265266/Carbon-dioxide-intake-soars) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 12, 2012, 12:35:30 pm In other words, their computer models were wrong - Again!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on July 12, 2012, 01:59:34 pm You only have to read the harry_readme.txt file (from the Climategate files) to realise just how crappy the algorithms can be for the "human induced climate change" computer models.
The harry_readme.txt file also demonstrates just how doctored the algorithm is to produce the desired results, at least for the University of East Anglia's climate research unit and the hockey team in general. In fact it is far more condemning that the emails from either Climategate I or II. It's a huge indictment on the hockey team; the file just doesn't have the snappy dialogue of corruption that the emails have (like using "Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline" and being advocates for "the cause" or condemning those that don't commit to "the cause".) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 12, 2012, 05:08:18 pm http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html
Those bastard Romans and their climate changing chariots! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 13, 2012, 03:38:26 pm Wellington sea level rising fastest in NZ By MATT STEWART - The Dominion Post | 7:10AM - Friday, 13 July 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/7272444s_13Jul12.jpg) FUTURE SHOCK: A storm tide flood under the worst-case scenario of a sea level rise of 1.5 metres by 2115. PARTS OF coastal Wellington could be drowned if doomsday climate change predictions from a new study pan out over the next 100 years. Two reports issued yesterday by Greater Wellington regional council show Wellington's sea level is the fastest rising in New Zealand — made worse by seismic rumblings causing the city to sink 1.7mm a year since 2000. Worst-case scenarios coupling massive sea level rise with intense storm floods show low-lying coastal parts of the Eastbourne bays, Petone, Pauatahanui, as well as the river mouths at Otaki, Hutt, Whakataki (near Castlepoint), and Waikanae and the lower Wairarapa valley, could be forever swamped if sea levels rose 1.5m by 2115. Paekakariki, Raumati South and Te Kopi would also be jeopardised by severe erosion. "We're starting to see potentially severe impacts in those areas," Greater Wellington senior hazards analyst Iain Dawe said. Downtown Wellington would be spared permanent inundation because the city's seawall would protect it from erosion, and its stormwater system would gradually drain the flood. The harbour also protects the city because wave run-up — where swells slop over the foreshore in a storm — was not as pronounced in the CBD as in places such as the south coast. The reports urge immediate action and aim to help urban planners make building, road and infrastructure development decisions in low-lying coastal areas. "We need integrated coastal management in the region with authorities working together to plan for natural disasters in the future," Dr Dawe said. The research was done by National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research scientists. The reports highlighted areas vulnerable to coastal flooding over the next 100 years. Wellington Harbour had an average sea level rise of about 2mm a year over the past century. This was mainly due to climate change but was magnified by subsidence in the city over the past decade, caused by slow slips triggered by deep tectonic plate movements. The region has "a more complicated spatial and temporal pattern of long- term relative sea level rise than other stable parts of New Zealand," the reports say. Like land, the sea is not flat and has its own topography, which explains why Wellington could record a bigger rise than ports at Auckland, Dunedin and Christchurch. If the Wellington Fault ruptured, forecasts show Lower Hutt and Petone could subside by up to 1m. Projections for century's end suggest the sea level in the Wellington region could rise by 0.8m by the 2090s or as high as 1.5m by 2115. Storms could also get longer and stronger, increasing the likelihood of coastal flooding and erosion. • Sea-level variability and trends: Wellington Region (http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/About-GW-the-region/News-and-media-releases/2012-images/SeaLevelVariabilityandTrendsintheWellingtonRegion2012REPORT.pdf) (5.29MB PDF document) http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington-central/7268184/Wellington-sea-level-rising-fastest-in-NZ (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington-central/7268184/Wellington-sea-level-rising-fastest-in-NZ) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 13, 2012, 05:28:33 pm That would be modelled with one of NIWAs computers, right? ::)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on July 13, 2012, 06:02:33 pm I wonder if they factored in the 3m of uplift from the next quake. I just shake my head and grin whenever another one of these flights of fancy gets printed.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 13, 2012, 06:50:59 pm Quote The research was done by National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research scientists. Wernt these the guys that moved their Karori weather station to a new location, thus giving global warming figures a boost? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 20, 2012, 07:25:53 pm Greenland glacier loses ice Greenland glacier loses ice island twice the size of Manhattan By TRACY BRYANT - University of Delaware | 7:51pm - Monday, July 16, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/UD_PetermannGlacier_16Jul12.jpg) Petermann Glacier connects the Greenland ice sheet to the Arctic Ocean. The vast flat expanse stretching into the background is Petermann Glacier, well over one-third of which has now broken off. — Photo: David Riedel, British Columbia. AN ICE ISLAND twice the size of Manhattan has broken off from Greenland’s Petermann Glacier, according to researchers at the University of Delaware and the Canadian Ice Service. The Petermann Glacier is one of the two largest glaciers left in Greenland connecting the great Greenland ice sheet with the ocean via a floating ice shelf. Andreas Muenchow (http://udapps.nss.udel.edu/experts/326598426-Andreas_K_Muenchow), associate professor of physical ocean science and engineering in University of Delaware’s College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, reports the calving on July 16, 2012, in his “Icy Seas” blog (http://icyseas.org). Muenchow credits Trudy Wohleben of the Canadian Ice Service for first noticing the fracture. The discovery was confirmed by reprocessing data taken by MODIS (http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about), the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer aboard NASA’s Terra and Aqua satellites. At 46 square miles (120 square km), this latest ice island is about half the size of the mega-calving that occurred from the same glacier two years ago. The 2010 chunk, also reported by Muenchow (http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2011/aug/greenland080610.html), was four times the size of Manhattan. “While the size is not as spectacular as it was in 2010, the fact that it follows so closely to the 2010 event brings the glacier’s terminus to a location where it has not been for at least 150 years,” Muenchow says. “The Greenland ice sheet as a whole is shrinking, melting and reducing in size as the result of globally changing air and ocean temperatures and associated changes in circulation patterns in both the ocean and atmosphere,” he notes. Muenchow points out that the air around northern Greenland and Ellesmere Island has warmed by about 0.11 +/- 0.025 degrees Celsius per year since 1987. “Northwest Greenland and northeast Canada are warming more than five times faster than the rest of the world,” Muenchow says, “but the observed warming is not proof that the diminishing ice shelf is caused by this, because air temperatures have little effect on this glacier; ocean temperatures do, and our ocean temperature time series are only five to eight years long — too short to establish a robust warming signal.” The ocean and sea ice observing array that Muenchow and his research team installed in 2003 with U.S. National Science Foundation support in Nares Strait, the deep channel between Greenland and Canada, has recorded data from 2003 to 2009. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/UD_PetermanFjiord_16Jul12.jpg) The Canadian Coast Guard Service vessel Henry Larsen is shown at the entrance of Petermann Fjord. The glacier in the background is a tiny, tiny side arm that feeds into Petermann Glacier. There are hundreds of these, University of Delaware's Andreas Muenchow says. — Photo: Helen Johnson, Oxford University. The Canadian Coast Guard Ship Henry Larsen is scheduled to travel to Nares Strait and Petermann Fjord later this summer to recover moorings placed by UD in 2009. These mooring data, if recovered, will provide scientists with ocean current, temperature, salinity and ice thickness data at better than hourly intervals from 2009 through 2012. The period includes the passage of the 2010 ice island directly over the instruments. According to Muenchow, this newest ice island will follow the path of the 2010 ice island, providing a slow-moving floating taxi for polar bears, seals and other marine life until it enters Nares Strait, the deep channel between northern Greenland and Canada, where it likely will get broken up. “This is definitely déjà vu,” Muenchow says. “The first large pieces of the 2010 calving arrived last summer on the shores of Newfoundland, but there are still many large pieces scattered all along eastern Canada from Lancaster Sound in the high Arctic to Labrador to the south.” Prior to 2010, the last time such a sizable ice island was born in the region was 50 years ago. In 1962, the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf, on the northern coast of Ellesmere Island in Nunavut, Canada, calved a 230-square-mile island. http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2013/jul/glacier-071612.html (http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2013/jul/glacier-071612.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 20, 2012, 07:56:04 pm Cracking up: Greenland’s glacier loss ‘disturbing’ By SETH BORENSTEIN - Associated Press Science Writer | 6:54pm - Wednesday, July 18, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/dh_707199982a_18jul12.jpg) This satellite image from Monday shows a calving, crescent-shaped crack on the Petermann Glacier in northwestern Greenland. — NASA/Associated Press. WASHINGTON — An iceberg twice the size of Manhattan tore off one of Greenland’s largest glaciers, illustrating another dramatic change to the warming island. For several years, scientists had been watching a long crack near the tip of the northerly Petermann Glacier. On Monday, NASA satellites showed it had broken completely, freeing an iceberg measuring 46 square miles. A massive ice sheet covers about four-fifths of Greenland. Petermann Glacier is mostly on land, but a segment sticks out over water like a frozen tongue, and that’s where the break occurred. The same glacier spawned an iceberg twice that size two years ago. Together, the breaks made a large change that’s got the attention of researchers. “It’s dramatic. It’s disturbing,” said University of Delaware professor Andreas Muenchow, who was one of the first researchers to notice the break. “We have data for 150 years, and we see changes that we have not seen before. “It’s one of the manifestations that Greenland is changing very fast,” he said. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/dh_707199982b_18jul12.jpg) These 2010 and 2012 images show the formation of a crack in northwestern Greenland’s Petermann Glacier. On Monday, a 46-square-mile iceberg tore off Petermann, which had spawned an iceberg twice that size in 2010. — NASA, University of Delaware/Associated Press. Researchers suspect global warming is to blame but can’t prove it conclusively yet. Glaciers calve icebergs naturally, but what’s happened in the last three years to Petermann is unprecedented, Muenchow and other scientists say. “This is not part of natural variations anymore,” said NASA glaciologist Eric Rignot, who camped on Petermann 10 years ago. Ohio State University ice scientist Ian Howat said there is still a chance it could be normal calving, like losing a fingernail that has grown too long, but any further loss would show it’s not natural. “We’re still in the phase of scratching our heads and figuring out how big a deal this really is,” Howatt said. Many of Greenland’s southern glaciers have been melting at an unusually rapid pace. The Petermann break brings large ice loss much farther north than in the past, said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder. If it continues, and more of the Petermann is lost, the melting would push up sea levels, he said. The ice lost so far already was floating, so the breaks don’t add to global sea levels. Northern Greenland and Canada have been warming five times faster than the average global temperature, Muenchow said. Temperatures have increased there by about four degrees Fahrenheit in the last 30 years, Scambos said. The new iceberg is likely to follow the path of the one in 2010, Muenchow said. That iceberg broke apart into smaller icebergs headed north, then west and last year started landing in Newfoundland, he said. It’s more than glaciers in Greenland that are melting. Scientists also reported this week that the Arctic had the largest sea ice loss on record for June. http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20120719/NEWS06/707199982/Cracking-up:-Greenland’s-glacier-loss-‘disturbing’ (http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20120719/NEWS06/707199982/Cracking-up:-Greenland’s-glacier-loss-‘disturbing’) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 20, 2012, 07:56:26 pm Wellington's climate shows warming trend By JIM SALINGER - The Dominion Post | 7:04AM - Friday, 20 July 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202012/7314208s_20Jul12.jpg) Wellington's climate records show a warming trend. — Professor Jim Salinger. CLIMATE SCIENTISTS want to monitor how climate is changing and global warming progressing. How they do this is particularly relevant as this week the New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust is trying to persuade a judge (http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/7287585/Climate-change-readings-inaccurate) in the High Court at Auckland to invalidate New Zealand's temperature records that have been compiled and collected by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research and the former government agencies. The coalition asserts the only way NIWA can claim a warming trend of one degree Celsius over the past century is through the use of inaccurate data. Scientists are very interested in tracking climate as human factors will be the dominant influence on climate this century, save a meteor crashing into the planet. They are interested in adjusting the readings as though they are taken from one location in an area. Wellington has one of the longest and best climate records of any region in New Zealand. This is why climate scientists carefully adjust temperature records. When Sir James Hector, director of the Colonial Museum in Wellington in the 1860s, established a network to monitor New Zealand's weather and climate, the primary stations were established for weather forecasting, so the priority on permanency of location of a climate monitoring site for climate change was lower. However, we are indebted to Sir James's Scottish heritage, as in setting up the network he bought precision thermometers which were housed in Stevenson screens to ensure consistency. Observations were taken under standard conditions, in his words "rigorous". This has given us a legacy of climate monitoring under rigorously enforced methods with very reliable observations from the 19th century, the envy of many countries. Climate scientists, in constructing a climate record over the past 150 years for Wellington, have to adjust the measurements taken for several reasons. The climate record has been taken from not one but five sites. The various sites are in the area of Wellington city. These sites have different temperature characteristics and may be cooler or warmer than other sites because of factors such as different elevation above sea level, or urban buildup. By adjusting temperature series, changes that are caused by climate, rather than the changes in site or environment, can be monitored. THE diagram shows the record of mean temperature at the five sites: Knowles Observatory, halfway between the harbour and Tinakori hills; the Government Astronomical Observatory on a hill in the Bolton Street cemetery; Buckle Street; the Thorndon Esplanade; and then the current one at the top of the Botanic Gardens at Kelburn, 125 metres above sea level. This is the highest, and coolest, of all the Wellington city long-term climate recording sites. To obtain a consistent record to monitor global warming locally, adjustments are made so that the readings reflect those at the current site. To make these changes climate data are rigorously checked for any obvious errors. Adjustments are made by comparing a period of overlap between the old and new site, and comparing climate data before and after the site change with other neighbouring climate stations. By these means adjustments to the mean temperature have been calculated for the Wellington sites. All earlier sites are warmer than the current well-ventilated Kelburn site by as much as 1C because they are much lower in altitude. It is from Wellington's adjusted long-term record that true climate trends can be obtained. The long-term record from Wellington city thus calculated shows that there is year-to-year variability which can be as much as 1.5°C between years. However, there is an overall clear trend with Wellington mean annual temperatures by 2011 1.3°C warmer than in the early 1860s. This has been noticeable in the ability of gardeners to now grow frost-sensitive plants in warmer parts of Wellington. Both the shorter climate series from the single sites at Palmerston North and Westport show extremely similar trends and variations, with mean annual temperature increases of about 0.8°C from the 1930s to 2011. Long-term monitoring is essential to detect small but significant changes in climate. As records are taken from several sites in a locality these require adjustments to reflect the true climate trends. Wellington's temperature readings have been carefully adjusted with each site change to provide a consistent and reliable long-term record. The excellent climate record from Wellington shows a clear warming trend over the past 150 years. • Jim Salinger is a visiting professor at Stanford University. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/7311522/Wellingtons-climate-shows-warming-trend (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/7311522/Wellingtons-climate-shows-warming-trend) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 20, 2012, 08:43:21 pm Sorry - I switched off when I saw Jim Salingers name.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on July 20, 2012, 09:32:06 pm Sorry - I switched off when I saw Jim Salingers name. Ditto..Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on August 02, 2012, 12:05:53 pm Another nail for the warmalists coffin. Like their hocky stick, the figures they rely on and the predictions made with them that have failed to materialise.................
http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400061/Climate-change-science-tackled Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on August 02, 2012, 01:42:19 pm Another nail for the warmalists coffin. Like their hocky stick, the figures they rely on and the predictions made with them that have failed to materialise................. http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400061/Climate-change-science-tackled Wow! This exclamation is due to the fact that Fairfax even allowed an opinion piece opposing their bias. I say this because Fairfax media have a vested interest in pushing the warmist hyperbole being significant financial partners to Earth Hour (this is why Fairfax media hype Earth Hour so much.) Fairfax owns roughly one third of Earth Hour (http://boy-on-a-bike.blogspot.ca/2011/12/untangling-ownership-of-earthhour.html#!/2011/12/untangling-ownership-of-earthhour.html) Dr David Evans used to be a believer and promoter of the warmist hyperbole. That he has joined the sceptic camp has proved irksome to true believers. Not that he is alone. Sure many have gone from the Hockey Team to luke warm (e.g. Dr Judith Curry) rather than to outright sceptism, but to find any scientist going from sceptic to believer is as rare as hen's teeth. I suspect that is why the media make such a fuss over Professor Muller with his media invented conversion from sceptic to believer; trying to find people who go the other way is quite hard that they have to create them. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2012, 03:12:41 pm Southern climate once like Queensland By MATT STEWART - Fairfax NZ News | 5:00AM - Thursday, 02 August 2012 NEW ZEALAND once had a climate like Queensland, at a time when palm trees swayed in the balmy subtropical rainforests of Antarctica, new research shows. A global team of scientists, who left from Wellington, analysed Antarctic pollen and spores, opening a window on the ancient climate of the continent about 52 million years ago, which showed humid weather similar to modern coastal Queensland. Mean summer temperatures ranged between 20 and 27 degrees Celsius and frost-sensitive vegetation abounded, according to the study, which drilled sub-seabed rock samples from off the coast of what is now known as Wilkes Land, due south of Australia. Even by the poles, scientists found the ‘Greenhouse' Eocene epoch — 55 to 48 million years ago — was very warm, leading to the growth of "highly diverse, near-tropical forests". The research, published in the science journal Nature this week, confirmed what many scientists suspected — that Antarctica once boasted an enviable summer. New Zealand's climate would have been similar during the epoch and there may also have been land mammals, like possums, on Antarctica, said Dr Ian Raine, team researcher and a micro-paleontologist at GNS Science in Lower Hutt. Apart from recurring ice ages, Dr Raine said, Antarctica had been frozen for just a fraction of its history — the latest freeze starting about 35 million years ago. The study showed winter temperatures on the Wilkes Land coast during the epoch topped 10°C, despite three months of polar blackness. But the continental interior was noticeably cooler, with a climate supporting temperate southern beech rainforests similar to those found in the South Island today. The finding highlights extreme contrasts between modern and ancient climates. The "greenhouse" epoch was the warmest time in the past 66 million years and showed temperature gradients from the pole to the equator were less pronounced than they are now, Dr Raine said. The study sounds a warning for climate change, with scientists forecasting Earth could again heat up in a few hundred years as fossil fuel burning accelerates carbon dioxide (CO²) to the levels which allowed the lush forests to thrive near the South Pole. Back then atmospheric CO² concentrations were more than twice as high as today. "If the current CO² emissions continue unabated due to the burning of fossil fuels, CO² concentrations in the atmosphere, as they existed in the distant past, are likely to be achieved within a few hundred years,” lead researcher Professor Jorg Pross said. “By studying naturally occurring climate warming periods in the geological past, our knowledge of the mechanisms and processes in the climate system increases. This contributes enormously to improving our understanding of current human-induced global warming.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400971/Southern-climate-once-like-Queensland (http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400971/Southern-climate-once-like-Queensland) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2012, 03:18:23 pm Wild US weather explained Fairfax NZ News | 12:01PM - Thursday, 02 August 2012 THE heatwaves, wildfires, and droughts scorching the United States may not just be a fluke. According to scientists from the UN's climate body, the freak weather across America is a direct result of climate change. In the first congressional hearing on climate science in more than two years, scientists from the ICPP told lawmakers that man-made climate change was one of the culprits behind the streak of strange weather seen all around the country lately. "It is critical to understand that the link between climate change and the kinds of extremes that lead to disaster is clear," Christopher Field, a leading ICPP scientist, told lawmakers. Climate experts at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing pointed to the number of natural disasters the US has had lately, the Guardian recaps: In 2011, there were 14 major, billion-dollar weather events, well surpassing the previous record of nine. The last time an ICPP scientist appeared before the committee was in February 2009, but legislative action on climate change was quickly halted by the partisan divide on the issue. Oklahoma Republican Senator Jim Inhofe, a leading sceptic of climate change, protested the hearing, telling the committee: "The global warming movement has completely collapsed." Indeed, Barack Obama's climate change agenda was left in the dust near the beginning of his presidency. But environmental advocates hope to revitalise the movement, Bloomberg reports. "The whole world is debating global warming," said Senator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who has made something of a mission out of refuting Inhofe's claims. "We can't run away from the issue. We need to put it front and centre." http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400175/Wild-US-weather-explained (http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/7400175/Wild-US-weather-explained) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2012, 03:30:42 pm • Richard Muller's volte face on climate change is good for science (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/31/richard-muller-climate-change-good-science) (The Guardian — July 31, 2012) • Richard Muller: ‘Humans Are Almost Entirely The Cause’ Of Climate Change (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/29/richard-muller-climate-change-humans-koch_n_1715887.html) (The Huffington Post — July 29, 2012) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2012, 11:02:45 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Conversion of climate change skeptic not likely to sway GOP By DAVID HORSEY | 12:38AM - Thursday, August 02, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_20120802a_02aug12.jpg) Republicans heads are buried in the climate change sand. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times/August 02, 2012. ARE TWO OF the left’s most useful villains, Charles and David Koch (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/david-koch-PEBSL00422.topic), not quite as unredeemable as liberals believe? Could it be they might change their minds about climate change and admit that it is real? UC Berkeley (http://www.latimes.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/university-of-california-berkeley-OREDU00000197.topic) physics professor Richard A. Muller says that, after years of paying for studies by global warming skeptics, the Koch brothers honestly want to get the science clarified. They helped fund Muller who, only three years ago, doubted that the Earth was heating up to dangerous levels due to human activity. Now, with his Koch-funded research complete, he has reversed himself. In a column published in the New York Times, Muller wrote, “Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.” Muller can now be welcomed into the enormous club of scientists who have, for years, been warning about this impending threat to life as we have known it on this planet. The question is whether his conversion can bring along any conservative politicians, such as most of the Republicans in Congress. Scientific research is unlikely to convince them (Why should facts sway them now if they have resisted the truth up to this point?). But Republicans might possibly reassess if the word comes down from two of their biggest financial backers, the Koch brothers. Through their super PAC, Americans for Prosperity (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/americans-for-prosperity-ORCIG0000042.topic), the Kochs have dumped a mountain of money into Republican campaigns. They were the sugar daddies behind Herman Cain (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/government/herman-cain-PEPLT00008439.topic)’s curious run for president and now are doing their best to elect Mitt Romney (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics/government/mitt-romney-PEPLT007376.topic). When these libertarian billionaires snap their fingers, Republicans rush to do their bidding. Muller told U.S. News & World Report blogger Elizabeth Flock that the Kochs do not match the caricature liberals draw of them. "People think they can look into the minds of Charles and David Koch," Muller said to Flock. "But I have had conversations with them where they are interested in the science and the proof, so that these issues [of climate change] would be resolved." I will believe it when I see it. Sure, it is entirely possible that the Kochs do accept Muller’s findings. There are probably plenty of people like them at the highest levels of the oil and coal industries who already believe climate change is real and is caused by CO² emissions from human activities. These folks are not dummies, after all. But they are also the people who put the special in special interests. Petrochemical kings like the Kochs might understand that the burning of fossil fuels is pushing humanity toward a precipice, yet not really give a damn. When fortunes are at stake and economic power is on the line, quarterly profits invariably outweigh the fate of future generations. It is no longer necessary to accept abstract science to believe in climate change. The severe drought striking much of the West, Midwest and South presents much more tangible and alarming evidence. Climatologists say drought may be the new normal in those regions. But will the many Republican politicians from those parts of the country stop denying the reality of climate change? Will they spring into action to help their constituents living on that drying land? Nope, they will do nothing — unless the money men of industry snap their fingers and say jump. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802,0,5819816.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802,0,5819816.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on August 04, 2012, 11:39:27 am More sophistry, is the author of that tract claiming that every year and decade should be exactly the same as the previous ones? It's commonly held that the 20th century was an unusually wet period for the mid west and the climate and rainfall has always been notoriously fickle. What do you think caused the Anastasi to abandon their cliff cities? it was good old climate change with no human trigger or artificial guilt complex attached to it.
There are more people living and farming in the midwest now than there ever were in the entire history of the North American continent and they're there due to.... climate change, that's right folks, the climate got a bit wetter for a while there over the last century or so and humans being what they are soon took advantage of it. The trouble is that when it flips back to the bad old climate that it had before, they all begin to cry about how unfair it is and being American they begin to cast about looking for someone to blame. That'll be you and me being accused by their useful idiots. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on August 04, 2012, 01:05:03 pm 1. Muller never converted to anything. The closest he came to sceptism was claiming that he could no longer trust Michael Mann's work.
2. The 1930s were far worse in America than the present. It was known as the dustbowl. I suggest you do some research KTJ before posting. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on August 04, 2012, 01:11:22 pm Muller's conversion to warmism is identical to the Pope converting to Catholicism.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 06, 2012, 10:13:15 pm New study links current events in weather to climate change By SETH BORENSTEIN - Associated Press Science Writer | 8:20PM - Saturday August 04, 2012 WASHINGTON — The relentless, weather-gone-crazy type of heat that has blistered the United States and other parts of the world in recent years is so rare that it can’t be anything but man-made global warming, says a new statistical analysis from a top government scientist. The research by a man often called the “godfather of global warming” says that the likelihood of such temperatures occurring from the 1950s through the 1980s was rarer than 1 in 300. Now, the odds are closer to 1 in 10, according to the study by NASA scientist James Hansen. He says that statistically what’s happening is not random or normal but pure and simple climate change. “This is not some scientific theory. We are now experiencing scientific fact,” Hansen told the Associated Press in an interview. Hansen is a scientist at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and a professor at Columbia University. But he also is a strident activist who has called for government action to curb greenhouse gases for years. While his study was published online Saturday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, it is unlikely to sway opinion among the remaining climate-change skeptics. However, several climate scientists praised the new work. In a blunt departure from most climate research, Hansen’s study — based on statistics, not the more typical climate modeling — blames these three heat waves purely on global warming: Last year’s devastating Texas-Oklahoma drought. The 2010 heat waves in Russia and the Middle East, which led to thousands of deaths. The 2003 European heat wave blamed for tens of thousands of deaths, especially among the elderly in France. The analysis was written before the current drought and record-breaking temperatures that have seared much of the United States this year. But Hansen believes this, too, is another prime example of global warming at its worst. The new research makes the case for the severity of global warming in a different way than most scientific studies and uses simple math instead of relying on complex climate models or an understanding of atmospheric physics. It also doesn’t bother with the usual caveats about individual weather events having numerous causes. The increase in the chance of extreme heat, drought and heavy downpours in certain regions is so huge that scientists should stop hemming and hawing, Hansen said. “This is happening often enough, over a big enough area that people can see it happening,” he said. Scientists generally have responded that it’s impossible to say whether single events are caused by global warming because of the influence of natural weather variability. However, that position has been shifting in recent months, as other studies, too, have concluded climate change is happening right before our eyes. Hansen hopes his new study will shift people’s thinking about climate change and goad governments into action. He wrote an op-ed piece that appeared online Friday in the Washington Post. “There is still time to act and avoid a worsening climate, but we are wasting precious time,” he wrote. The science in Hansen’s study is excellent “and reframes the question,” said Andrew Weaver, a climate scientist at the University of Victoria in British Columbia who was a member of the Nobel Prize-winning international panel of climate scientists that issued a series of reports on global warming. “Rather than say, ‘Is this because of climate change?’ That’s the wrong question. What you can say is, ‘How likely is this to have occurred with the absence of global warming?’ It’s so extraordinarily unlikely that it has to be due to global warming,” Weaver said. For years, scientists have run complex computer models using combinations of various factors to see how likely a weather event would happen without global warming and with it. About 25 different aspects of climate change have been formally attributed to man-made greenhouse gases in dozens of formal studies. But these are generally broad and nonspecific, such as more heat waves in some regions and heavy rainfall in others. Another upcoming study by Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, links the 2010 Russian heat wave to global warming by looking at the underlying weather that caused the heat wave. He called Hansen’s paper an important one that helps communicate the problem. But there is bound to be continued disagreement. Previous studies had been unable to link the two, and one by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded that the Russian drought, which also led to devastating wildfires, was not related to global warming. White House science adviser John Holdren praised the paper’s findings in a statement. But he also said it is true that scientists can’t blame single events on global warming: “This work, which finds that extremely hot summers are more than 10 times more common than they used to be, reinforces many other lines of evidence showing that climate change is occurring and that it is harmful.” Skeptical scientist John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville said Hansen shouldn’t have compared recent years to the 1950s-1980s time period because he said that was a quiet time for extremes. But Derek Arndt, director of climate monitoring for the federal government’s National Climatic Data Center, said that range is a fair one and often used because it is the “golden era” for good statistics. Granger Morgan, head of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University, called Hansen’s study “an important next step in what I expect will be a growing set of statistically based arguments.” In a landmark 1988 study, Hansen predicted that if greenhouse-gas emissions continue, which they have, Washington, D.C., would have about nine days each year of 95 degrees or warmer in the decade of the 2010s. So far this year, with about four more weeks of summer, the city has had 23 days with 95 degrees or hotter temperatures. Hansen says now he underestimated how bad things would get. And while he hopes this will spur action including a tax on the burning of fossil fuels, which emit carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, others doubt it. Science policy expert Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado said Hansen clearly doesn’t understand social science, thinking a study like his could spur action. Just because something ought to happen doesn’t mean it will, he said. In an email, he wrote: “Hansen is pursuing a deeply flawed model of policy change, one that will prove ineffectual and with its most lasting consequence a further politicization of climate science (if that is possible!).” http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20120805/NEWS03/708059895/New-study-links-current-events-in-weather-to-climate-change (http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20120805/NEWS03/708059895/New-study-links-current-events-in-weather-to-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on August 06, 2012, 10:49:42 pm The evidence against Ewen Macdonald was more compelling and yet you swear he's innocent..
Are all of your personalities in a constant state of conflict? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 07, 2012, 04:24:24 pm Climate sceptics fail in NIWA case By TREVOR QUINN - Fairfax NZ News | 3:22PM - Friday, 07 September 2012 A GROUP of climate change sceptics has failed in its case against the National Institute for Atmospheric and Water Research (NIWA) who they brought to court over what they said was inaccurate temperature recordings. The New Zealand Climate Education Trust — a branch of the NZ Climate Science Coalition — challenged NIWA figures, in the High Court at Auckland earlier this year, which showed a rise in temperatures in New Zealand of 1 degree Celcius over the past 100 years. The group said the temperature increase of 1°C was significantly higher than global warming figures around the world and almost 50 per cent above the global average. In the High Court judgement, released today, Justice Geoffrey Venning ruled that the New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust had not been successful in any of the challenges they brought against NIWA. Justice Venning also decided that NIWA's cost should be paid by the trust and he said that if an agreement on the costs could not be reached he would make another ruling at a later stage. During the hearing in July the trust said they believed there had been no warming or a trivial warming of around 0.2°C. The trust also said that NIWA's calculating procedures were unscientific and unreliable. In the judgement Justice Venning said he thought the court should be cautious about making judgements based on decisions made and conclusions drawn by a specialist body such as NIWA. He said NIWA acted "within its own sphere of expertise". Justice Venning said unless the trust could point to some defect in NIWA's decision-making process or show that the decision was clearly wrong in principle or in law the court could not intervene. "This Court should not seek to determine or resolve scientific questions demanding the evaluation of contentious expert opinion." The judge also said that he thought the court should be cautious about making judgements based on decisions made and conclusions drawn by a specialist body, such as NIWA. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7634556/Climate-sceptics-fail-in-Niwa-case (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7634556/Climate-sceptics-fail-in-Niwa-case) Another related thread posted to this General Forum messageboard @ XNC2.... • While the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” fiddle, Rome burns! (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,6068.0.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on September 08, 2012, 09:41:15 am Errrm.......Yes?
So the court states that Niwa operates by its own rules and that this court is not going to get involved in an arguement between scientists? About the only contentious thing there, is I felt he could have ordered both parties pay their own costs. After all, niwa has a bottomless money-pit in the form of the government................ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2012, 09:32:07 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Colomnists%20Portraits/NZHerald_BrianRudman.gif) One small word, one giant setback for denial Brian Rudman on National Issues The New Zealand Herald (http://www.nzherald.co.nz) | 5:30AM - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 UNLIKE bloggers and tweeters, judges can't just let fly with a string of expletives. But they do have a quiver of high-sounding Latinisms up their sleeves to slip into a judgment when their exasperation meter flies into the red zone. Words like prolix, which sounds so much more polite than declaring the submission just waded through was tediously prolonged, long-winded, palaverous, rambling and/or waffling. For Justice Geoffrey Venning, the original statements of claim by the climate change deniers, accusing the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd of cooking the books over atmospheric warming was so, shall we say, prolix, that he couldn't help declaring as much in page two of his recent decision, throwing the claim out of court and ordering the flat-earthers of the NZ Climate Science Coalition to pay NIWA its costs, reported to be "well over $100,000". Even more damaging to the credibility of the NZCSC, the judge dismissed much of the "expert evidence" of two of the lobby group's three main witnesses, in particular co-founder Terry Dunleavy, "retired journalist" and former National Party candidate. The judge ruled that for Mr Dunleavy's evidence to be admissible, he would have to be "an expert in the particular field of the science of meteorology and/or climate. He is not. He has no applicable qualifications. His interest in the area does not sufficiently qualify him as an expert". Worse, parts of his evidence were not "impartial". Mr Dunleavy and his fellow travellers went to court two years ago, alleging that, in effect, the Government's climate institute had acted fraudulently in preparing documentation to show that New Zealand's temperature had warmed by about 1°C in the past 100 years. Justice Venning said the court should be cautious about interfering with the conclusions made by specialist bodies within its own sphere of influence and that unless the NZCSC "can point to some defect in NIWA's decision-making process or show that the decision was clearly wrong in principle and in law this court will not intervene". It was not for the court "to determine or resolve scientific questions". His conclusion was that Niwa's procedure "was in accordance with internationally recognised and credible scientific methodology" and was "peer reviewed". Of course peer review is something the flat-earthers will never risk for their own claims. For years the deniers have been challenged to publish their arguments in a reputable scientific journal and allow it to be subjected to the examination of recognised experts in the field. Of course, to the deniers, the world's climate experts are all part of some global United Nations-backed conspiracy promoting "the lie" of man-made global warming. Just why they conspire is still to be explained. For Mr Dunleavy, and NZCSC co-founder Professor Bob Carter, this defeat won't help their reputations in their parallel roles at the top of the International Climate Science Coalition. The retired journalist is labelled "strategic director and founding chairman" of this world body and Professor Carter, who failed to convince Justice Venning in the NIWA case, is chief science adviser. A taste of Mr Dunleavy's impartiality is on show in a YouTube clip of him addressing the second International Conference on Climate Change, run by the Heartland Institute in New York, March 2009. They were there, he declares, "to save the planet ... from being swamped by a tsunami of false propaganda about a catastrophe caused by we humans emitting a little too much of a colourless, odourless gas, carbon dioxide". The lies were being preached by "zealots" working under the auspices of the "United Nations". The only light relief I could find regarding the Heartland Institute is that its headquarters are on South Wacker Drive, Chicago. But if our wackos were hoping to touch up their Wacker Drive mates for a loan to pay their court costs, they might be in for a surprise. A misjudged billboard campaign by the ultra-conservative Heartland Institute this year resulted in a mass exodus of corporate donors. In May, Heartland erected billboards across Chicago with huge mugshots of notorious criminals, the Unabomber and cult leader and murderer Charles Manson, with the text "I still believe in global warming. Do you?" The signs were removed within 24 hours but not before the departure of many supporters and several larger donors. Which suggests that Mr Dunleavy's best bet might be hoping he can persuade rich supporters like expat millionaire Alan Gibbs, listed No.2 on the ICSC advisory board, to come to the party. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10833373 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10833373) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on September 17, 2012, 08:07:33 am Editorial: Judge's ruling in climate case refreshing 5:29 AM Monday Sep 17, 2012 Scathing judgment backing Niwa represents damning of sceptics' crusade. A year ago, James Hansen, one of the world's top climate scientists, conceded that climate sceptics were winning the argument with the public over global warming. This, he said, was occurring even as climate science itself was showing ever more clearly that the Earth was in increasing danger from rising temperatures. Part of the reason for this outcome is the professional communications approach employed by the climate sceptics. Scientists have not been able to compete with this. One of the main thrusts of this strategy has been to allege that scientists have behaved without integrity or honesty. It is in this context that a recent High Court judgment has considerable importance. The case saw a branch of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, a group of sceptics, seeking to have temperatures collected by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research declared invalid. It could hardly have failed more comprehensively. Justice Geoffrey Venning ruled that the coalition had not succeeded in any of its challenges against Niwa, and said it must pay the crown research institute's costs. The coalition alleged that the method used to collect national temperature records, which show a national warming trend of almost one degree Celsius in the past century, almost 50 per cent above the global average, had been unscientific. That had created an unrealistic and unreliable indication of climate warming, it said. If the coalition had managed to discredit Niwa's methods, it would also have discredited the evidence for climate change, and the part played by human activities. But Justice Venning said Niwa had applied "internationally recognised and credible scientific methodology" and, as such, did not breach any obligation it may have had to pursue excellence. The coalition was also effectively branded as amateurish. The evidence of one coalition member was dismissed in large part by Justice Venning because "he has no applicable qualifications. His interest in the area does not sufficiently qualify him as an expert". This represented a refreshing approach from Justice Venning. Too often, the claims of unqualified people have been able to cast doubt on the view of the majority of active climate scientists who are certain human industry is contributing to global warming. As has happened before, climate sceptics have reacted by seeking to shift the goalposts. In an Opinion article in this newspaper, Auckland University associate professor Chris de Freitas played down the importance of any court ruling, saying it was no substitute for the insufficient number of attempts globally "to reassess quantitatively the nature and reliability of homogeneity adjustments to complete national sets". That oddly overlooked the fact that the coalition had chosen the High Court as a battleground, thereby attaching its own importance to it. It also ignored the scathing nature of the judgment. So severe was this that it rendered the case outlandish and raised questions about how it could have occupied so much of the court's time. Justice Venning's judgment was a strong riposte to the climate sceptics' ongoing claims of a conspiracy by scientists. Many inquiries by British and American government agencies and independent panels have previously upheld the integrity and honesty of the scientists. This ruling reinforced that and represented a damning of the climate sceptics' case. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10834470 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10834470) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 05, 2012, 01:12:04 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Study reveals ancient greenhouse gas emissions An analysis of Greenland ice core samples indicates significant global methane emissions per capita during the Roman Empire and China's Han Dynasty — much greater than had been known. By MONTE MORIN | 4:46PM - Wednesday, October 03, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012oct04z.jpg) The study's conclusions were based on an analysis of ice core samples from Greenland. — Photo: John McConnico/Associated Press. CENTURIES before the Industrial Revolution or the recognition of global warming, the ancient Roman and Chinese empires were already producing powerful greenhouse gases through their daily toil, according to a new study. The burning of plant matter to cook food, clear cropland and process metals released millions of tons of methane gas into the atmosphere each year during several periods of pre-industrial history, according to the study, published Thursday in the journal Nature. Although the quantity of methane produced back then pales in comparison with the emissions released today — the total amount is roughly 70 times greater now — the findings suggest that man's footprint on the climate is larger than previously realized. Until now, it was assumed by scientists that human activity began increasing greenhouse gas levels only after the year 1750. "The quantities are much smaller, because there were fewer people on Earth," said study leader Celia Sapart, an atmospheric chemist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. "But the amount of methane emitted per person was significant." Sapart's conclusions were based on an analysis of ice core samples from Greenland. The layered ice columns, which date back 2,000 years, contain tiny air bubbles from different periods of history, and provide scientists with a view into the atmosphere's changing chemistry. The first period of methane production captured in the ice cores — roughly from the years AD 1 to 300 — encompassed the tail ends of the Roman Empire and the Han Dynasty, when charcoal was the preferred form of fuel. The second period of elevated methane emissions occurred during what's known as the Medieval Climate Anomaly, from roughly 800 to 1200, and a third was found during the Little Ice Age between 1300 and 1600. Methane is one of a few gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to global warming. It forms naturally when plant and animal matter decomposes in airless environments, and it's also released when vegetation burns. However, when methane is produced by burning, it contains heavier carbon isotopes than methane generated through decomposition. By using a mass spectrometer to study the air trapped in the ice cores, Sapart and her colleagues were able to determine the ratio of methane produced by burning and by decomposition. The study notes that not all cases of burned vegetation were the result of human activity; forest fires, particularly in times of drought, would also contribute to so-called pyrogenic methane production. The research team used mathematical models to account for this naturally burning vegetation and other fluctuations in atmospheric methane content. "The results show that between 100 BC and AD 1600, human activity may have been responsible for roughly 20-30% of the total pyrogenic methane emissions," the authors wrote. The research appeared to be the result of very careful and very difficult examination of carbon isotopes and could impact global warming estimates for the pre-industrial period, according to Ed Dlugokencky, a methane expert at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado. "The study gives further evidence for a contribution to the global methane burden from anthropogenic sources," said Dlugokencky, who was not involved in the study. Sapart said that though the study helped answer questions about the past, there were still plenty that remained about the future. Of particular concern is the melting of permafrost in the Arctic regions, where methane trapped in the frozen earth and ice is allowed to escape into the atmosphere. "To date, we do not know how natural methane sources will evolve together with human-induced climate change, but it is likely those natural sources will increase," she said. ______________________________________ Related news story: • The curious blindness of climate deniers (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-curious-blindness-of-climate-deniers-20120917,0,811243.story) http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-humans-climate-change-20121004,0,2962982.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-humans-climate-change-20121004,0,2962982.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on October 05, 2012, 02:43:27 pm Ho-Hum.
Bored! Bored! - Very bored! Do a google on "Dan Turner climate" and the usual long list of spittle-spraying diatribes on human induced climate change shows up. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 30, 2012, 03:50:52 pm (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/infographics/182/HurricaneLowerManhattan.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/SCCZEN_AP121030143234_460x230.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/SCCZEN_AP121030161802_460x230.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 30, 2012, 03:51:07 pm (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/infographics/182/HurricaneLowerManhattan.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/SCCZEN_AP121030143234_460x230.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/SCCZEN_AP121030161802_460x230.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 30, 2012, 04:04:05 pm Here are some more global-warming/climate-change "hoax" photographs.... (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143025_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030130657_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030142732_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030141836_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143017_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030141431_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143220_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143508_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143422_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030143432_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030083531_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030084950_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030104823_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030105331_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030115440_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030121836_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030122241_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030130111_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030132223_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030132422_620x413.jpg) (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121030133830_620x413.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on October 31, 2012, 10:10:27 am Some more reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,12423.0.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 31, 2012, 02:05:46 pm (http://static.stuff.co.nz/1351598614/963/7884963.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 31, 2012, 02:11:01 pm (http://static.stuff.co.nz/1351624125/352/7886352.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 01, 2012, 11:41:19 am What we sow is what we reap Letters to the Editor - The Dominion Post | Thursday, 01 November 2012 (http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201244/AP121029090309_620x413.jpg) THE HORROR of the Frankenstein hurricane with the benign nickname, Sandy, which this week kicked in the United States' front door, won't be lost on its victims. It will be lost on the deaf and blind corporate establishment, wedded only to profit, which refuses to acknowledge its major role in atmospheric change and fights regulation. This Frankenstorm is, in a sense, “going back to mother”. In the past 30 years, damaging weather events in the US have increased five times over. What we sow is what we reap, and unless the blind greed of corporate capitalism is reined in, destructive environmental events such as Sandy will increase in frequency and severity, finally engulfing all of us in a holocaust of our own making. ALAN RHODES Napier http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/letters-to-the-editor/7892327/Letter-What-we-sow-is-what-we-reap (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/letters-to-the-editor/7892327/Letter-What-we-sow-is-what-we-reap) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 01, 2012, 12:52:04 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012oct31axl.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 02, 2012, 09:33:44 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix/boats_on_tracks.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 02, 2012, 11:50:21 am (http://static.stuff.co.nz/1351802814/215/7898215.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 06, 2012, 11:04:51 am (http://images.theage.com.au/2012/11/05/3770056/port-Bruce_Petty.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on November 10, 2012, 04:37:13 am Back in the superstitious days every bad weather event was blamed on witches.
In the modern 21st century nothing much has changed. We still scapegoat and cannot accept bad weather as bad weather. Loonies still have to blame someone for it. The Aztecs thought they could control the climate by physically taking people's hearts. These days our leaders believe we can control the climate by taking away people's green bits of paper. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on November 10, 2012, 06:33:50 am Greens blast Government for backing out of Kyoto deal Jacqui Stanford, Newstalk ZB November 10, 2012, 6:41 am ...Dr Graham says it means a lot of hot air at talks, but no legally binding measures to reduce emissions. ... http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/15346599/greens-blast-government-for-backing-out-of-kyoto-deal/ o goody! does this mean us domestic energy users are going to get a refund of the carbon tax we have already paid on electricity and fuel? yeahbut http://www.nzherald.co.nz/carbon-trading/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501831&objectid=10824448 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 28, 2012, 02:27:25 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Despite storms and floods, humans willingly ignore global warming By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Tuesday, November 27, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012nov27a.jpg) Humanity is oblivious to climate change warnings. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times/November 27, 2012. WHAT DO Manhattan and Miami have in common with ancient Pompeii? They are doomed places where the residents cannot imagine that the good times will ever end. Superstorm Sandy got our attention — like Mike Tyson walking into the house and punching our dog. And the certainty that more freakish, savage storms will pay a visit has made it tough for global-warming deniers to keep denying. But denial is not as tough to reckon with as obliviousness. Being oblivious to approaching doom is a consistent human trait. We are a hopeful, gullible and greedy species. Most of us imagine we can be the last one out of the burning casino with hundred-dollar bills stuffed in every pocket. Last week, PBS broadcast Ken Burns' new documentary, about the 1930s Dust Bowl, and provided a reminder of humanity’s unwillingness to acknowledge that what makes us rich today may kill us tomorrow. In the opening decades of the 20th century, real estate hucksters, railroad tycoons and even government agencies persuaded thousands of dirt-poor farmers to come to the dry and windy center of the Great Plains, plow up millions of acres of ancient grasslands and plant wheat. There were several reasons this was a bad idea, but for a couple of unusually wet decades, bumper crops were the norm. Then, in the 1930s, inevitable drought returned. The land dried up and, quite literally, blew away in enormous black clouds that killed crops, livestock, children, old people and dreams. It was the worst man-made environmental disaster in American history. Now, as we grow more aware that we face the worst man-made environmental disaster in the history of the world, we are proving to be no more wise than the imprudent farmers who tore up the buffalo grass. Rather than taking serious steps to curb the carbon emissions that are driving up temperatures everywhere, rather than being shocked by the rapid melting of the polar ice packs and mountain glaciers, rather than seeing drought-driven wildfires and monster storms as portents of things to come, we are redoubling our efforts to extract every last ounce of fuel from the dirtiest depths of the land. The oil boom in North Dakota is turning that sparsely populated state into an American Arabia. Even bigger is the oil bonanza in western Canada. According to a Los Angeles Times report (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/10/business/la-fi-canada-recruit-20121111), recruiters from Alberta are scouring California and other states hoping to lure tens of thousands of workers north to the oil fields. In a time of high unemployment and high gas prices, this seems like happy, hopeful news. But it is hope built on sand — the vast deposits of oil sands that give up their black gold only through a process that requires a bottomless supply of water and poses huge environmental risks. The worst comes after the oil is extracted. That is when we burn it all up in our cars and factories and send the resulting emissions into the atmosphere. On Sunday, the New York Times published a set of dramatic graphics showing how several coastal cities will be affected by rising sea levels that will be one result of global warming. Scientists say if immediate, dramatic measures are taken to reduce emissions, the seas may rise just five feet. New York City might be able to cope by erecting barriers, but Miami Beach would disappear. If the world hits just the modest emissions targets that have already been set, but largely ignored, sea level will go up twelve feet. That means all that will be left of Miami is a scattering of islands, while nearly a quarter of New York goes underwater. But if we continue full speed ahead, drilling, fracking and burning it all up, then the coasts will see a 25-foot rise that swamps all of south Florida; all of Norfolk, Virginia; big swaths of New York and Boston; every beach in California and, strangely enough, more than 60% of Sacramento. Of course, this is all many decades in the future, our legacy to future generations. For now, in between the storms and wildfires, we will remain oblivious. After all, until the end actually came, Pompeii was a pleasant town with a fine mountain view. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126,0,3924115.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126,0,3924115.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 29, 2012, 10:28:40 am From the Los Angeles Times.... Ocean acidification is killing sea life, and we are the culprits By DAVID HORSEY | 5:05AM - Wednesday, November 28, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012nov28a.jpg) Ocean acidification threatens sea life and the global food chain. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times/November 28, 2012. IF THE prospect of coastal cities sinking into the sea 100 years from now does not motivate Americans to do something dramatic to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, there is something happening at this very moment that should be setting off sirens. Rising CO2 levels are making the oceans more acidic and that change in the chemistry of the seas is disrupting the food chain that ends with you and me. For years, as scientists watched the carbon emissions from our tailpipes and smokestacks spew into the sky and goose temperatures higher, there was one mitigating factor that was keeping a brake on global warming: The oceans were absorbing a whole lot of that CO2. Now, though, it turns out that is not such a blessing. Carbon dioxide welling up from the cold, deep ocean is shifting the pH balance in shallower coastal waters. That rise in acidity is affecting organisms that depend on calcium carbonate to form protective shells and exoskeletons — creatures such as crabs and oysters and clams, as well as coral reefs that provide crucial habitat for many kinds of sea life. Acidification dissolves shells and coral. There is evidence it also screws up the instinctual guidance systems of at least some types of fish, making them unable to discern the difference between predators and prey. Scientists suspected something bad like this might happen as the oceans grew more sour, but they did not expect it to be happening already. Researchers are finding that, in several locales, the shells of tiny creatures called pteropods are being thinned and broken down by acidity. People do not eat pteropods, but plenty of fish do. They supply 50% of the diet of pink salmon, and people do eat salmon. It is not hard to understand the biology: If pteropods disappear, salmon and other fish get scarce. In an interview (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019765681_pteropods26m.html) with the Seattle Times, Gretchen Hofmann, a biologist at UC Santa Barbara stressed how crucial little creatures like pteropods are in maintaining the food chain. “They’re small but carry an enormous amount of nutrition and are eaten even by very big fish. If you’re in the Antarctic and see a beautiful emperor penguin, it exists by eating fish under the sea ice. And those fish eat pteropods.” Moved to action by a massive die-off of oyster larvae that was traced to acidification, Washington became the first state to establish a blue-ribbon panel to come up with a plan to cope with ocean acidification. The panel released its findings on Tuesday and recommended 42 steps toward adaptation, remediation, monitoring and education. For now, such efforts may help protect the seafood industry that brings $1.7 billion annually to Washington, but one state cannot fix this problem permanently. The threat is global. A report by the United Nations Environment Program said, “Fish, including shellfish, contribute 15% of animal protein for three billion people worldwide. A further one billion people rely on fisheries for their primary source of protein.... Fish stocks, already declining in many areas due to over-fishing and habitat destruction now face the new threats posed by ocean acidification.” Each and every day, humans loft 70 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, and the seas absorb a fourth of that. Unless we are feeling suicidal, it is time to change our way of doing business. This is not a matter of finding empathy for our grandchildren who will be stuck living on a simmering, stormy planet because we refuse to end our carbon-burning ways, this is a matter of killing off species that feed us today. Global warming is the foreboding thunder in the distance. Ocean acidification is the lightning strike in our frontyard, right here, right now. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-ocean-acidification-20121127,0,3773335.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-ocean-acidification-20121127,0,3773335.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 12, 2012, 07:15:17 pm • Climate change conforming to UN predictions: scientists (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-10/climate-change-conforming-to-un-predictions/4417644) ABC News - 12:55pm Australian Eastern Daylight Time, Monday, December 10, 2012 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 12, 2012, 08:36:18 pm Global Warming
But its been getting colder for the last 16 years ::) global warming is over long live global cooling If you pay me money I will save the world from cooling Lets call it an ice tax Get your self some ice credits from me today ;D There's good money to be made from fear mongering lol Al's Carbon Footprint PHOTOS: Al Gore's New $8.875 Million Montecito Villa Real Estate , Al Gore , Los Angeles Real Estate , Celebrity Homes , Al Gore Global Warming , Al Gore Montecito , Al Gore's New Home , Gore Montecito , Montecito , Oprah-Montecito , Real Estalker , Slidepollajax , Los Angeles News Via Real Estalker, Al and Tipper Gore have picked up a $8.875M luxury getaway in Montecito, CA; a swanky zip code that has attracted big name residents like Oprah Winfrey, Steve Martin, and Kirk Douglas. Records show that the approximately 6,500 sq. foot home boasts 6 bedrooms, 9 bathrooms, a large pool house, 6 fireplaces, wood framed french doors, and carved stone detailing throughout. Check out the slideshow and see what you think: tacky or tasteful. (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91230_large.jpg?1355305672721) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91232_large.jpg?1355305931178) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91241_large.jpg?1355305936006) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91242_large.jpg?1355305972482) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91244_large.jpg?1355305992358) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91245_large.jpg?1355306010729) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91252_large.jpg?1355306033578) (http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/6880/slide_6880_91253_large.jpg?1355306053204) Al Gore's house http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/al-gores-house-2/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 14, 2012, 08:28:12 am From the Los Angeles Times.... Blind faith of climate change deniers endangers us all By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Thursday, December 13, 2012 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012dec13a.jpg) Climate change deniers refuse to accept scientific warnings. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times/December 13, 2012. THIS WEEK's Newsweek magazine features a couple of essays — one about Jesus and one about climate change — that demonstrate the difference between simple faith in the unknowable and blind faith that denies scientific fact. An article by Bart D. Ehrman (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/12/09/what-do-we-really-know-about-jesus.html), professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, discusses things that people believe about the birth of Christ that are actually not in the Bible. For instance, despite what the Christmas carols say, nowhere in the holy book does it mention an ox and ass beside the manger or the exact number of wise men following the star (a star that seems to be operating contrary to the laws of physics, by the way). More unsettling for those who want to take the Gospel accounts literally, the genealogies of Joseph cited in Matthew and Luke that link him to King David are at odds with each other. And the census of "the whole world" declared by Caesar Augustus that allegedly sent Mary and Joseph on a journey to Bethlehem is not mentioned anywhere in the very comprehensive bureaucratic records of the Roman Empire. Doubters have concluded that the nativity stories are obvious myths meant primarily to connect Jesus to the Jewish messianic prophecies. Plenty of others feel no need to take every element of the Christmas story as fact. For them, the spirit of the tale is what matters most. Literalists insist anything is possible with God (including a virgin giving birth), and they have formulated ingenious ways to reconcile the discrepancies in the Gospel accounts. Two millenniums away from the actual event, there is no way to determine perfect truth and no great harm done if folks choose to believe every aspect of the lovely story of that silent night. Great harm is what comes from denying scientific facts about 21st century issues. That is the concern of the second Newsweek article (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/12/09/bakken-oil-boom-and-climate-change-threaten-the-future-of-pasta.html). Written by Mark Hertsgaard, author of "Hot: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth", it documents a stark threat to mankind's food supply: "By 2050, scientists project, the world's leading wheat belts — the U.S. and Canadian Midwest, northern China, India, Russia, and Australia — on average will experience, every other year, a hotter summer than the hottest summer now on record. Wheat production in that period could decline between 23 and 27 percent, reports the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), unless swift action is taken to limit temperature rise and develop crop varieties that can tolerate a hotter world." Hertsgaard takes the reader to North Dakota, where climate change has forced production of durum wheat from the east into the west of the state. Ironically, farmers are now bumping up against the oil boom in western North Dakota that is gobbling up farmland, sucking up vast quantities of water and flaring huge amounts of natural gas into the atmosphere, thereby exacerbating the ongoing rise in global temperatures that are threatening not only wheat crops, but rice and corn as well. Yet, even though the consequences of climate change are becoming frighteningly obvious and, as Hertsgaard writes, "scientists at both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency linked the record heat and drought of summer of 2012 with man-made climate change,” far too many conservatives cling to a blind faith that climate science is a hoax. Doug Goehring, North Dakota’s Republican agriculture commissioner, is typical of them all. Rather than believe the science, he says, "I believe an agenda is being pushed." Yes, it is — but it is the agenda of oil companies and other extracting industries that will not let a looming peril to humanity get in the way of their profits. And it is the climate change deniers in Congress and in state governments who faithfully push that agenda and will not be dissuaded, even by a host of angels. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213,0,4041383.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213,0,4041383.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 21, 2013, 10:45:22 am From the Los Angeles Times.... New Western governor sets his sights on climate change solutions By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Friday, January 18, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013jan18a.jpg) WHEN WE were classmates at Ingraham High School in Seattle, Jay Inslee was quarterback of the football team and a key player on the state champion basketball squad. I was a fledgling cartoonist and editorial writer on the student newspaper. On Wednesday afternoon, as I watched Inslee shoot hoops with his buddies under the new backboard he had just put up on his garage, it struck me that some things have not changed. It was still basketballs for him, cartoons for me. But, in truth, the change is rather dramatic. My bio now starts with the phrase “two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner.” Inslee, as a congressman, threw elbows and blocked shots on the White House basketball court with President Obama. And now, that hoop and net he just installed is attached to the garage outside the governor's mansion in Olympia, Washington. As of Wednesday, his bio has a new top line: 23rd governor of the state of Washington. I traveled to Olympia to see Inslee sworn in. After all, how often does a friend become a governor? And what other governor at his swearing-in would have chosen to be introduced by Dennis Hayes, the founder of Earth Day? Inslee and I were only acquaintances in our teenage years. Our friendship really started at Bill Clinton’s inauguration in 1993. I was in Washington, D.C., covering the event; Jay was a freshman member of Congress. As we walked along a marble hallway in one of the House office buildings, he expressed amazement at where he was and what he was doing. "Our dads are supposed to be doing this, not us!" he laughed. In 1996, I spent several days tracking him during his first run for governor. He had lost his congressional seat in the watershed election of 1994 when Republicans took control of the House for the first time in 50 years and now he was engaged in a quixotic primary campaign against Democratic heavyweights. His life consisted of nonstop fundraising calls and dispiriting candidates’ events where he made his pitch to nearly-empty rooms. On the night of his primary defeat, standing with just a few friends and teary-eyed staffers at his quiet campaign headquarters, Inslee quoted from memory Theodore Roosevelt’s famous speech about the man in the arena “who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." Two years later, the indefatigable Inslee was returned to Congress from a different district and easily held that seat until he left to campaign for governor again last year. In Congress, he became a leader on new energy technology and climate change. I once asked him how anything would ever get done to forestall the looming climate calamity, given the pitiful lack of political will on the issue. As always, he was upbeat, certain that smart leaders would find a solution, certain this was not another quixotic fight. So, it was no surprise that, in his inaugural speech as governor, Inslee told the assembled legislators he believes the state can lead the world in providing a technological response to the climate challenge. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrated in California that states can take effective action to reduce carbon emissions even while the federal government dawdles. Inslee wants his state to follow a similar path and, in the process, create new jobs in the clean energy industry Republican legislators, many of whom cling to the idea that climate change is as mythical as unicorns, sat glumly as he directed a message to them: “We don’t deny science in Washington; we embrace it. We do not follow technological innovation; we lead it. And we will not pass up a golden opportunity to create jobs.” At the governor’s mansion, two hours after his inaugural address and a few minutes before the basketball game, I reminded Inslee of that feeling he had when he first went to Congress, that sense that an older generation should still be in charge. I asked him how he felt on his first day as governor. His answer was firm: “I am ready now.” So much of the time, politics is dismal and disheartening, but, on Wednesday, I was reminded that elections matter. That is how we raise up good men and women like Jay Inslee who consider “daring greatly” to be their life’s mission. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117,0,1055506.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117,0,1055506.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on January 24, 2013, 12:55:20 pm The claim that the first IPCC report's "projection" of future climate was correct has been debunked by the leaked AR5 draft...by their own graphs.
The comical entry above that it was correct can only be attributed by rounding up, and even then it only fits the very bottom of the range. The leaked draft is quite illuminating. The IPCC is even prepared to say the sun has been a major influence on climate. The IPCC continues to draw upon activists (Greenpeace, WWF for example) for its references rather than less partisan sources. The UK Metservice has been forced to admit no warming in 16 years. Their own models project no more warming for another five years. James Hansen has had to concede natural variability in climate change (though he is adamant that it will return to his abymsally performing record.) The debacle is slowly being unravelled. It will be interesting to see how long this modern myth can keep running until it is completely debunked except to the extreme fringe groups. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on March 02, 2013, 07:49:51 am http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on March 02, 2013, 08:17:16 am re http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,600.0/msg,144523.html I haven't read this either. Should I ? http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/12/16/1334921/leaked-ipcc-draft-report-recent-warming-is-manmade-cloud-feedback-is-positive-inaction-is-suicidal/?mobile=nc Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 02, 2013, 09:00:40 am from The Guardian.... Secret funding helped build vast network of climate denial thinktanks Anonymous billionaires donated $120m to more than 100 anti-climate groups working to discredit climate change science By SUZANNE GOLDENBERT - US Environment Correspondent | 1:39PM GMT - Thursday, 14 February 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/guardian_2013feb14a_zps36070b7d.jpg) Climate sceptic groups are mobilising against Obama’s efforts to act on climate change in his second term. — Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images. CONSERVATIVE BILLIONAIRES used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120m (£77m) to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change), the Guardian has learned. The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of thinktanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarising "wedge issue" for hardcore conservatives. The millions were routed through two trusts, Donors Trust (http://www.donorstrust.org) and the Donors Capital Fund (http://www.donorscapitalfund.org/), operating out of a generic town house in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington DC. Donors Capital caters to those making donations of $1m or more. Whitney Ball, chief executive of the Donors Trust told the Guardian that her organisation assured wealthy donors that their funds would never by diverted to liberal causes. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/guardian_2013feb14b_zps159dca8a.jpg) The funding stream far outstripped the support from more visible opponents of climate action such as the oil industry or the conservative billionaire Koch brothers. — Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images. "We exist to help donors promote liberty which we understand to be limited government, personal responsibility, and free enterprise," she said in an interview. By definition that means none of the money is going to end up with groups like Greenpeace, she said. "It won't be going to liberals." Ball won't divulge names, but she said the stable of donors represents a wide range of opinion on the American right. Increasingly over the years, those conservative donors have been pushing funds towards organisations working to discredit climate science or block climate action. Donors exhibit sharp differences of opinion on many issues, Ball said. They run the spectrum of conservative opinion, from social conservatives to libertarians. But in opposing mandatory cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, they found common ground. "Are there both sides of an environmental issue? Probably not," she went on. "Here is the thing. If you look at libertarians, you tend to have a lot of differences on things like defence, immigration, drugs, the war, things like that compared to conservatives. When it comes to issues like the environment, if there are differences, they are not nearly as pronounced." By 2010, the dark money amounted to $118m distributed to 102 thinktanks or action groups which have a record of denying the existence of a human factor in climate change, or opposing environmental regulations. The money flowed to Washington thinktanks embedded in Republican party politics, obscure policy forums in Alaska and Tennessee, contrarian scientists at Harvard and lesser institutions, even to buy up DVDs of a film attacking Al Gore. The ready stream of cash set off a conservative backlash against Barack Obama's environmental agenda that wrecked any chance of Congress taking action on climate change. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/guardian_2013feb14c_zpsf7e41cda.jpg) Graphic: climate denial funding. Those same groups are now mobilising against Obama's efforts to act on climate change in his second term. A top recipient of the secret funds on Wednesday put out a point-by-point critique of the climate content in the president's state of the union address. And it was all done with a guarantee of complete anonymity for the donors who wished to remain hidden. "The funding of the denial machine is becoming increasingly invisible to public scrutiny. It's also growing. Budgets for all these different groups are growing," said Kert Davies, research director of Greenpeace, which compiled the data on funding of the anti-climate groups using tax records. "These groups are increasingly getting money from sources that are anonymous or untraceable. There is no transparency, no accountability for the money. There is no way to tell who is funding them," Davies said. The trusts were established for the express purpose of managing donations to a host of conservative causes. Such vehicles, called donor-advised funds, are not uncommon in America. They offer a number of advantages to wealthy donors. They are convenient, cheaper to run than a private foundation, offer tax breaks and are lawful. That opposition hardened over the years, especially from the mid-2000s where the Greenpeace record shows a sharp spike in funds to the anti-climate cause. In effect, the Donors Trust was bankrolling a movement, said Robert Brulle (http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~brullerj), a Drexel University sociologist who has extensively researched the networks of ultra-conservative donors. "This is what I call the counter-movement, a large-scale effort that is an organised effort and that is part and parcel of the conservative movement in the United States " Brulle said. "We don't know where a lot of the money is coming from, but we do know that Donors Trust is just one example of the dark money flowing into this effort." In his view, Brulle said: "Donors Trust is just the tip of a very big iceberg." The rise of that movement is evident in the funding stream. In 2002, the two trusts raised less than $900,000 for the anti-climate cause. That was a fraction of what Exxon Mobil or the conservative oil billionaire Koch brothers donated to climate sceptic groups that year. By 2010, the two Donor Trusts between them were channelling just under $30m to a host of conservative organisations opposing climate action or science. That accounted to 46% of all their grants to conservative causes, according to the Greenpeace analysis. The funding stream far outstripped the support from more visible opponents of climate action such as the oil industry or the conservative billionaire Koch brothers, the records show. When it came to blocking action on the climate crisis, the obscure charity in the suburbs was outspending the Koch brothers by a factor of six to one. "There is plenty of money coming from elsewhere," said John Mashey, a retired computer executive who has researched funding for climate contrarians. "Focusing on the Kochs gets things confused. You can not ignore the Kochs. They have their fingers in too many things, but they are not the only ones." It is also possible the Kochs continued to fund their favourite projects using the anonymity offered by Donor Trust. But the records suggest many other wealthy conservatives opened up their wallets to the anti-climate cause — an impression Ball wishes to stick. She argued the media had overblown the Kochs support for conservative causes like climate contrarianism over the years. "It's so funny that on the right we think George Soros funds everything, and on the left you guys think it is the evil Koch brothers who are behind everything. It's just not true. If the Koch brothers didn't exist we would still have a very healthy organisation," Ball said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network) from The Guardian.... How Donors Trust distributed millions to anti-climate groups The secretive funding network distributed $118m to 102 groups including some of the best-known thinktanks on the right By SUZANNE GOLDENBERG - US Environment Correspondent | 1.46PM GMT - Thursday, 14 February 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/guardian_2013feb14d_zps85474d2d.jpg) Dozens of exhibitors promote their oil and gas related businesses. By 2010, Donors Trust had distributed $118m to 102 thinktanks or action groups. — Photo: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA. THE SECRETIVE funding channel known as the Donors Trust (http://donorstrust.org) patronised a host of conservative causes. But climate was at the top of the list. By 2010, Donors Trust had distributed $118m to 102 thinktanks or action groups (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network) which have a record of denying the existence of a human factor in climate change (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change), or opposing environmental regulations. Recipients included some of the best-known thinktanks on the right. The American Enterprise Institute (http://www.aei.org), which is closely connected to the Republican party establishment and has a large staff of scholars, received more than $17m in untraceable donations over the years, the record show. But relatively obscure organisations did not go overlooked. The Heartland Institute (http://heartland.org), virtually unknown outside the small world of climate politics, received $13.5m from the Donors Trust. Americans for Prosperity (http://americansforprosperity.org), the Tea Party group seen as the strike force of the conservative oil billionaire Koch Brothers, received $11m since 2002. Levi Russell, spokesman for Americans for Prosperity, declined to comment on the importance of that support to the organisation. "We're very grateful for each of the millions of activists and donors that make what we do possible," he said in an email. The secretive funding network also funded individuals, such as Jo Kwong, an official at the Philanthropy Roundtable (http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org) who was awarded $200,000 in 2010. And there was strong interest in funding media projects. Some of the groups on the Donors Trust list would have struggled to exist without being bankrolled by anonymous donors. The support helped the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (http://www.cfact.org) (Cfact), expand from $600,000 to $3m annual operation. In 2010, Cfact received nearly half of its budget from those anonymous donors, the records show. The group's most visible product is the website, Climate Depot (http://climatedepot.com), a contrarian news source run by Marc Morano. Climate Depot sees itself as the rapid reaction force of the anti-climate cause. On the morning after Obama's state of the union address, Morano put out a point by point rebuttal to the section on climate change (http://climatedepot.com/a/19683/Obama-fails-climate-science-in-his-State-of-the-Union-address--Climate-Depots-pointbypoint-rebuttal-to-the-Presidents-global-warming-claims). The gregarious Morano is a former aide to the Republican senator Jim Inhofe (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/01/inhofe-climate-mccarthyite) notorious for declaring climate change the greatest hoax on mankind. According to Cfact's tax filings, Morano, listed as communications director, was the most highly paid member of the organisation. However, Craig Rucker, the group's executive director, insisted the funding was not critical to their work. "It is not crucial in the least. Climate Depot's continued operation is not linked to funding from any particular source," he said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/donors-trust-funding-climate-denial-networks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/donors-trust-funding-climate-denial-networks) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on March 02, 2013, 02:21:59 pm Sounds a bit like when Galileo locked horns with the Catholic Church over heliocentrism.
The Catholic won intially but Galieo was the one who was proven to be correct. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on March 04, 2013, 01:46:32 pm You're assuming of course Suzanne Goldenberg is being completely honest. I don't know all the organisations she mentioned, but I have passing familiarity with the Heartland Institute. It is true the Koch brothers donated money to the Heartland Institute. There is one problem with Goldenberg's argument though: none of it was earmarked for climate scepticism. It was all earmarked for health. IOW the Koch brothers gave zero dollars for the cause Goldenberg wants us to believe her on.
How much of the rest is true is brought into disrepute. Americans for Prosperity probably have lots of things they devote money to and I'd really be interested in the amount Exxon Mobil gave away since I've found Greenpeace et al on this to be totally fraudalent. Exxon Mobil on the other hand has given money away to Green projects in the past... Even if Goldenberg were true, it is still small change compared to the billions climate activists get. It is somewhat out of date, but the US government has given $79billion away to them. In the last year the Australian Gilliard government has given $1.6billion to the cause. Dr Michael Mann has recently been exposed to getting $10,000 a pop for one or two hour seminars. Dr James Hansen as reluctantly released by NASA has earned over $1million from his activism. How much he has really earned from such activity is anybody's guess. When you present these types of charges, you should try and achieve some sort of balance. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on March 04, 2013, 01:54:13 pm When it comes to funding climate activisim pays extremely well
Climate money (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/climate_money.pdf). This was written in 2009 and so the amount of money given to these activists will be even more. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on March 14, 2013, 10:13:06 am ClimateGate III is now here. The person, known by the pseudonym FOIA*, responsible for the last two leaks (ClimateGate I and ClimateGate II) has given out the 128bit password to select individuals so that the remaining emails and data can be released.
One of the protests by the Hockey Team is their emails were taken out of context. When all of the emails are redacted (email addresses and so forth) they will not be able to hide behind this excuse anymore. Interestingly enoughly one of the latest finds is the Hockey Team not only admitting that the Medieval Warm Period (and Little Ice Age) existed, but that it was global. * Freedom Of Information Act: similar to our Official Information Act (OIA) You can read more at Watts up with that (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/13/climategate-3-0-has-occurred-the-password-has-been-released/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on March 14, 2013, 11:07:31 am * Cue for inane gif or cartoon.....
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 16, 2013, 10:35:55 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202013/8433295sr_VanishingMonarchs_16Mar13_zpsb12ab598.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on March 16, 2013, 10:37:24 am * Cue for inane gif or cartoon..... Bingo!Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on March 26, 2013, 01:19:52 pm Has the flip to the 70s global cooling and Ice Age propaganda begun again?
The coming Ice Age (http://www.welt.de/print/die_welt/vermischtes/article114733276/Wissenschaftler-warnen-vor-Eiszeit.html) (only in German unfortunately.) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 26, 2013, 01:59:25 pm Hahaha.....things are sooooooooo predictable. The drought continues, so cue anti-warmalists jumping in with SPIN to try to divert attention from the earth heating up. Those flat-earthers sure are funny-buggers! (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/09_ROFLMAO.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on March 26, 2013, 02:07:53 pm There hasn't been any shortage of rain, it's simply been ending up in the ocean at the same latitude as us but at the wrong longitude.
It's atmospheric pressure causing the dry spell, not higher temperatures as such. We're stuck in a persistent anticyclone. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on March 26, 2013, 03:23:24 pm That and parts of Australia got loads of rain due to that high pressure, but some people are super stupid and go on about a flat earth.
The earth has not warmed up since 1997. That is an inconvenient fact for the warmmongers. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 02, 2013, 10:20:31 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Earth's greenhouse gas levels approach 400-ppm milestone (http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-greenhouse-gas--earth-20130430,0,119469.story) (5:25AM - Wednesday, August 1st, 2013) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on May 02, 2013, 10:22:48 am And?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on May 02, 2013, 11:39:51 am And? There's this delusion that the climate was perfect when CO2 was 350 parts per million or less. Bill McKibben, an alarmist supreme, even has a website devoted to the concept. McKibben is regularly cited. Apparently we need to get back this magic number* and then the climate will be perfect again. No floods, droughts, superstorms, cyclones, hurricanes, prostitution** or anything bad happened when CO2 levels were at this figure or lower. * Seemingly a number plucked out of thin air, hence 'magic.' ** Yes, the US Democrats are promoting this in the Congress at the moment. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on May 02, 2013, 11:57:01 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Earth's greenhouse gas levels approach 400-ppm milestone (http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-greenhouse-gas--earth-20130430,0,119469.story) (5:25AM - Wednesday, August 1st, 2013) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 02, 2013, 03:34:45 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2012dec13a.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on May 02, 2013, 05:09:31 pm If the temperature was increasing, your little pic might make sense.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: sickofpollies on May 02, 2013, 05:17:20 pm If the temperature was increasing, your little pic might make sense. The real deniers of climate change (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/23/the-real-deniers-of-climate-change/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 12, 2013, 04:08:01 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Bloomberg unveils sweeping disaster protection plan for New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg unveils a $20-billion proposal that he says would protect New Yorkers from climate disasters. It includes levees, surge barriers and a new ‘Seaport City’. By MATT PEARCE | 4:45PM - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013jun11ny_zps094650fa.jpg) This file photo of May 10th, 2013 shows view of the Manhattan Bridge, left, and Brooklyn Bridge as seen from the 105th floor of One World Trade Center, in New York. Seven months after Superstorm Sandy swamped New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed a nearly $20 billion plan Tuesday, June 11th, 2013, to protect the city from the effects of global warming and storms. — Photo: Mark Lennihan/Associated Press. IN A far-reaching plan that would reshape the coastline of the nation's largest city, New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg unveiled a $20-billion proposal Tuesday that he said will protect New Yorkers from disasters brought on by climate change. New York's marriage with the sea has grown more fraught after Superstorm Sandy ravaged the city's 520-mile coastline. The sweeping proposal, which could impact the city for years after the mayor's departure from office in January, calls for a series of new floodwalls, levees, surge barriers and even construction of a new "Seaport City" to protect the East River shoreline. “This plan is incredibly ambitious — and much of the work will extend far beyond the next 200 days — but we refused to pass the responsibility for creating a plan onto the next administration," Bloomberg said in prepared remarks. "This is urgent work, and it must begin now.” The specter of climate change and rising waters have loomed over New York more urgently since Sandy wrought an estimated $20 billion in damage along the eastern seaboard. Reinsurance providers have warned that the northeastern U.S. should expect more frequent flood and hurricane damage as waters rise and weather patterns change. One Munich RE researcher said earlier this year (http://www.munichre.com/en/media_relations/press_releases/2013/2013_01_03_press_release.aspx) that taking basic protective steps to adapt would be "absolutely essential," with another adding that such moves would make economic sense for New York over time. About 400,000 New York residents live in a 100-year flood plain, city officials said. To support the proposals, Bloomberg has marshaled a small army of experts (http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_release&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2013a%2Fsupport_for_sirr.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1) and a climate-change report (http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/downloads/pdf/npcc_climate_risk_information_2013_report.pdf) that estimates New York City could see its waters rise as much as 31 inches by 2050. The report also presents worst-case scenarios in which the city gets 15% more precipitation and a 6.5-degree increase in average annual temperature in that time. More than just beefing up New York's coastal defenses, the plan also carries a series of political proposals that would redevelop areas hit hardest by Sandy and rewrite the city's construction codes. One proposal offers building owners $1.2 billion in grants and loans for flood-resiliency upgrades, and another changes building codes that would require hospitals to adopt 500-year-flood safety standards. Other proposals would expand emergency-generator coverage and add standards for utility and telecommunications companies to repair service swiftly after outages. "Millions of New Yorkers lost power during Sandy and hundreds of thousands lost heat, Internet service, or phone service," Bloomberg said. "When a crisis hits, when we really need them most, we lose access to them. That is not acceptable," he said. "Most of these networks are not run or regulated by the city, but the time has come for all of our private-sector partners to step up to the plate and join us in protecting New Yorkers." Kevin Burke, chairman and CEO of power provider Con Edison, said in a statement that "Con Edison has already begun making significant investments to protect our infrastructure and our customers from future storms." The city will also have to tackle tough new federal flood insurance rates that Bloomberg said would overburden working families in Staten Island. The 250 recommendations in the new plan — titled the Special Initiative for Rebuilding and Resiliency — could use $15 billion in existing city and federal funding that could be driven toward the project, with the city considering various ways to come up with $4.5 billion in additional funds. Whether all of those proposals will find traction with New Yorkers and federal purseholders is yet to be seen, particularly after Bloomberg leaves office, but the plan presents one of the most ambitious municipal disaster-prevention projects in recent memory. "We can't completely climate-proof our city. That would be impossible," Bloomberg said. "But we can make our city stronger and safer — and we can start today." http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bloomberg-climate-change-20130611,0,7933233.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bloomberg-climate-change-20130611,0,7933233.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 07, 2013, 11:28:43 am Volatile weather ‘the new normal’ By SIMON DAY - The Dominion Post | 10:37AM - Sunday, 07 July 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/8824392sr_07Jul13_zps2fd82f18.jpg) WARMING CLIMATE: A falling tree took out a power pole and lines, blocking Warwick Street in the Wellington suburb of Wilton. — Photo: KIRSTY FARRANT. GET USED TO IT. That "once in 20 years" freak storm is forecast to happen again sooner than you think. Experts say the wild weather of recent months — heavy snowstorms and flooding in the South Island, and stormy winds in Wellington — is the new normal, and the country needs to prepare for more temperamental weather as the climate warms. Based on median predictions for temperature increases over the next century, New Zealand's climate will get drier in some regions, wetter in others, and higher winds and more cyclones will occur, NIWA says. Extreme winds are likely to increase across New Zealand in winter and decrease in summer, especially for the Wellington region and the eastern South Island. In many parts of the North Island and the eastern parts of the South Island longer droughts are expected. "We might expect to see, not every year, but on average another couple of weeks of drought each year," said David Wratt, NIWA chief scientist. Wratt warned the wisest thing to do for New Zealand was to was "plan accordingly". Winds that reached over 200km/h during last month's Wellington storm left more than 30,000 homes without power and heavy rain washed out large parts of the capital's railway lines. While a number of city councils have climate change action plans, local governments need to start taking action immediately, climate change advisers say. "The longer we delay, the more our options become limited," said Chris Cameron, principal climate change adviser for Wellington City Council. Rebuilding storm-damaged infrastructure without adding further resilience would not provide long-term solutions, Cameron said. "There is a gap between the level and the consequence of the issue and the response," he said. The long-term cost needed to be measured against the short-term needs of the community, said council policy manager Andrew Stitt. "There is a question about being able to maintain the level of service, versus a long-term investment for change. We are constantly making those tradeoffs," he said. Farmers accept the science, but are not worried by the potential for more extreme drought. "I don't hold any grave concerns about forecast weather changes because I know farmers are an adaptable, changeable bunch," said Bruce Wills, president of Federated Farmers. The nationwide drought in 2007-2008 cost the New Zealand economy $2.8 billion. Last summer's drought, a one-in-70-year event, cost the economy $1.3b. The reduced impact, despite the size of the most recent drought, was due to farmers being better prepared, Wills said. "I got through this year pretty comfortably because I turned my farming business upside down after I got caught unprepared in 2007," he said. He built 60 new dams, swapped much of his sheep stock for drought-resistant cattle, and grew his grass longer to be more resilient in low rainfall. "Good farmers will adjust to conditions and adjust their business accordingly," he said. STORM WREAKS HAVOC TREES were felled, roofs torn off, and power lines went down after a storm swept through Canterbury and the lower North Island on Friday night and early yesterday morning. Winds reached up to 135km/h in parts of Canterbury and Wellington, with wind warnings in place yesterday in the Wairarapa and a weather watch across Hawke's Bay and the Tararua Ranges for rain. In the south, falling trees took out power lines at 2am and sparked a fire. "We had a huge northwest gust of wind come through this morning," said Lincoln fire chief Kevin Greene yesterday. "With that huge wind behind it, [the fire] just took off." At one point, there were 45 firefighters, six pumps and five tankers dealing with the fires that flared along a 2km stretch. It was contained by 5.30am. About 9800 households also lost access to power with lines down. Most were reconnected by the afternoon. Kaikoura was blocked after a truck stopped in the middle of the road. The driver felt it was too dangerous to continue driving. Yesterday's strong winds are set to continue through the weekend in the lower North Island, and the rain expected right through next week, said MetService forecaster Elke Louw. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/8888718/Volatile-weather-the-new-normal (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/8888718/Volatile-weather-the-new-normal) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on July 07, 2013, 12:23:04 pm Thank god for that, it's another NIWA prediction. Had me worried for about .00003 seconds there.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 12, 2013, 10:35:21 pm Always did have a bit of time for Ken Ring...
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/opinion/post/-/blog/17924887/wondering-where-the-warming-went/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on July 13, 2013, 08:11:39 am Nicely credible except for the bit about waves on the surface being created by underwater volcanism and in turn causing winds.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 13, 2013, 02:53:48 pm Hahaha....I love it when a claim is made that someone/something is nicely credible.....EXCEPT..... It's like qualifying something with that word BUT. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/TooFunny.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingPinkPanther.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ROFLMAO_Dog.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingHard.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ItchyBugga.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 13, 2013, 04:02:16 pm From what I have gathered, it seems that Ring has a much better average predictio(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/Ash01/Gifs/confused-smiley-013.gif) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Ash01/media/Gifs/confused-smiley-013.gif.html)n rate than NIWA......
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on July 28, 2013, 07:41:53 pm meanwhile http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/25/north-pole-melting-leaves_n_3652373.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 31, 2013, 02:01:17 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/ClimateChangeDeniers_25jul13_zpsff2d7d7d.jpg) (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/25/us-politics-climate-change-scepticism) (click on the graphic to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 12, 2013, 12:40:56 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Effects of climate change in California are ‘significant and growing’ Environmental shifts, such as higher sea temperatures and shrinking glaciers in the Sierra Nevada, point to overwhelming evidence of climate change, state scientists say. By TONY BARBOZA | 6:38PM - Saturday, August 10, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013aug10y_zps04f3e48d.jpg) The Tuolumne River in Yosemite National Park on January 3rd, 2012, reveals a landscape usually frozen and covered with snow at that time of year. Several evidences of climate change that state scientiests cited were from the Sierra Nevada, including reduced spring runoff. — Photo: Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times. CALIFORNIA is feeling the effects of climate change far and wide, as heat-trapping greenhouse gases reduce spring runoff from the Sierra Nevada, make the waters of Monterey Bay more acidic and shorten winter chill periods required to grow fruit and nuts in the Central Valley, a new report says. Though past studies have offered grim projections of a warming planet, the report released Thursday by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (http://oehha.ca.gov) took an inventory of three dozen shifts that are already happening. "The nature of these changes is that they're occurring gradually, but the impacts are significant and growing," said Sam Delson, a spokesman for the health hazard assessment office, a branch of the California Environmental Protection Agency (http://www.calepa.ca.gov). Among the effects detailed in the report: The number of acres burned by wildfires in California has been increasing since 1950, with the three worst fire seasons occurring in the last decade. Sea surface temperatures at La Jolla have risen by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit over the last century, twice as much as the global average. Glaciers in the Sierra Nevada are shrinking, and water in lakes, including Lake Tahoe and Mono Lake, has warmed over the last few decades. The changes associated with global warming can be irregular. Sea level rise in California, for instance, has bucked the global pattern and leveled off over the last two decades, the report notes. But the overall trend is overwhelming, scientists say. "These environmental indicators are leaning very dominantly in a single direction that is consistent with the early phases of climate change," said Dan Cayan, a climate scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the U.S. Geological Survey who contributed to the report. "It's not something that's 100 years away; it's already starting to play out." The report also describes some of the ways plants and animals appear to be responding to a warming climate. Butterflies in the Central Valley are emerging earlier in the spring, and Sierra Nevada conifer trees have retreated upslope over the last 60 years, the report says. About half of the small mammals in Yosemite National Park have moved to higher elevations compared with decades ago. The analysis drew from data and scientific research from throughout the state. It updates a similar statewide inventory released in 2009 but includes 10 additional problems now linked to climate change, including ocean acidification, tree deaths in the Sierra Nevada and zones of higher temperatures within cities that are known as "urban heat islands." • Download the report Indicators of Climate Change in California (http://oehha.ca.gov/multimedia/epic/pdf/ClimateChangeIndicatorsReport2013.pdf) • Download the Summary Report: Indicators of Climate Change in California (http://oehha.ca.gov/multimedia/epic/pdf/ClimateChangeIndicatorsSummaryAugust2013.pdf) • Download the Press Release issued jointly by OEHHA and Cal/EPA (http://oehha.ca.gov/public_info/press/ClimateChange_PressRelease.pdf) • Download an earlier 2009 Climate Change report (http://oehha.ca.gov/multimedia/epic/pdf/ClimateChangeIndicatorsApril2009.pdf) http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0811-calif-climate-20130811,0,4664481.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0811-calif-climate-20130811,0,4664481.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 23, 2013, 04:24:31 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Climate change deniers live in ignorant bliss as seas keep rising By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Thursday, August 22, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013aug22al_zps2b156cf1.jpg) A NEW climate-change report from the United Nations that was leaked to the media this week says sea levels could rise by more than 3 feet by the end of the 21st century and that there is a 95% likelihood that the global warming that is causing this rise is largely a result of human activity. You may now cue the deniers who say somebody is just making this stuff up. In this case, that somebody is the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC), an international scientific team that issues periodic assessments of our planet’s shifting climate. Its report, which is still under review, is scheduled for release in four parts between September 2013 and November 2014. Just like a slew of other scientific studies, it warns that major coastal cities, including New York, Miami, New Orleans, London, Shanghai and Sydney, are in peril of being inundated by the rising seas. And, like those numerous other reports, it says dramatically increased levels of carbon dioxide produced by industrial activity and the burning of fossil fuels are likely to lead to extreme heat waves, widespread melting of polar and glacial ice, drought, crop failures and extinction of many plants and animals. As dire as this sounds, there are already those who complain the new report, like previous IPCC assessments, understates the problem. In an interview with the Huffington Post, the director of Penn State University’s Earth System Science Center, Michael Mann, said the sea level rise might actually reach 6 feet by 2100. "This fits a pattern of the IPCC tending to err on the side of conservative, in part — I believe — because of fear of being attacked by the climate change denial machine," Mann said. And, of course, that denial machine is always humming. On Monday, one of the U.S. Senate’s most vociferous climate change deniers, Senator James M. Inhofe (Republican-Oklahoma), was on Mike Huckabee’s radio show sharing misinformation with the host. The conservative pair traded a series of bogus claims that purported to prove there was nothing to worry about when it comes to increasing global temperatures. Oddly, former-Arkansas Governor Huckabee was once a climate change believer who backed a cap-and-trade plan for industry to cut CO2 emissions. Then, of course, Huckabee decided to go after the 2008 Republican presidential nomination and had to dispense with scientific knowledge in favor of the right-wing magical thinking that pervades the base of the Republican Party. Ah, to be a conservative climate change denier. While real scientists must do all the research and engage in heated debates about just how bad things are going to be, the deniers can rest easy in the bliss of willful ignorance. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821,0,6254618.story (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821,0,6254618.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 28, 2013, 12:02:09 pm Climate panel: warming ‘extremely likely’ man-made The New Zealand Herald (http://www.nzherald.co.nz) | 10:32PM - Friday, September 27, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202013/nzh_Emissions_28sep13_zps243c2c92.jpg) Global warming is likely to be man-made, says a scientific panel. SCIENTISTS can now say with extreme confidence that human activity is the dominant cause of the global warming observed since the 1950s, a new report by an international scientific group said today. Calling man-made warming "extremely likely," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (http://www.ipcc.ch) used the strongest words yet on the issue as it adopted its assessment on the state of the climate system. In its previous assessment, in 2007, the UN-sponsored panel said it was "very likely" that global warming was man-made. One of the most controversial subjects in the report was how to deal with a purported slowdown in warming in the past 15 years. Climate skeptics say this "hiatus" casts doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change. Many governments had objections over how the issue was treated in earlier drafts and some had called for it to be deleted altogether. In the end, the IPCC made only a brief mention of the issue in the summary for policymakers, stressing that short-term records are sensitive to natural variability and don't in general reflect long-term trends. "An old rule says that climate-relevant trends should not be calculated for periods less than around 30 years," said Thomas Stocker, co-chair of the group that wrote the report. Many scientists say the purported slowdown reflects random climate fluctuations and an unusually hot year, 1998, picked as a starting point for charting temperatures. Another leading hypothesis is that heat is settling temporarily in the oceans, but that wasn't included in the summary. Stocker said there wasn't enough literature on "this emerging question". The IPCC said the evidence of climate change has grown thanks to more and better observations, a clearer understanding of the climate system and improved models to analyze the impact of rising temperatures. "Our assessment of the science finds that the atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amount of snow and ice has diminished, the global mean sea level has risen and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased," said Qin Dahe, co-chair of the working group that wrote the report. The full 2,000-page report (http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1) isn't going to be released until Monday, but the summary for policymakers (http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5-SPM_Approved27Sep2013.pdf) with the key findings was published Friday. It contained few surprises as many of the findings had been leaked in advance. As expected, the IPCC raised its projections of the rise in sea levels to 10-32 inches (26-82cm) by the end of the century. The previous report predicted a rise of 7-23 inches (18-59cm). The IPCC assessments are important because they form the scientific basis of U.N. negotiations on a new climate deal. Governments are supposed to finish that agreement in 2015, but it's unclear whether they will commit to the emissions cuts that scientists say will be necessary to keep the temperature below a limit at which the worst effects of climate change can be avoided. Using four scenarios with different emissions controls, the report projected that global average temperatures would rise by 0.3°C to 4.8°C by the end of the century. Only the two lower scenarios, which were based on significant cuts in CO2 emissions, came in below the 2°C limit that countries have set as their target in the climate talks to avoid the worst impacts of warming. "This is yet another wakeup call: Those who deny the science or choose excuses over action are playing with fire," US Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement. "Once again, the science grows clearer, the case grows more compelling, and the costs of inaction grow beyond anything that anyone with conscience or common sense should be willing to even contemplate." At this point, emissions keep rising mainly due to rapid growth in China and other emerging economies. They say rich countries should take the lead on emissions cuts because they've pumped carbon into the atmosphere for longer. Climate activists said the report should spur governments to action. "There are few surprises in this report but the increase in the confidence around many observations just validates what we are seeing happening around us," said Samantha Smith, of the World Wildlife Fund. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11131126 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11131126) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on September 28, 2013, 12:41:54 pm Yes - Yes.... We know and understand. Salaries, stipends and grants depend on this!
They have been scurrying round like mice in a cheese factory, all trying to figure out how to blame a drop in temperature on warming! ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 02, 2013, 07:00:49 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Yosemite's largest ice mass is melting fast Lyell Glacier has shrunk 62% over the past century and hasn't moved in years. It's a key source of water in the park, and scientists say it will be gone in 20 years. By LOUIS SAHAGUN | 9:12PM - Tuesday, October 01, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013oct01lg_zps026d9ee3.jpg) The photo on the left of Lyell Glacier in Yosemite National Park was taken by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1983; the one on the right was taken by park geologist Greg Stock in late September. — Photos: U.S. Geological Survey/Greg Stock. CLIMATE CHANGE is taking a visible toll on Yosemite National Park, where the largest ice mass in the park is in a death spiral, geologists say. During an annual trek to the glacier deep in Yosemite's backcountry last month, Greg Stock, the park's first full-time geologist, found that Lyell Glacier had shrunk visibly since his visit last year, continuing a trend that began more than a century ago. Lyell has dropped 62% of its mass and lost 120 vertical feet of ice over the last 100 years. "We give it 20 years or so of existence — then it'll vanish, leaving behind rocky debris," Stock said. The Sierra Nevada Mountains have roughly 100 remaining glaciers, two of them in Yosemite. The shrinkage of glaciers across the Sierra is also occurring around the world. Great ice sheets are dwindling, prompting concerns about what happens next to surrounding ecological systems after perennial rivulets of melted ice disappear. "We've looked at glaciers in California, Colorado, Wyoming, Washington and elsewhere, and they're all thinning because of warming temperatures and less precipitation," said Andrew Fountain, professor of geology and geography at Portland State University in Oregon. "This is the beginning of the end of these things." If carbon dioxide levels continue to rise, the earth will eventually become ice-free, according to a study by Ken MacLeod, a professor of geological sciences at the University of Missouri, published in the October issue of the journal Geology. Research by scientists at NASA, the U.S. Geological Survey and UC Davis suggests that absorption of sunlight in snow by industrial air pollution including soot, or black carbon, is also causing snow and ice to melt faster. Yosemite's other glacier, Maclure, is also shrinking, but it remains alive and continues to creep at a rate of about an inch a day. Lyell, however, hasn't budged. It is the second largest glacier in the Sierra Nevada and the headwater of the Tuolumne River watershed, but it no longer fits the definition of a glacier because it has ceased moving. "Lyell Glacier is stagnant — a clear sign it's dying," Stock said. "Our research indicates it stopped moving about a decade ago." Of particular concern is the effect on Yosemite's Tuolumne Meadows. After two years of drought, many of the streams that nourish the picturesque meadowlands have gone dry. The one exception, however, is the Lyell Fork of the Tuolumne River, which is sustained by runoff from Lyell and Maclure glaciers. "When the glaciers are gone, there will be no steady supplies of water in that drainage," Stock said. "We don't know what the impacts of that will be on plants and animals that evolved with these ice flows." Future research projects will attempt to use climate shifts chronicled in the widths of tree rings in nearby forests to create computer models that will show the shrinkage of Yosemite's glaciers over the last 300 years — and help predict when they will disappear entirely. Scientists also want to know why Lyell has stopped moving when neighboring Maclure, which is half the size it was a century ago, continues to advance at the same rate it did when naturalist John Muir and his friend Galen Clark hammered wooden stakes into its icy crust in 1872 to prove that glaciers are "living" because they move and alter the landscape as they do so. "Glaciers tend to flow like honey down a plate, or slide over meltwater beneath them," Stock said. "We suspect Lyell just isn't thick enough anymore to drive a downhill motion." Overall, "the rate of glacier retreat has accelerated since about 2000," Stock said. "Eventually, there'll be nothing left." That's already happened at least once in Yosemite, geologists say. Black Mountain Glacier, which Muir discovered, surveyed and declared "living" in 1871, was gone by the mid-1980s. http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-glaciers-20131002,0,7692754.story (http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-glaciers-20131002,0,7692754.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on October 02, 2013, 08:58:02 pm The photo on the left was actually taken in 1883, not 1983 but what's a century here or there? Quite a lot actually, most of the world's glaciers have been in retreat for over a century since the little ice age ended.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lyle-Glacier-1883.jpg Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 12, 2013, 11:02:04 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202013/3170_Philippines_12nov13_zps3c04b10d.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 13, 2013, 10:52:36 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202013/9389683sr_ThePhilippines_12nov13_zps358cb4c8.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 15, 2013, 05:27:17 am From the Los Angeles Times.... Typhoon Haiyan's havoc will not impress climate change deniers By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Thursday, November 14, 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013nov14a_zps716be008.jpg) TYPHOON HAIYAN, the monster storm that set a Hiroshima-level standard for natural devastation when it hit the Philippines on Friday, was so big that its spiral image laid over a map of the United States stretches nearly from sea to shining sea. With winds hitting sustained peaks of 195 mph and gusts up to 235 mph, it may well be the most powerful storm ever recorded. And it is probably just the herald of many monster storms to come. As NBC News Science Editor Alan Boyle reports, “Experts say Typhoon Haiyan was about as strong as it could theoretically get when it swept through the Philippines, killing thousands of people and driving hundreds of thousands from their homes. But intensity limits have been rising over decades past — and climate models suggest they will keep rising over the decades to come, with the potential for bigger and more devastating storms.” The ominous effects of climate change are becoming more and more obvious with each new natural disaster. For years now, polar ice has been melting and glaciers have been receding, but those effects of rising global temperatures go on quietly, far from the centers of civilization. It’s easy to ignore the plight of polar bears far to the north; less easy to be inattentive when a storm knocks out the lights in Manhattan, floods the subways and wrecks New Jersey coastal towns, as happened a year ago with Superstorm Sandy. Still, there are plenty of folks who not only remain in denial, they take affirmative action to force other people to pretend climate change is not real. Some of these people are lobbyists who block legislation that could force industries to change their methods and reduce the carbon emissions that help drive the warming phenomenon. Some are state legislators who ban even the mention of global warming and climate change in disaster plans. Last summer, Republican lawmakers in North Carolina passed a bill to prevent the Coastal Resources Commission from taking climate change data into account when projecting future rates of increase in the sea level along the state’s low-lying coast. They were encouraged in this by real estate developers who do not want anything to get in the way of them building more houses in vulnerable areas that might be inundated by the Atlantic in years to come. GOP legislators in other red-leaning states are also doing what they can to legislate denial, even as their constituents cope with an increase in floods, wildfires, tornadoes and drought that may be driven by more extreme weather patterns caused by climate change. Even as the planet is getting less hospitable to human habitation, America’s political response is being skewed by people who — for reasons of religion, greed or plain stupidity — want to play make-believe. Neither more monster storms nor disappearing polar bears will make them face up to reality. Only voters can do that. • PHOTOS: Central Philippines devastated by Typhoon Haiyan (http://framework.latimes.com/2013/11/12/typhoon-haiya) http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-typhoon-haiyans-20131113,0,921020.story (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-typhoon-haiyans-20131113,0,921020.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 20, 2013, 01:18:15 pm Michael Klare: A Climate Change-Fueled Revolution? posted 4:38PM - Sunday, November 17, 2013 | TomDispatch.com (http://www.tomdispatch.com/) There’s a crossroads moment in our recent history that comes back to me whenever I think of our warming planet. (2013 is shaping up to be the seventh warmest year (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/13/un-2013-seventh-warmest-year-records) since records began to be kept in 1850. The 10 warmest years have all occured since 1998 (http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/2013-already-among-10-warmest-years-record-report-20131113).) In the six months from July 1979 to January 1980, as Jimmy Carter’s one-term presidency was winding down, he urged two approaches to global energy on Americans. One was dismissed out of hand, the other taken up with alacrity — and our world is incommensurately the worse for it. Here’s a description (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175703/tomgram%3A_engelhardt,_the_biggest_criminal_enterprise_in_history) I wrote back in May that is worth quoting again: “On July 15th, 1979, at a time when gas lines, sometimes blocks long, were a disturbing fixture of American life, President Jimmy Carter spoke directly (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/carter-crisis) to the American people on television for 32 minutes, calling for a concerted effort to end the country’s oil dependence on the Middle East. ‘To give us energy security’, he announced, ‘I am asking for the most massive peacetime commitment of funds and resources in our nation's history to develop America's own alternative sources of fuel — from coal, from oil shale, from plant products for gasohol, from unconventional gas, from the sun’...” “It’s true that, with the science of climate change then in its infancy, Carter wouldn’t have known about the possibility of an overheating world, and his vision of ‘alternative energy’ wasn’t exactly a fossil-fuel-free one. Even then — shades of today or possibly tomorrow — he was talking about having ‘more oil in our shale alone than several Saudi Arabias’. Still, it was a remarkably forward-looking speech.” “Had we invested massively in alternative energy R&D back then, who knows where we might be today? Instead, the media dubbed it the ‘malaise speech,’ though the president never actually used that word, speaking instead of an American ‘crisis of confidence’. While the initial public reaction seemed positive (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106508243), it didn’t last long. In the end, the president's energy proposals were essentially laughed out of the room and ignored for decades.” “Carter would, however, make his mark on U.S. energy policy, just not quite in the way he had imagined. Six months later, on January 23, 1980, in his last State of the Union Address (http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/documents/speeches/su80jec.phtml), he would proclaim what came to be known as the Carter Doctrine: ‘Let our position be absolutely clear’, he said. ‘An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force’.” “No one would laugh him out of the room for that. Instead, the Pentagon would fatefully begin organizing itself to protect U.S. (and oil) interests in the Persian Gulf on a new scale and America’s oil wars would follow soon enough. Not long after that address, it would start building up a Rapid Deployment Force in the Gulf that would in the end become U.S. Central Command. More than three decades later, ironies abound: thanks in part to those oil wars, whole swaths of the energy-rich Middle East are in crisis, if not chaos, while the big energy companies have put time and money into a staggeringly fossil-fuel version of Carter’s ‘alternative’ North America. They’ve focused on shale oil, and on shale gas as well, and with new production methods, they are reputedly on the brink of turning the United States (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175523/michael_klare_welcome_to_the_new_third_world) into a ‘new Saudi Arabia’ (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/11/12/is-the-united-states-the-next-saudi-arabia).” Could there have been a sadder choice in recent history? If, in 1979, the U.S. had invested in a big way in solar, wind, tidal power, and who knows what else, imagine where we might be today. Imagine a world not facing a future in which storms like Super-Typhoon Haiyan, which recently leveled part of the Philippines, its winds devastating, its storm surge killing staggering numbers, threaten to become the norm for our children and grandchildren. So oil wars, yes! — which meant transforming the Greater Middle East into a region of chaos, instability, and death. An oil-ravaged planet, yes indeed! — which meant potentially transforming a future version of Earth into a planet of chaos, instability, and death! A green energy revolution, not on your life! — not while the giant energy corporations have so much invested in underground reserves of fossil fuels and such gigantic profits to make, not while so many governments are deeply intertwined with those energy giants or are themselves essentially giant energy companies. No wonder TomDispatch regular (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175760/michael_klare_fossil_fuel_euphoria) Michael Klare suggests that it falls into our hands to ensure that a green energy revolution arrives ahead of a human-created, fossil-fueled apocalypse. — Tom Engelhardt ______________________________________ Surviving Climate Change Is a Green Energy Revolution on the Global Agenda? By Michael T. Klare (http://www.tomdispatch.com/authors/michaelklare) A WEEK after the most powerful “super typhoon” ever recorded pummeled the Philippines, killing thousands (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24954011) in a single province, and three weeks after the northern Chinese city of Harbin suffered a devastating “airpocalypse” (http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-pollution-northeastern-china-20131022,0,5024464.story), suffocating the city with coal-plant pollution, government leaders beware! Although individual events like these cannot be attributed with absolute certainty to increased fossil fuel use and climate change, they are the type of disasters that, scientists tell us, will become a pervasive part of life on a planet being transformed by the massive consumption of carbon-based fuels. If, as is now the case, governments across the planet back an extension of the carbon age (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175734/michael_klare_entering_the_third_carbon_age) and ever increasing reliance on “unconventional” fossil fuels (http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/05/03/understanding-unconventional-oil/ao4f) like tar sands and shale gas, we should all expect trouble. In fact, we should expect mass upheavals leading to a green energy revolution. None of us can predict the future, but when it comes to a mass rebellion against the perpetrators of global destruction, we can see a glimmer of the coming upheaval in events of the present moment. Take a look and you will see that the assorted environmental protests that have long bedeviled politicians are gaining in strength and support. With an awareness of climate change growing and as intensifying floods (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57609494), fires (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/31/2312591/climate-change-wildfires), droughts (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-me-parched-20130806-dto,0,5922502.htmlstoryj), and storms (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/typhoon-haiyan-climate-change-continues-2710436) become an inescapable feature of daily life across the planet, more people are joining environmental groups and engaging in increasingly bold protest actions. Sooner or later, government leaders are likely to face multiple eruptions of mass public anger and may, in the end, be forced to make radical adjustments in energy policy or risk being swept aside. In fact, it is possible to imagine such a green energy revolution erupting in one part of the world and spreading like wildfire to others. Because climate change is going to inflict increasingly severe harm on human populations, the impulse to rebel is only likely to gain in strength across the planet. While circumstances may vary, the ultimate goal of these uprisings will be to terminate the reign of fossil fuels while emphasizing investment in and reliance upon renewable forms of energy. And a success in any one location is bound to invite imitation in others. A wave of serial eruptions of this sort would not be without precedent. In the early years of twentieth-first century, for example, one government after another in disparate parts of the former Soviet Union was swept away in what were called the “color revolutions” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution) — populist upheavals against old-style authoritarian regimes. These included the “Rose Revolution” in Georgia (2003), the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine (2004), and the “Pink” or “Tulip Revolution” in Kyrgyzstan (2005). In 2011, a similar wave of protests erupted in North Africa, culminating in what we call the Arab Spring. Like these earlier upheavals, a “green revolution” is unlikely (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175737/) to arise from a highly structured political campaign with clearly identified leaders. In all likelihood, it will erupt spontaneously, after a cascade of climate-change induced disasters provokes an outpouring of public fury. Once ignited, however, it will undoubtedly ratchet up the pressure for governments to seek broad-ranging, systemic transformations of their energy and climate policies. In this sense, any such upheaval — whatever form it takes — will prove “revolutionary” by seeking policy shifts of such magnitude as to challenge the survival of incumbent governments or force them to enact measures with transformative implications. Foreshadowings of such a process can already be found around the globe. Take the mass environmental protests that erupted in Turkey this June. Though sparked by a far smaller concern than planetary devastation via climate change, for a time they actually posed a significant threat to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his governing party. Although his forces eventually succeeded in crushing the protests — leaving four dead (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/europe/development-project-in-istanbul-focus-of-violent-protests-is-stopped-by-court.html), 8,000 injured, and 11 blinded by tear-gas canisters — his reputation as a moderate Islamist was badly damaged (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/eu-defends-right-peaceful-protest-turkey) by the episode. Like so many surprising upheavals on this planet, the Turkish uprising had the most modest of beginnings: on May 27th, a handful of environmental activists blocked bulldozers (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/world/europe/istanbul-protests-started-over-trees.html) sent by the government to level Gezi Park, a tiny oasis of greenery in the heart of Istanbul, and prepare the way for the construction of an upscale mall. The government responded to this small-scale, non-violent action by sending in riot police and clearing the area, a move that enraged many Turks and prompted tens of thousands of them to occupy nearby Taksim Square. This move, in turn, led to an even more brutal police crackdown (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-16/turkish-police-block-off-taksim-after-street-battles-overnight.html) and then to huge demonstrations in Istanbul and around the country. In the end, mass protests erupted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_protests_in_Turkey) in 70 cities, the largest display of anti-government sentiment since Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party came to power in 2002. This was, in the most literal sense possible, a “green” revolution, ignited by the government’s assault on the last piece of greenery in central Istanbul. But once the police intervened in full strength, it became a wide-ranging rebuke to Erdogan’s authoritarian impulses (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/eu-defends-right-peaceful-protest-turkey) and his drive to remake the city (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/world/europe/in-istanbuls-taksim-square-an-achilles-heel.html) as a neo-Ottoman showplace — replete with fancy malls and high-priced condominiums — while eliminating poor neighborhoods and freewheeling public spaces like Taksim Square. “It’s all about superiority, and ruling over the people like sultans,” declared (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/01/world/europe/police-attack-protesters-in-istanbuls-taksim-square.html) one protestor. It’s not just about the trees in Gezi Park, said (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/01/world/europe/police-attack-protesters-in-istanbuls-taksim-square.html) another: “We are here to stand up against those who are trying to make a profit from our land.” The Ningbo Rebellion The same trajectory of events — a small-scale environmental protest evolving into a full-scale challenge to governmental authority — can be seen in other mass protests of recent years. Take a Chinese example: in October 2012, students and middle class people joined with poor farmers to protest the construction of an $8.8 billion petrochemical facility in Ningbo, a city of 3.4 million people south of Shanghai. In a country where environmental pollution has reached nearly unprecedented levels, these protests were touched off (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/29/world/asia/protests-against-sinopec-plant-in-china-reach-third-day.html) by fears that the plant, to be built by the state-owned energy company Sinopec with local government support, would produce paraxylene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraxylene), a toxic substance used in plastics, paints, and cleaning solvents. Here, too, the initial spark that led to the protests was small-scale. On October 22nd, some 200 farmers obstructed a road near the district government’s office in an attempt to block the plant’s construction. After the police were called in to clear the blockade, students from nearby Ningbo University joined the protests. Using social media, the protestors quickly enlisted support from middle-class residents of the city who converged in their thousands on downtown Ningbo. When riot police moved in to break up the crowds, the protestors fought back (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/world/asia/protests-against-expansion-of-china-chemical-plant-turn-violent.html), attacking police cars and throwing bricks and water bottles. While the police eventually gained the upper hand after several days of pitched battles, the Chinese government concluded that mass action of this sort, occurring in the heart of a major city and featuring an alliance of students, farmers, and young professionals, was too great a threat. After five days of fighting, the government gave in, announcing (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/28/chinese-factory-plan-ditched-protests) the cancellation of the petrochemical project. The Ningbo demonstrations were hardly the first (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/06/business/Protests-Over-Large-Projects.html) such upheavals to erupt in China. They did, however, highlight a growing governmental vulnerability to mass environmental protest. For decades, the reigning Chinese Communist Party has justified its monopolistic hold on power by citing its success in generating rapid economic growth. But that growth means the use of ever more fossil fuels and petrochemicals, which, in turn, means increased carbon emissions and disastrous atmospheric pollution, including one “airpocalypse” (http://www.npr.org/2013/01/14/169305324/beijings-air-quality-reaches-hazardous-levels) after another. Until recently, most Chinese seemed to accept such conditions as the inevitable consequences of growth, but it seems that tolerance of environmental degradation is rapidly diminishing (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/world/asia/beijing-journal-anger-grows-over-air-pollution-in-china.html). As a result, the party finds itself in a terrible bind: it can slow development as a step toward cleaning up the environment, incurring a risk of growing economic discontent, or it can continue its growth-at-all-costs policy, and find itself embroiled in a firestorm of Ningbo-style environmental protests. This dilemma — the environment versus the economy — has proven to be at the heart of similar mass eruptions elsewhere on the planet. After Fukushima Two of the largest protests of this sort were sparked by the reactor meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants on March 11, 2011, after a massive tsunami struck northern Japan. In both of these actions — the first in Germany, the second in Japan — the future of nuclear power and the survival of governments were placed in doubt. The biggest protests occurred in Germany. On March 26th, 15 days after the Fukushima explosions, an estimated 250,000 people (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12872339) participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations across the country — 100,000 in Berlin, and up to 40,000 each in Hamburg, Munich, and Cologne. “Today’s demonstrations are just the prelude to a new, strong, anti-nuclear movement,” declared Jochen Stay (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12872339), a protest leader. “We’re not going to let up until the plants are finally mothballed.” At issue was the fate of Germany’s remaining nuclear power plants. Although touted as an attractive alternative to fossil fuels, nuclear power is seen by most Germans as a dangerous and unwelcome energy option. Several months prior to Fukushima, German Chancellor Angela Merkel insisted (http://www.dw.de/merkel-hails-contentious-new-power-policy-as-greenest-in-the-world/a-5978792-1) that Germany would keep its 17 operating reactors until 2040, allowing a smooth transition from the country’s historic reliance on coal to renewable energy for generating electricity. Immediately after Fukushima, she ordered a temporary shutdown of Germany’s seven oldest reactors for safety inspections but refused to close the others, provoking an outpouring of protest. Witnessing the scale of the demonstrations, and after suffering an electoral defeat in the key state of Baden-Württemberg, Merkel evidently came to the conclusion that clinging to her position would be the equivalent of political suicide. On May 30th, she announced (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13592208) that the seven reactors undergoing inspections would be closed permanently and the remaining 10 would be phased out by 2022, almost 20 years earlier than in her original plan. By all accounts, the decision to phase out nuclear power almost two decades early will have significant repercussions for the German economy. Shutting down (http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/nuclear-power-germany-renewable-energy) the reactors and replacing them with wind and solar energy will cost an estimated $735 billion and take several decades, producing (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/world/europe/germanys-effort-at-clean-energy-proves-complex.html) soaring electricity bills and periodic energy shortages. However, such is the strength of anti-nuclear sentiment (http://pri.org/stories/2011-07-20/germanys-anti-nuclear-shift) in Germany that Merkel felt she had no choice but to close the reactors anyway. The anti-nuclear protests in Japan occurred considerably later, but were no less momentous. On July 16th, 2012, 16 months after the Fukushima disaster, an estimated 170,000 people (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/world/asia/thousands-gather-in-tokyo-to-protest-nuclear-restart.html) assembled in Tokyo to protest a government plan to restart the country’s nuclear reactors, idled after the disaster. This was not only Japan's largest antinuclear demonstration in many years, but the largest of any sort to occur in recent memory. For the government, the July 16th action was particularly significant. Prior to Fukushima, most Japanese had embraced the country’s growing reliance on nuclear power, putting their trust in the government to ensure its safety. After Fukushima and the disastrous attempts of the reactors’ owner, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Electric_Power_Company) (TEPCO), to deal with the situation, public support for nuclear power plummeted (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/world/asia/japans-prime-minister-orders-restart-of-2-nuclear-reactors.html). As it became increasingly evident that the government had mishandled the crisis (http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201301050037), people lost faith in its ability to exercise effective control over the nuclear industry. Repeated promises that nuclear reactors could be made safe lost all credibility when it became known that government officials had long collaborated (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/06/world/asia/fukushima-nuclear-crisis-a-man-made-disaster-report-says.html) with TEPCO executives in covering up (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/world/asia/tepco-admits-failure-in-acknowledging-risks-at-nuclear-plant.html) safety concerns at Fukushima and, once the meltdowns occurred, in concealing information (http://nuclear-news.net/2013/09/02/tepcos-deliberate-lies-to-conceal-true-level-of-fukushima-radiation/) about the true scale of the disaster and its medical implications. The July 16th protest and others like it should be seen as a public vote against the government’s energy policy and oversight capabilities. “Japanese have not spoken out against the national government,” said one protestor (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/30/world/asia/thousands-in-tokyo-protest-the-restarting-of-a-nuclear-plant.html), a 29-year-old homemaker who brought her one-year-old son. “Now, we have to speak out, or the government will endanger us all.” Skepticism about the government, rare for twenty-first-century Japan, has proved a major obstacle to its desire to restart (http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=JA) the country’s 50 idled reactors. While most Japanese oppose nuclear power, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe remains determined to get the rectors running again in order to reduce Japan’s heavy reliance on imported energy and promote economic growth. “I think it is impossible to promise zero [nuclear power plants] at this stage,” he declared (http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201310250045) this October. “From the government’s standpoint, [nuclear plants] are extremely important for a stable energy supply and economic activities.” Despite such sentiments, Abe is finding it extremely difficult to garner support for his plans, and it is doubtful that significant numbers of those reactors will be coming online anytime soon. The Explosions Ahead What these episodes tell us is that people around the world are becoming ever more concerned about energy policy as it affects their lives and are prepared — often on short notice — to engage in mass protests. At the same time, governments globally, with rare exceptions, are deeply wedded to existing energy policies. These almost invariably turn them into targets, no matter what the original spark for mass opposition. As the results of climate change become ever more disruptive, government officials will find themselves repeatedly choosing between long-held energy plans and the possibility of losing their grip on power. Because few governments are as yet prepared to launch the sorts of efforts that might even begin to effectively address the peril of climate change, they will increasingly be seen as obstacles to essential action and so as entities that need to be removed. In short, climate rebellion — spontaneous protests that may at any moment evolve into unquenchable mass movements — is on the horizon. Faced with such rebellions, recalcitrant governments will respond with some combination of accommodation to popular demands and harsh repression. Many governments will be at risk from such developments, but the Chinese leadership appears to be especially vulnerable. The ruling party has staked its future viability on an endless carbon-fueled growth agenda that is steadily destroying the country’s environment. It has already faced half-a-dozen environmental upheavals like the one in Ningbo, and has responded to them by agreeing to protestors’ demands (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/world/asia/chinese-officials-cancel-plant-project-amid-protests.html) or by employing brute force. The question is: How long can this go on? Environmental conditions are bound to worsen (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2013/jun/07/chinas-environmental-problems-grim-ministry-report), especially as China continues to rely on coal for home heating and electrical power, and yet there is no indication (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/business/energy-environment/chinas-clean-air-drive-likely-to-take-a-long-time.html) that the ruling Communist Party is prepared to take the radical steps required to significantly reduce domestic coal consumption. This translates into the possibility of mass protests erupting at any time and on a potentially unprecedented scale. And these, in turn, could bring the Party’s very survival into question — a scenario (http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2011/05/04/china-political-stability-amid-jasmine-revolutions) guaranteed to produce immense anxiety among the country’s top leaders. And what about the United States? At this point, it would be ludicrous to say that, as a result of popular disturbances, the nation’s political leadership is at any risk of being swept away or even forced to take serious steps to scale back reliance on fossil fuels. There are, however, certainly signs of a growing nationwide campaign against aspects of fossil fuel reliance, including vigorous protests (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175618) against hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) and the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175648/michael_klare_a_presidential_decision). For environmental activist and writer Bill McKibben, all this adds up to an incipient mass movement against the continued consumption of fossil fuels. “In the last few years,” he has written (http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175737/), this movement “has blocked the construction of dozens of coal-fired power plants, fought the oil industry to a draw on the Keystone pipeline, convinced a wide swath of American institutions to divest themselves of their fossil fuel stocks, and challenged practices like mountaintop-removal coal mining and fracking for natural gas.” It may not have achieved the success of the drive for gay marriage, he observed, but it “continues to grow quickly, and it’s starting to claim some victories.” If it’s still too early to gauge the future of this anti-carbon movement, it does seem, at least, to be gaining momentum. In the 2013 elections, for example, three cities in energy-rich Colorado — Boulder, Fort Collins, and Lafayette — voted to ban or place moratoriums (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/us/colorado-cities-rejection-of-fracking-poses-political-test-for-natural-gas-industry.html) on fracking within their boundaries, while protests against Keystone XL and similar projects are on the rise. Nobody can say that a green energy revolution is a sure thing, but who can deny that energy-oriented environmental protests in the U.S. and elsewhere have the potential to expand into something far greater? Like China, the United States will experience genuine damage from climate change and its unwavering commitment to fossil fuels in the years ahead. Americans are not, for the most part, passive people. Expect them, like the Chinese, to respond to these perils with increased ire and a determination to alter government policy. So don’t be surprised if that green energy revolution erupts in your neighborhood as part of humanity’s response to the greatest danger we’ve ever faced. If governments won’t take the lead on an imperiled planet, someone will. ______________________________________ • Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and conflict studies at Hampshire College and the author, most recently, of “The Race for What’s Left” (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1250023971/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20). A documentary movie version of his book Blood and Oil is available from the Media Education Foundation (http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=124). http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175773/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_a_climate_change-fueled_revolution (http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175773/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_a_climate_change-fueled_revolution) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 04, 2014, 06:35:11 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Meagre Sierra snowpack is way below average By BETTINA BOXALL | 4:51PM PST - Friday, January 03, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan03ss_zpsae23acf1.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52c75bb9/turbine/la-sci-sn-sierra-snowpack-20140103) Frank Gehrke, chief of snow surveys for the California Department of Water Resources, left, walks over bare ground on the way to measuring the snowpack near Echo Summit in the Sierra Nevada. Statewide, the snowpack is just 20% of average for this time of year. — Photo: Steve Yeater/Associated Press. THE signs aren’t good when the chief of California’s snow survey has to walk over bare ground to take a snowpack measurement in the Sierra Nevada, as Frank Gehrke did Friday near Echo Summit. Manual and electronic readings up and down the range placed the statewide snowpack at 20% of normal for this date, adding to worries that 2014 could be a bad drought year. The meager snowpack was not a surprise. Last year was California’s driest in 119 years of records, according to the Western Regional Climate Center in Reno. Los Angeles and other cities around the state recorded their lowest precipitation amounts for a calendar year. The levels of key reservoirs have been dropping when they should be rising with winter rains. Governor Jerry Brown has yet to declare a drought emergency. But last month the state Department of Water Resources formed a drought management team. “While we hope conditions improve, we are fully mobilized to streamline water transfers and take every action possible to ease the effects of dry weather on farms, homes and businesses as we face a possible third consecutive dry year,” department director Mark Cowin said in a statement. “Every Californian can help by making water conservation a daily habit.” Storage in Lake Shasta and Lake Oroville, the two largest reservoirs in the state, is 57% of average for the date. Several other major reservoirs are in better shape, largely due to supplies left over from December 2012, when storms drenched many parts of California. Thanks to that month, statewide precipitation in the 2013 water year, which ended September 30th, was 73% of average — the 29th driest on record, according to the regional climate center. If this winter stays dry, the hardest-hit will likely be farmers in some parts of the San Joaquin Valley and rural communities that depend on wells. In Southern California, regional water managers say they have enough supplies in reserve to maintain deliveries for the next two years and do not expect to ration sales. Storage in Pyramid and Castaic lakes, the two state reservoirs that the Southland draws directly from, is slightly above average for the date. Diamond Valley Lake in Riverside County, where the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California stores imported supplies, is nearly three-quarters full. The snowpack, which is a measurement of the snow’s water content, not its depth, was the lowest in the northern mountains, at 11% of average for the date. It was the highest in the southern Sierra, at 30% of the norm. The statewide snowpack figure of 20% tied with 2012 as the driest early January reading in 25 years of records. http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-sierra-snowpack-20140103,0,939473.story (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-sierra-snowpack-20140103,0,939473.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 04, 2014, 06:35:56 pm from The Sydney Morning Herald.... 2013 confirmed as Australia's hottest year on record By PETER HANNAM | Friday, January 03, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/smh_2014jan03hot1_zpsfd264366.jpg) Australia smashed its previous annual heat record in 2013. — Photo: Glenn Campbell. AUSTRALIA smashed its previous annual heat record in 2013, with a summer heatwave and spring hot spell among the outstanding periods of unusual warmth. The Bureau of Meteorology on Friday confirmed (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus) that last year was the hottest nationwide in more than a century of standardised records, with mean temperatures 1.2 degrees above the 1961-90 average. Every state and the Northern Territory recorded at least their fourth warmest year by mean temperatures, underscoring the breadth of 2013's unusual heat. By maximums, all but Victoria and Tasmania recorded their hottest years, with nationwide maximums a full 1.45 degrees above the long-term average, shattering the previous record anomaly of 1.21 degrees set in 2002. Among the cities, Sydney posted daily maximums averaging 23.7 degrees in 2013, well above the previous high in more than 150 years of records, of 23.4 degrees set in both 2004 and 2005, said Blair Trewin, a senior climatologist at the Bureau of Meteorology. Minimum temperatures were the third-highest, at 15.1 degrees, a shade below the 15.2 degrees set in 2007 and 2009. Melbourne posted its third hottest year, also based on records going back to the 1850s, with maximums averaging 21.5 degrees, shy of 2007's record of 21.8 degrees. The city's minimums averaged 12.2 degrees, second only to 2007's 12.5 degrees. This January has also started with a blast of heat over inland regions, with Moomba in South Australia recording 49.3 degrees on Thursday, while Birdsville in Queensland clocked up 48.6 degrees. Walgett, meanwhile, reached 49.1 degrees on Friday, the highest for the state since 1939, the Bureau of Meteorology's Dr Trewin said. Walgett, in fact, was only one many towns to set records on Friday, with others including Moree, Tamworth, Armidale, Narrabri and Coonabarabran in NSW, and St George and Roma in Queensland. The hot air mass is slowly shifting east. Brisbane may challenge its record high of 43.2 degrees on Saturday, with 41 degrees currently forecast. "That (forecast) would be factoring in some possibility of a sea breeze," said the bureau's Dr Trewin. "If the sea breeze fails, anything could happen." (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/smh_2014jan03hot2_zps2c4cb924.jpg) Australia's heat in 2013: no region below average. — Souce: Bureau of Meteorology. ‘Unprecedented year’ David Karoly, a climate scientist at the University of Melbourne, said 2013 was "an unprecedented year" for Australia not least because it came in a period without an El Nino weather pattern over the Pacific. The so-called El Nino-Southern Oscillation - which typically warms up eastern Australia in particular — remained in neutral through the year, and continues to do so (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/). "These record high temperatures for Australia in 2013 cannot be explained by natural variability alone," Professor Karoly said. "This event could not have happened without increasing greenhouse gases, without climate change." A heatwave in early January, when the national average maximum temperatures reached 40.3 degrees on January 7th, set the country up for a hot year. January was Australia's hottest month on record and December 2012-February 2013 was the hottest summer.[/size] Neutral conditions Unusually warm waters around Australia helped keep temperatures well above average in 2013, while many parts of the country recorded their mildest winters on record. Climate experts say another intense El Nino year, such as in 1998, could challenge even 2013's newly set temperature highs. Australia's warmth during 2013 extended into spring, with September setting records as the most exceptionally hot month on record. Average maximum temperatures were 3.41 degrees above the long-run average, with South Australia's 5.39 degrees above the norm — a record for any state or territory in any month. The heat was accompanied by early season bushfires, particularly around Sydney in October, and extensive drought across much of Queensland. Rainfall nationally averaged 428 millimetres, about 37 millimetres below average, for the year. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/smh_2014jan03hot3_zps75eeec0c.jpg) Wet in the north west in 2013, mostly dry or average rain elsewhere. — Souce: Bureau of Meteorology. Capitals, states, world Aside from Sydney and Melbourne, most other state capitals also had notably hot years. Canberra and Hobart posted their second warmest years. Perth had its third-warmest year by maximum temperatures, while Darwin and Adelaide had their third-equal warmest. Brisbane, in the midst of a very warm period to start 2014, lagged in 2013 with only its ninth warmest year. Among the states, NSW had its warmest year, with maximums 1.76 degrees above the long-term average, beating the 1.63 degree anomaly set in 2002, said the bureau's Dr Trewin. By mean temperature, the state was the second warmest on record, behind 2009. For Victoria, maximum temperatures were 1.3 degrees above normal, placing it third-warmest on records behind the 1.42 degree anomaly set in 2007. Both mean and minimums were also third-highest for the state. South Australia was exceptional in a remarkable year, with the state setting its highest maximum, mean and minimum temperatures, the bureau said. Globally, 2013 was the sixth hottest year in records dating back to 1880. No year since 1985 has recorded a below-average global mean temperature reading, and nine of the 10 warmest years have occurred in the past 12 years, the Bureau of Meteorology said. The bureau also noted that only one year in the last decade was cooler than average, when a strong La Nina weather pattern over the Pacific kept temperatures low in 2011. The average for each of the rolling 10-year periods from 1995-2004 to 2004-2013 have been among the top 10 records, it said. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/smh_2014jan03hot4_zps57ef3911.jpg) Many towns across southern Queensland and northern NSW set temperature records on Friday. — Souce: Bureau of Meteorology. Politic debate Australia's warmth prompted heat of a political kind, with Greens and Labor saying the records mean the Abbott government is wrong to be attempting to scrap having a price on carbon. Acting Greens leader Richard di Natale said it went against all evidence for the government to unwind the carbon tax. "Tony Abbott’s a reckless ideologue who ignores the science and is intent on listening to people who are part of the tinfoil hat brigade," he told reporters in Melbourne. "The experts right around the world are telling him loudly and clearly that we’ve got a big problem on our hands and we’ve got to start taking action to fix it." Acting opposition leader Penny Wong said the only people in Australia who didn’t believe in climate change were Mr Abbott and his cabinet. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said that was nonsense. "What we will do is take direct action that will reduce emissions and we’ll meet our 5 per cent reduction target" of 2000 carbon emission levels by 2020, she told reporters in Perth. "Under Labor’s carbon tax, prices go up and emissions go up so Labor’s response was a nonsense." Senator Wong said the government’s direct action policy was "a con job you have when you think that climate change is absolute crap". Environment Minister Greg Hunt was asked to comment directly on the Bureau of Meteorology’s finding that "the past year emphasises that the warming trend continues" but did not respond. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/2013-confirmed-as-australias-hottest-year-on-record-20140103-308ek.html (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/2013-confirmed-as-australias-hottest-year-on-record-20140103-308ek.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2014, 12:48:43 pm (http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/files/2013/12/rsz-Russian-ship-MV-Akademik-Shokalskiy-495x318.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 05, 2014, 01:08:11 pm Yep....something which was warned about decades ago. Increased average worldwide temperatures mean more EXTREMES of climate (both hot AND cold) as climate change causes havoc. Not to worry....when insurance companies (reacting to the effects of climate change) price insurance cover for YOUR property right off the market (way above your ability to pay), you'll be able to tightly screw your eyes shut, stick your fingers in your ears, and chant over and over and over again, “it's all bullshit....it isn't happening!”, then hope like hell your home doesn't get damaged in a storm. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 05, 2014, 03:36:38 pm In the past we had warmer weather than now
we also had an ice age There are places under the sea that were once dry land Climate change is all part of our normal cycle of existence The main problem on planet earth is that we have let the control freaks fuck up all the human minds with their brain washed agenda. Hello Ya Fucking Zombies WHAT WE NEED IS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT THE BANKS WILL SAVE US hahaha suckers ;D The Year the World Bank Fused Sustainable Development with Its Goals for the Future The World Bank Group set two ambitious goals in 2013, and in the process made clear that one concept will underlie its actions toward both: sustainability. "Ending extreme poverty within a generation and promoting shared prosperity must be achieved in such a way as to be sustainable over time and across generations," the goals document reads. "This requires promoting environmental, social, and fiscal sustainability. We need to secure the long-term future of our planet and its resources so future generations do not find themselves in a wasteland." With the goals as a foundation, the Bank Group set a clear direction for its energy work going forward that focuses on exanding energy access, use of renewable energy, and improvement in energy efficiency. In urban development, it launched the Low-Carbon, Livable Cities Initiative to help fast-growing cities in developing countries plan for sustainable development and prepare to finance it. The World Bank Group also established a firm, evidence-supported position on climate change and on the critical need for building resilience and integrating disaster risk management into development to save lives and avoid millions of people falling back into poverty. In other sectors, the Bank Group expanded sustainable development principles by ramping up work in the use of information and communication technologies, support for public transportation systems, development of climate-smart agriculture, and work in integrated urban water management. A new report on social inclusion dove deeper into the forces behind exclusion that challenge sustainable development and the goal of shared prosperity. Sustainable Energy for All In June, the World Bank Board of Directors, representing 188 member countries, put expanding energy access and accelerating energy efficiency and renewable energy at the core of the Bank Group's work in the sector. The energy directions paper embraced the goals of a new international initiative: Sustainable Energy for All , chaired by World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Its goals: by 2030, achieve universal energy access, double the share of renewable energy in the global mix, and double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency. The energy directions paper also drew global attention for its position on coal: It affirmed that the World Bank Group will “only in rare circumstances” provide financial support for new greenfield coal power generation projects. Several multilateral development banks and developed country governments followed with similar pledges. The Bank also increased its focus on geothermal exploration, reducing gas flaring, and, through its ESMAP partnership, increasing the use of cleaner cookstoves and helping cities improve their energy efficiency. Significantly, the directions paper emphasizes energy prices as a key to energy efficiency and growing the share of renewable energy sources in countries' energy mix. Low-Carbon, Livable Cities From Africa to Asia, city leaders were talking with the World Bank about resilience and low-carbon development. They want to build a long, successful future, but most of them face a serious challenge: finance. Only 4 percent of the 150 largest cities in developing countries are considered creditworthy in international financial markets, and only 20 percent in local markets. The World Bank launched its Low-Carbon, Livable Cities Initiative in 2013 to help. It focuses on two vital steps: urban planning, including developing the greenhouse gas accounting and other data and analysis needed for informed decisions, and helping cities raise their credit ratings so they can tap into the finance needed. The Bank's first City Creditworthiness Training Program for African cities drew 55 senior municipal administrators from 10 countries for a five-day training event in October to get them started. The program's ambitious goal: help 300 cities in developing countries raise their credit ratings over the next four years and begin securing projects and finance. With the many other partners focused on cities, we see momentum growing around support for municipal and city leaders and institutions. Open Quotes We need to secure the long-term future of our planet and its resources so future generations do not find themselves in a wasteland. Close Quotes World Bank Group Goals Document Climate Change Throughout 2013, the World Bank focused attention on large-scale work to address climate change through sustainable development across the sectors. The Turn Down the Heat reports provided evidence of the danger: without action to stop it, climate change threatens to roll back decades of development progress, and while everyone will be affected, the poor will suffer the most. The Bank focused on where climate action can make the greatest difference: building low-carbon, resilient cities by mobilizing finance, urban planning, and expertise; moving forward on climate-smart agriculture to make the food supply more resilient to climate change and help sequester carbon; accelerating energy efficiency, investment in renewable energy, and universal access to energy; and, underpinning these actions, the Bank began looking at how to lay the groundwork for a robust price on carbon and how to ramp up efforts to remove harmful fossil fuel subsidies. "Get the prices right, get finance flowing, and work where it matters most," Vice President for Sustainable Development Rachel Kyte told world leaders at the climate change conference in Warsaw in November. Looking Ahead In the coming year, Vice President Kyte will move to a new role as World Bank Group Vice President and Special Envoy for Climate Change. The new structure allows expertise from across the entire World Bank Group to be brought together to support solutions for all clients. It is a concrete response to mitigating and adapting to climate change and building investment in resilience through urban planning, sustainable energy and transportation, energy efficient construction, integrated water management, disaster risk management, and climate-smart agriculture. As 2013 turns into 2014, and with Typhoon Haiyan and the people of the Philippines in our hearts and minds, World Bank Group President Kim's call for plans that are appropriately scaled to the size of the challenge is matched by the requests for partnership. We will do all we can to play our part and encourage others to step up. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/12/23/year-world-bank-fused-sustainable-development-goals-future Its mostly all about corruption Corruption, Institutions and Sustainable Development by Bertrand Venard When civil servants make decisions based purely on their own personal interests, their decisions are not likely to be of benefit to society An argument has been rumbling on for years amongst experts concerning the real effect of corruption on a country’s economy. Despite widespread condemnation of corruption, some academics insist that such illegal practices as bribery do in fact grease the wheels of economic growth. Three main explanations have been given for the potential positive influence of corruption on economic development. It has been suggested that bribes attract a better quality of civil servants. If there is a higher quality of civil servants then, they argue, better economic decisions will be made. Also, bribing implies speeding up the bureaucratic process which could lead to an increase in economic development. Thus, a business leader getting import / export documents quickly from a very busy administration service is likely to be a supporter of the view that paying some extra unofficial fees allows business to be done faster and better. Finally, corruption can be seen as a form of competition for official resources leading to better government services. The opposing view is that corruption throws sand in the wheels of economic development. The usual definition of corruption as the “sale of government property for private gain” leads to the intuitive conclusion that corruption has a negative influence on economic growth. When civil servants make decisions based purely on their own personal interests, their decisions are not likely to be of benefit to society. Three main arguments could be given to highlight the negative influence of corruption on the economy. Firstly, the most important loss in economic growth linked to corruption is due to the inefficient allocation of resources. If a Minister makes a decision according to the highest bribe, little attention would be paid to a country’s or state’s needs. The result can be seen, for example, in an unnecessary splendid building or a crass and expensive project which serves as a front for the hidden money that will flow into the pockets of greedy politicians. In addition, to receive bribes, civil servants will create restrictions to economic development. The more complicated are the rules for obtaining a passport or any authorization, the higher is the opportunity to demand bribes, Furthermore, many private businesses, such as foreign investors dislike corruption and therefore avoid investing in corrupt economic sectors or countries. Bad investments, restrictions to business and less private investments will lead to slower economic development. In a recent academic article published in the October 2013 issue of the Economics Bulletin, my research showed that corruption should categorically be seen as sand in the wheels of economic development. To arrive at this conclusion I used macroeconomic data collected by the World Bank over a period of ten years in 120 countries, including India. This large research base allowed me to verify that a higher quality of institutional framework implies a lower level of corruption. By institutions, researchers mean the rules of the games. To assess the overall quality of the institutions, measurements were used concerning for example the law, law enforcement or government effectiveness (quality of public services). Furthermore, the analysis proves that a higher quality of institutional framework implies more sustainable economic development. This conclusion was made possible by using a relatively recent measure of genuine sustainable development instead of the typical GDP / capita to assess economic development. The GDP per capita is too simplistic given that economic development is about sustainable improvements in human welfare and that GDP per capita cannot measure this aspect. Sustainable development has been defined by the Nobel Prize laureate Kenneth Arrow as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs”. This is expressed as the sum of the values of investments or disinvestments in each of capital assets. Sustainable economic development therefore takes into account economic development but also includes the changes in the natural resources base and environmental quality as well as the change in the human capital. For example, estimates of the depletion of a variety of natural resources are deducted to reflect the decline in asset values linked with their extraction and harvest. In the same way, pollution damages are deducted. The result of my research is clear: better institutions lead to higher sustainable economic development. Conversely, the effect of the quality of institutions is stronger when the country has a low quality of institutions than when the country enjoys a high quality in this area. Finally, the new data shows that the lower the corruption, the higher the sustainable economic development. Thus, corruption is definitely negative for development, and in the long term negative for a development that respects both humans and nature. In countries with low quality institutions, both the institutional quality and the corruption level account for nearly 25% of the variance of the sustainable economic development. Improving the standard of institutions and fighting corruption should be a priority in any country wishing to build a better future for its population in terms of sustainable development. Bertrand Venard, professor of strategy, Audencia Nantes School of Management, France http://forbesindia.com/article/special/corruption-institutions-and-sustainable-development/36673/1 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 06, 2014, 12:33:44 pm Last winter warmest on record The Dominion Post | 10:31AM - Monday, 06 January 2013 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/9580489s_06jan14_zps3ff16671.jpg) A graph showing the historic temperature increase. The zero line is the average temperature from 1961-1990. NEW ZEALAND has emerged from its second-warmest year and warmest winter on record. But it is bad news, as it follows a global trend which an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report blaming it on "increasing greenhouse gases augmenting the greenhouse effect". Climate scientist Dr Jim Salinger this morning released the figures. The above-average temperatures were expected to continue this year, he said. They show 2013 was the warmest winter nationally since records began in 1870. Last year was the second-warmest on record nationally with temperatures on average 0.84 degrees Celsius above normal. The only year it was hotter was 1998, when it was 0.89C above average. Masterton, Omarama, Timaru, Invercargill and the Chatham Islands all had record years. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9580148/Last-winter-warmest-on-record (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9580148/Last-winter-warmest-on-record) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 06, 2014, 04:55:30 pm Quote Climate scientist Dr Jim Salinger this morning released the figures. (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/07_LaughOutLoud.gif)(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Jim Salinger! Say no more. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Gecko on January 06, 2014, 06:00:20 pm shove this up ya date Jim
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/9579297/US-hunkers-down-for-polar-vortex Global warming? No, the planet is getting cooler http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/427980/Global-warming-No-the-planet-is-getting-cooler Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 07, 2014, 07:33:30 am Doom clouds over Wairarapa's pinot Winter snow on the Tararua Range and Wairarapa pinot noir are under threat from climate change. By TOM HUNT - The Dominion Post | 6:30AM - Tuesday, 07 January 2014 MOZZIES will come up trumps but winter snow on the Tararua Range and Martinborough's famed pinot noir are under threat from global warming. While leading Wairarapa winemakers say the region's top drop is safe for a while yet, climate scientist Jim Salinger is warning its days could be numbered as temperatures rise. He said New Zealand just ended its second warmest year since records began in 1870 and last winter was New Zealand's warmest on record. High temperatures were expected to continue this year and while individual years could experience a drop in average temperatures, New Zealand and the world would get warmer through the years, Dr Salinger said. It was a direct impact of gases increasing the "greenhouse effect", he said. By 2030 to 2040 New Zealand would be about one degree Celsius warmer. Last year's average temperature was 13.03°C, 0.84°C above average. Some bugs — notably mosquitoes, which got knocked back by annual frosts — would thrive, he said. Water would be more likely to fall on the Southern Alps as rain, rather than snow, and run straight off in winter. Snow that settled would melt earlier, meaning less water coming down the rivers to the plains. Around the lower North Island, winter snow on the Tararua Range "may well become a thing of the past", Dr Salinger said. Wairarapa vineyards might have to switch from grapes that grew in colder climates — such as pinot noir — to varieties such as those now grown in the warmer Hawke's Bay, he said. But Margrain Vineyard winemaker Strat Canning, of Martinborough, was not concerned about his pinot noir grapes in the next five to 10 years. Mr Canning, who was "not an absolute convert" that global warming existed, said that while pinot noir needed cold conditions, Wairarapa nights would have to get a lot warmer to make the variety ungrowable. Ata Rangi Vineyard winemaker Helen Masters said it was simplistic to look at entire-year averages in winemaking. Over winter months the vine canopy was growing but it was not until January till March that pinot noir grapes were going through "tannin development" - the crucial part in grape development. The 2013 harvest was shaping up to be one of the best vintages in years, she said. Grape growers kept an eye on weather patterns. As protection, Ata Rangi had long planted varieties such as syrah, cabernet and merlot, which were more suited to warmer weather. Temperatures would need to rise significantly to rule pinot noir out in Wairarapa, she said. Federated Farmers president Bruce Wills said farmers would adapt: "You either adapt or you die." This century could see tropical fruits or rice grown in northern parts of the country, he said. Better water storage was needed - dams that could store rain and send it down rivers in a steady flow through the year. His own Hawke's Bay farm had "100-year variations" in 12 months last year, from the one-in-70-year drought last summer to one of the easiest winters he could remember. Climate scientist Brett Mullan, of the National Institute of Water & Atmospheric research (NIWA), agreed global temperatures were rising due to greenhouse gases. While Dr Salinger used 22 sites to reach his conclusion that 2013 was the second warmest on record, Niwa used seven sites. They showed 2013 to be the third-warmest on record. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9582791/Doom-clouds-over-Wairarapas-pinot (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9582791/Doom-clouds-over-Wairarapas-pinot) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 07, 2014, 07:34:42 am Quote Climate scientist Dr Jim Salinger this morning released the figures. (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/07_LaughOutLoud.gif)(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Jim Salinger! Say no more. Tell us all about YOUR science degree majoring in climatology. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 07, 2014, 09:56:40 am Quote Climate scientist Dr Jim Salinger this morning released the figures. (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/07_LaughOutLoud.gif)(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Jim Salinger! Say no more. Tell us all about YOUR science degree majoring in climatology. One thing I haven't done, is move recording devices to suit an agenda - and I don't massage figures and statistics... Didn't he get arseholed from NIWA for his antics? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 07, 2014, 09:43:05 pm North America arctic blast creeps
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25632586 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJo373jNbKY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtzMBfDrpI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf-fzVH6v_U#t=23 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DEljp5Lb3A#t=43 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 07, 2014, 09:55:22 pm Quote Quote The IPCC concedes for the first time that a [/quote15 year-long period of no significant warming occurred since 1998 despite a 7% rise in carbon dioxide (CO2). It also acknowledges that on a longer (more climatic) time scale the rate of global warming has decelerated since 1951, despite an accompanying 80 ppm or 26% increase in carbon dioxide (312 to 392 ppm). The statement represents a significant revision in IPCC thinking http://www.sepp.org/key_issues/critique_of_ipcc_spm.pdf Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Gecko on January 08, 2014, 12:30:24 pm tell a lie a few times and it becomes the truth. This self serving bastard is an expert
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/6491195/Al-Gore-could-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 09, 2014, 07:44:23 am (http://www.smfforfree.com/gallery/xtranewscommunity2/97_21_04_11_5_31_50.gif) re mess # 292 http://nz.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/20624146/2013-nzs-second-hottest-year-on-record/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 09, 2014, 07:33:11 pm Oh no we had a warm winter the expert calls that the canary in the coal mine
we in for warmer weather unless we repent from using energy that and pay Al Gore's carbon credit firm Gore and Blood lot's of money and they will save us from warm weather hahaha what a silly joke ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 12, 2014, 10:16:53 am Failed doubters trust leaves taxpayers at loss By STEVE KILGALLON - The Dominion Post | 8:45AM - Sunday, 12 January 2014 A GROUP of climate-change doubters has left the taxpayer at a substantial six-figure loss after its trust was liquidated following a failed High Court battle with the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA). A three-year court case over NIWA's recording of historic temperature data ended last year when the New Zealand Climate Science Education Trust's final appeal foundered. It was ordered to pay NIWA $89,000 in costs after losing the original case; the appeals court then made another costs order, with the amount yet to be finalised. The trust didn't pay the first amount, and last month NIWA pursued liquidation, but a trustee has confirmed the trust has no money. NIWA chief executive John Morgan said it was still considering pursuing two of the trust's key players — former wine journalist Terry Dunleavy, a Justice of the Peace and MBE, and retired lawyer Barry Brill, a former National MP — for the money, but was waiting for the liquidation process to finish. He added: "On the surface it looks like the trust was purely for the purpose of taking action, which is not what one would consider the normal use of a charitable trust". NIWA gained an increase on the normal scale used to award costs. Morgan said he "suspected the judge [did that because] he think the merits of their accusations way below a basic threshold". The trust's deed said its purpose was "promotion of enlightened awareness and understanding of climate [and other environmental issues", research and exchange of ideas. Trustee Bryan Leyland, when asked about its assets, said: "To my knowledge, there is no money. We spent a large amount of money on the court case, there were some expensive legal technicalities." Funding had come "from a number of source, which are confidential". Dunleavey referred calls to Brill, who did not respond to calls. Both Judge Venning and the Court of Appeal dismissed the trust's claim that it was in the "public interest" to challenge government departments, partly because the trust refused to back up some of its arguments. The Ministry of Business, Employment and Industry wouldn't comment until liquidator Anthony Pullan's report on January 17th. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9600968/Failed-doubters-trust-leaves-taxpayers-at-loss (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9600968/Failed-doubters-trust-leaves-taxpayers-at-loss) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 12, 2014, 01:49:04 pm ::) Lake Michigan Is Full Of Ice Balls The Size Of Boulders The Huffington Post By Ryan Grenoble Posted: 01/09/2014 4:52 pm EST Updated: 01/10/2014 8:51 pm EST http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/09/lake-michigan-ice-balls-video_n_4570097.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 12, 2014, 04:20:39 pm freezing in America,Hot in Australia,Summers been cool here where i live so yes we have climate change it happens every day.Record weather lol hahaha ;D
Global warming religion nutters got stuck in the ice in the summer time and the main stream whore slite propaganda beast media done their best to change the subject, They seem to have a bad case of lets not talk about or mention global cooling in Antarctic (http://MAINSTREAM MEDIA OMITS CLIMATE CHANGE MISSION FROM ANTARCTICA SHIP RESCUE) (http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Journalism/2014/01/06/akademik-shokalskiy-rescue-reuters.jpg) Global warming experts adrift in Antarctica since Christmas have finally been rescued, as the valiant efforts to save the Russian ship Akademik Shokalskiy were documented throughout the mainstream media. Yet one major detail – what the ship was doing in Antarctica at all – seems to have eluded almost every major media outlet. Breitbart News previously reported that the New York Times's account of how the Russian ship was finally freed from a large chunk of ice after attempts by a Chinese icebreaker failed mysteriously omitted the original purpose of having 25 professors on board a ship in Antarctica in the first place. However, the Times was not anywhere near alone in covering only the details of the rescue without any look into why the crew needed rescuing. CNN's earlier reports on the ship coincide with this week's news that the crew on the ship was finally saved by an American icebreaker ship, both mentioning that the crew onboard the Akademik Shokalskiy were, indeed, "on a climate change research ship." It stands out among media sources in pointing this out. The Associated Press, for example, mentions only that the Akademik Shokalskiy was a "research ship." The Washington Post version of the AP story claims the ship was in Antarctica "re-creating Australian explorer Douglas Mawson’s 1911-13 voyage to Antarctica." NBC News went with this story, too, as did Reuters – omitting any mention of climate change research. ABC News went with no mention of any motive for the ship's being down in the Antarctic at all. Not every media outlet merely reported a straight story without that key fact; some attempted to find new angles to the story that distracted from the purpose of the voyage and the tragedy that befell it – during Antarctica's summertime, no less – and the terrible optics these implied for the climate change lobby. USA Today , for example, wondered whether there would be any impact on the Antarctic tourist cruise industry thanks to the media's covering a ship stuck in the region (it concluded that no, no cruise companies seem to be worrying about this). National Geographic went with the very bizarre twist of emphasizing the American rescue ship's horsepower compared both to the Russian ship and its initial Chinese icebreaker savior, admiring the sheer power to break ice of such a ship. Only publications with "conservative" reputations like the New York Post and the Boston Herald addressed the climate change angle of the story. The Herald ran an editorial hoping that the incident would increase awareness of the continued growth of Antarctica's polar ice caps, a fact contrary to much global warming speculation. The Post also mentioned the record-breaking ice in Antarctica's summer and highlighted the ship's goal to document the hypothetical record-breaking melting the scientists expected to find. The Akademik Shokalskiy first sent out its distress call that it was stuck in ice on Christmas morning and has been lodged there ever since until finally having its passengers saved this week. The Snow Dragon, a Chinese icebreaker, moved closer to the Akademik Shokalskiy but, rather than managing to break a path through which it could escape, the icebreaker got stuck itself. A helicopter the ship brought with it did manage to take some passengers out of the Akademik Shokalskiy before the full rescue. An American vessel, the Polar Star, arrived this week from Australia and is in the process of returning the passengers to Tasmania, where they are expected by mid-January. The ships themselves remain lodged in ice. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/01/06/Mainstream-Media-Omits-Climate-Change-Mission-From-Antarctica-Ship-Rescue?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 14, 2014, 11:42:48 pm (http://media.theweek.com/img/dir_0112/56289_cartoon_main.jpg?197)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 17, 2014, 06:14:28 am then this is todays temps sourced from http://www.worldweathernow.com/ (http://www.smfforfree.com/gallery/xtranewscommunity2/67_20_01_10_3_46_00.gif) and Now (http://www.smfforfree.com/gallery/xtranewscommunity2/97_16_01_14_1_03_06.jpeg) from same source http://www.worldweathernow.com/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 23, 2014, 08:16:42 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) Fine weather for creepy melancholia By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | Tuesday, January 21, 2014 I HAVE enjoyed many terrific birthdays in San Francisco. I have, if memory serves and it sometimes does, nearly always celebrated my January birthday indoors, perhaps luxuriating in a fine hotel, or soaking in a hot, steaming body of water, or rolling around in a very large bed surrounded by whisky and laughter and various slippery things, all due to the chilly and invariably drizzling, foggy, sleeting, flagrantly unpleasant winter weather outside, weather that has always slammed January in San Francisco like a familiar and necessary refrain. Not this year. This year, I was sunbathing. This year I was splayed out on a tiny, hidden gem of a beach down in Half Moon Bay, sipping champagne, wearing nothing but underwear and a smile alongside a gorgeous companion equally — though significantly more beautifully — unadorned, both of us marveling at the 74-degree temperature, the glass-calm ocean and the utter surreality of the dry, warm, lightly breezed air. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_cowell_21jan14_zpsa2276d50.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/2014/01/cowell.jpg) Beach day! In January! WTF! We were, quite obviously, enjoying ourselves immensely. We were gasping at the stillness, the clear and simple heat, the ache and bite of the thirsty sand, repeating over and over that we couldn’t believe it was actually winter even as, deep down, we both could sense it — as I’m sure you can, too: Something is wrong. It’s not supposed to be like this. It’s not supposed to be warm, dry and sunny in the Bay Area for the entire month of January, and probably February, and most of December, and who knows how much longer. Not here. Not now. Not ever. Let me be clear: “Something is wrong” isn’t just something you mutter to yourself when the weather blips and flops and pulls a weird little stunt, like a rogue cold snap or fluke heat wave that you know will pass in a few days so hey, let’s get out the sunblock and have a freak barbecue in December. This kind of wrongness, it’s of a different tang and scale. You can feel it in your bones, your primitive animal nature, your equilibrium. It’s not about weather, per se. It’s about something bigger. Deeper. And quite a bit scarier. Surely you already know that California is officially in the midst of a severe, unprecedented drought. You’ve probably already read that 2013 was the driest year ever recorded in the state, that it could be the driest winter in 500 years (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2014/01/21/californias-driest-winter-in-500-years.html), that the Sierra snow pack is 17 percent of what it should be, and that many, many people are beginning to get very, very concerned. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_drought_21jan14_zpscec73847.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/2014/01/drought.jpg) Do you have enough sunblock? You do not have enough sunblock. What you might not know is a normal January has zero wildfires, whereas this one has already had 150. What you might not know is the predictive models (http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_summary.html) for the entire western side of the country show extremely bleak times ahead. Go ahead, skim through just how scary it really is (http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2014/01/california-drought-scary-facts-snowpack). If the insane fire danger alone isn’t enough to freak you out, the dour forecasts for all sorts of industries, from agriculture to ski resorts, certainly should. So really, this is not a column about the weather. This is a column about gut-level disquiet, about seeing the woes of our city (San Francisco hasn’t even reached half of its record-low rainfall for this time of year) and our state, and then widening out that lens of unsettling weirdness to take in the totality of what’s happening, from the brutal (and equally unprecedented) “polar vortex” slamming the rest of the country, to extreme disasters, such as Supertyphoon Haiyan, the strongest storm ever recorded at landfall, which killed 6,000 people in the Philippines. It recently snowed in Cairo for the first time in 112 years. In June of last year, in Death Valley, they hit the hottest temperature — 129 degrees — ever recorded for that month. We are, at our core, blood-soaked, spit-infused, bone-hammered animals. We are, behind all our air-conditioned defenses and numbed-out obsession with technology and loneliness, still somehow attuned to the rhythms of the planet, still a living organism deeply interwoven with, and desperately dependent upon, a much larger organism. What happens to her, happens to us. We can feel it. Even if we caused it. Maybe because we caused it. Can you really separate? Let’s take one paragraph right here to openly slap back the mortifying idiocy, the dangerous ignorance of the Tea Party, Fox News and all tiny-brained global warming deniers everywhere, and point instead to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent climate report, by far its most shocking and damning yet. Conclusion: It’s no longer a matter of when, but how bad. Which is to say: dramatic climate change is no longer even remotely preventable (http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_summary.html). It’s here. It will be here for centuries. And yes, most of what’s happening is very much our fault. It’s now only a question of severity, adaptation and survival. Do you care? Do you feel it? I bet you do. Your very body, your cells, your electromagnetic field and neural wiring, they all understand that nature is not a linear, easily predictable force, particularly when we’ve been slapping her, mauling her, cramming billions of tons of toxic waste into her and generally behaving towards the Earth the way a meth addict behaves toward a mixed green salad. A creeping sense of resigned doom pervades the blood. Is there any good news? Sort of. Advances in conservation, energy use and environmental policy are happening every day. Wind, solar and thermal power are growing fast, though still remain light years behind oil and coal. There’s still a chance California could be deluged by rain and snow in March. Our fatal game of Russian Roulette with the planet might once again leave us standing, quivering and stupid, one more time. The bad news? Science and common sense agree: It’s all too little, too late (http://www.wunderground.com/climate/evidence.asp). Short of an immediate, radical overhaul of international energy usage on a scale unprecedented in human history, we’re headed for some vicious struggles for survival indeed. Check that: They’re already here. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_1952sunbathing_21jan14_zps5579c08c.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/2014/01/1952-Sunbathing-on-the-ba-006.jpg) Nothing left to do but sigh. So, what do you do? How do you respond? Do you profess utter powerlessness and hope someone, somewhere figures it all out in time? Do you enjoy the random spoils of odd weather while you can, praying the wildfires don’t wipe out your home or the polar vortex doesn’t kill your grandparents, and store up on bottled water and good porn and Jesus? Do you shrug it off and keep dancing? Maybe you make a nervous joke out of it, a game, tell everyone to “shower with a friend!” as you work to cut back on your water usage by 20 percent, even though you know upwards of 85 percent of all water in California goes for farming (less than 10 percent is residential), and most of that goes to grow grain, to feed cattle, to feed our gluttonous meat/fast-food obsessions, to feed our obesity epidemic which feeds our love of pharmaceuticals and fad diets and hoping someone else figures it all out in time. Ah, the circle of life. Maybe you realize, deep in your bones, it’s no longer possible to turn it all around, and that there’s only so much you can do to adapt to severe unpredictability and the fact that Mother Nature always, nay always bats last. We’d try to whistle past the graveyard, if our lips weren’t so damn chapped. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2014/01/21/fine-weather-for-creepy-melancholia (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2014/01/21/fine-weather-for-creepy-melancholia) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 29, 2014, 01:12:39 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... California's drought, times three The state is facing three distinct water crises, each requiring its own emergency and long-term responses. LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITORIAL | Sunday, January 26, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan26fla_zps2130d97a.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52e2fbbc/turbine/la-ed-new-drought-20140126) Seen above on Tuesday, a tree that is usually at the banks of Folsom Lake outside Sacramento is now several hundred feet away from the water. In his drought emergency declaration, Governor Jerry Brown asked Californians to cut their water usage by 20%. — Photo: John G. Mabanglo/EPA. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIANS are facing not one drought but three, interconnected yet distinct, each bringing its own hazards and each requiring its own emergency and long-term responses. The first drought is regional, caused by the lack of rain in our own mountains and our own backyards. In normal winters — or rather those we have come to accept as normal — storms blow south from the Gulf of Alaska, churning in a counterclockwise direction and keeping much of their stored water in the air until they move inland from the west and run smack into the San Gabriel Mountains. When they lack enough energy to push over the peaks, they dump their water — in torrents that rush down the mountainsides, feed seasonal rivers such as the Los Angeles, replenish groundwater basins and, occasionally, cause havoc. The winter rain falls not just on the slopes but throughout the basin and the valleys that make up the geographic triangle outlined by the mountains and the coastline. That's the water that soaks into our backyards and landscapes and lessens the need for sprinklers. It's the water that also soaks into natural oaklands and scrublands, and when it goes missing — as it has for three winters now — the ground dries out, the trees and chaparral get dangerously crisp and wildfire becomes an increasing danger. That's the hazard Southern California faces in the coming months. The recent Colby fire north of Glendora may have been started, as prosecutors allege, by three men carelessly smoking marijuana in the foothills, but it spread quickly and frighteningly because of the tinder-dry conditions. Without substantial rainfall in February and March, we can expect more fires like that one in the summer and fall fire seasons. Other than extra caution by residents and vigilance and expertise on the part of professional firefighters, there is little Southern Californians can do about this regional drought beyond hoping for rain. The second drought is different but related. The same Gulf of Alaska system that usually sends rain south of the Tehachapis also sends storms across the Central Valley and into the higher, colder Sierra Nevada, where the water falls as snow and forms California's greatest natural reservoir, releasing its water later in the year in manageable, and useful, seasonal pulses. More often than not, that's the water that comes out of the tap here, brought to Los Angeles households from Eastern Sierra snowmelt through the Owens River and the aqueduct for which the centenary was celebrated a few months ago; and it's the water that comes to us, and to all of Southern California, plus Silicon Valley, much of the coast and Central Valley fields and homes, from Western Sierra snowmelt that flows from the Sacramento River to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and to the California Aqueduct. The Northern California drought does little to affect fire danger here but a great deal to affect the supply of water to homes and businesses. Southern California is unlikely to go thirsty this year because it has water reserves banked around the region. But it's worth noting that although the winter snowpack is down by 80%, Governor Jerry Brown's drought declaration called for only a 20% decrease in water use. It may seem counterintuitive to let lawns turn brown and gardens dry up in such dangerous conditions. But conservation is nevertheless crucial to address the problems caused by the drought in the Sierra. The third drought is occurring across the Western United States, and especially in the Rocky Mountains, which feed the Colorado River and by extension the other major component, after the Central Valley, of California's agricultural wealth. It also forms a major part of Los Angeles' water portfolio. Because these three droughts are interconnected, we rarely suffer from one without dealing with the others, and this year's situation is no different. The vast majority of Californians rely on water that falls in other parts of the state, or even outside the state, and although the multiple sources make water more secure for all of us, shortages usually come all at once. Southern California must prepare for the future by recapturing more of the rainwater that in wetter years still runs, unused, to the sea. It must do even more than is already being done to clean and reuse urban water. We will likely need a storm water bond, tax or other measure. We may have to build new dams to store water for future use without drying up rivers and destroying the ecosystem, as dams in California historically have done. A statewide water bond, which voters will consider in November, should help clean up groundwater basins here to allow residents to rely more on local supplies and less on the Sierra — although distant snowmelt must always be a part of the entire state's water portfolio. That means diverting some of the delta's water with pumps that do less damage to endangered fish and rely less on earthquake-vulnerable levees. The kind of system envisioned by the Bay Delta Conservation Plan would help all parts of California deal with global climate change and its inevitable result: precipitation that falls on the Sierra less like the snow that generations have come to rely on and more like the rain that comes, when it does, to Southern California in unmanageable torrents. These measures are needed not merely for drought years like this one. But the trio of droughts serves as a reminder of the urgent need for action — to plan, to conserve, to store, to reuse, to transport and to share the state's most precious resource. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-new-drought-20140126,0,7229717.story (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-new-drought-20140126,0,7229717.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 29, 2014, 01:12:55 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Republicans seek to tap California drought for a political edge Midterm election campaigns attempt to link the state's water crisis to Democratic environmental policies, and promise relief for farmers. By EVAN HALPER | 10:58PM PST - Sunday, January 26, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan26flb_zps662b253d.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52e603a4/turbine/la-apphoto-dry-california-governor3-jpg-20140126) A visitor to Folsom Lake in California's Central Valley walks his dog down a boat ramp that is now several hundred yards from the water's edge. At a mere 17% capacity, the lake has become a visual symbol of California's water crisis. — Photo: Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press. WASHINGTON — Beleaguered and outnumbered, California Republicans think they may have found a crucial ally — drought. Up and down the state's increasingly dry Central Valley, Republicans have pounded away at the argument that Democratic policies — particularly environmental rules — are to blame for the parched fields and dwindling reservoirs that threaten to bankrupt farms and wipe out jobs. In his latest campaign video, Republican Doug Ose stands in the middle of dried-out Folsom Lake. At a mere 17% capacity, the usually scenic reservoir favored by boaters and sunbathers looks like the set of "Mad Max". As the camera pans, Ose declares, "We're facing a real crisis." "Where's our representative?" he demands, referring to Representative Ami Bera, a freshman Democrat elected in 2012 on a razor-thin margin, whom he hopes to unseat this fall. House Speaker John A. Boehner joined the effort recently, flying to Bakersfield and promising to shepherd legislation through the House to divert some of the state's dwindling water supply to farmers. "When you come to a place like California, and you come from my part of the world, you just shake your head and wonder what kinds of nonsense does the bureaucracy do out here?" the Ohio Republican said, referring to the long-running diversion of millions of gallons from farms to the habitats of endangered fish. "How you can favor fish over people is something that people from my part of the world never understand," he said. Whether the politics of water can help the Republican Party make gains in this year's congressional elections remains to be seen. Republicans have bet on the water issue in the past to little avail. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina, for example, made attacks on water-related environmental regulations a major element of her unsuccessful campaign against Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer in 2010. Already, however, the renewed partisan focus on the issue has complicated Governor Jerry Brown's job, as his administration scrambles to develop emergency plans to keep water flowing to cities where the spigots of homes and businesses are in danger of running dry. And this time may be different. Across the state's agricultural heart, crisis is bearing down. Laborers face unemployment, and the owners of small companies that rely on a robust farming industry are panicked. The GOP is leveraging their anger. Until now, "nobody cared," said Tony Quinn, an editor of the California Target Book, which handicaps political races. "In a drought, all of a sudden there is rationing, there is no boating, no fishing. People are told not to flush when they pee in the toilet. We'll be going through all that. People begin to pay attention." "Republicans are looking for an issue in this very Democratic state," Quinn added. "Congressional candidates throughout the Central Valley are going to seize on this." Indeed, Republican strategists hope the issue could help in half a dozen districts in and around the Central Valley. In addition to Ose's race against Bera, Republican strategists hope anger over water restrictions could help them with otherwise uphill challenges to Democratic incumbents Jerry McNerney of Stockton and Jim Costa of Fresno. Water politics could also help Republicans defend incumbents who might be vulnerable if Brown appears headed to a lopsided victory. Democrats have eyed three Central Valley Republicans — Representatives David Valadao of Hanford, Jeff Denham of Turlock and Devin Nunes of Tulare — as possible targets. The political advantage exists even though the plan Boehner unveiled last week, which would give more water to farms and less to habitat conservation, stands almost no chance of becoming law. The Brown administration dismisses the proposal as crude and potentially catastrophic, and its odds in the Democratic-controlled Senate are about nil. Leading Democrats argue that the Republican proposals ignore the reality that California's water woes are complex and caused by diverse issues. Among them are gambles that agricultural interests took when they invested heavily in operations that rely on unstable water supplies. Relaxing of endangered species protections would not necessarily free up any water amid a drought this severe. Moreover, Democrats note, proposals to fund large water conservation and recycling programs have foundered in the GOP-controlled House. "This is a political stunt," said Representative George Miller (Democrat-Martinez), a veteran of the state's water tensions. "Their argument is so stupid." The drought has already complicated Brown's efforts to win approval for his long-range plan to build two 35-mile tunnels that would divert as much as 67,500 gallons of water every second from the Sacramento Delta to thirsty cities and farms to the south. The latest move by Central Valley farmers and their Republican allies to get more water in these scarce times is sure to increase tensions with Northern California voters and their representatives, including Miller, among whom opposition to diverting delta water appears to be hardening. State officials also worry that the measure Boehner is promoting could upend decades of carefully built alliances among farmers, water agencies, environmentalists, fishing communities and others that are the backbone of the state's water system. "What they are doing does not serve a purpose," said state Natural Resources Secretary John Laird. "It's not as if we have water left to argue over. We need to triage. "Some parts of the state are going to have to depend on the kindness of other parts of the state" to get water for their most basic needs, Laird said. "This is not the time to start a fight." For Boehner and his allies, however, those complexities may be beside the point. As Democrats struggle to explain the myriad policies, contracts and stakeholder agreements that have left the state unprepared to deal with a historic dry spell, Republicans are offering simpler explanations that appeal to the inland voters they covet. "The Man-Made California Drought" is the title of a Web page devoted to water at the House Committee on Natural Resources' site. It prominently features clips from "The Valley Hope Forgot", a multipart harangue against California water policy by the Fox network's Sean Hannity. Nunes, who stood alongside Boehner in Bakersfield, brushes aside Laird's advice to avoid a fight. "Laird and the others are all disciples of the NRDC and Sierra Club," said the congressman, referring to the National Resources Defense Council and the environmental group founded by conservationist John Muir. "They sit in San Francisco drinking $500 bottles of wine, and they want us out of production." Nunes, who once brought a bowl of fish to a hearing to make the point that they are treated better than farmers, accepts that pumping more water to farms right now may not be feasible. But the Republican proposal stipulates the pumping would start once water levels are high enough. "The people who built the water system designed it to withstand a five-year drought," he said. "But we have just been letting water go." And at least some Democrats are taking no chances. Shortly after Boehner's visit, Costa signaled he planned to sign on to the Republican effort. His re-election could hinge on it. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-drought-politics-20140127,0,4166887,full.story (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-drought-politics-20140127,0,4166887,full.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 01, 2014, 11:27:02 am From the Los Angeles Times.... California snowpack hits record low Underscoring the severity of a statewide drought, snowpack measurements hit a record low as Governor Jerry Brown meets with water leaders. By BETTINA BOXALL | 5:55PM PST - Thursday, January 30, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan30csp_zpsfdff85b9.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52eb02f3/turbine/la-apphoto-snowpack-survey4-jpg-20140130) Frank Gehrke, chief of the California Cooperative Snow Survey Program for the Department of Water Resources, leaves a snow-covered meadow after the second snow survey of the year near Echo Summit, California. Gehrke said that while recent snow fall will help bolster the depleted snowpack, it is not enough to affect the water supply. — Photo: Associated Press. EVEN WITH the first significant storm in nearly two months dropping snow on the Sierra Nevada, Thursday's mountain snowpack measurements were the lowest for the date in more than a half-century of record keeping. At 12% of average for this time of year, the dismal statewide snowpack underscored the severity of a drought that is threatening community water supplies and leaving farm fields in many parts of California barren. As snow survey crews worked, Governor Jerry Brown met with Southern California water leaders as part of a series of drought meetings he is holding around the state. "Every day this drought goes on, we're going to have to tighten the screws on what people are doing," Brown said in brief remarks before the private meeting with regional water managers at the downtown Los Angeles headquarters of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Brown earlier this month declared a state drought emergency and called on all Californians to cut water use by 20%. "Make no mistake," he said Thursday. "This drought is a big wake-up call and a reminder that we do depend on natural systems. It's not just going to the store." Thanks to billions of dollars of ratepayer investments in regional water storage projects and conservation programs, Southern California is in a stronger position than much of the rest of the state. "We spent 20 years preparing for a drought like this," MWD General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger said. The agency, which supplies the Southland with water from the Colorado River and Northern California, has no plans to impose rationing this year. But Kightlinger is asking the MWD board to issue a formal alert, emphasizing Brown's call for conservation, and wants the board to dip into the agency's general reserve fund to double annual conservation spending to $40 million. The money would fund public outreach and consumer rebates for water-efficient appliances and sprinkler systems. Kightlinger also said MWD would be open to forgoing some water shipments and transferring them to needy districts in other parts of the state if enough storms come along in the next two months to raise the level of depleted reservoirs upstate. But "right now we don't even have those supplies in Northern California," he said. "Frankly, I've never seen anything like it." MWD officials and Brown also discussed a $25-billion proposal to replumb the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta with a new diversion point and two water tunnels. Brown and major water contractors including MWD are pushing the project as the best way to ease endangered species restrictions that have cut water deliveries to the Southland and San Joaquin Valley agriculture. When President Obama this week phoned Brown about the drought, Brown said he told the president that some "lower level" federal officials involved in the project "are not being helpful. Quite the opposite." Kightlinger, elaborating later, said the Brown administration and water contractors were frustrated by the pace of review by federal agencies that must approve the project. "We've been working on it now over seven years," Kightlinger said. "We've spent $200 million-plus dollars in planning alone and we need high-level federal engagement to wrap this up." Until Thursday, the lowest statewide snowpack measurement at this time of year was 21% of average, in 1991 and 1963. The one bit of good news Thursday was that it was snowing in the Sierra. The storm arrived Wednesday evening and, combined with a second wave of moisture Thursday night, was expected to dump one to two feet of snow on slopes that have been so bare that mountain bikers were climbing them in the middle of January. The U.S. Forest Service on Thursday issued an oddly welcome warning of backcountry avalanche danger between the Yuba and Ebbetts passes "due to new heavy snow slabs." Dawn Johnson, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Reno, said two low pressure systems in recent days managed to split in half the persistent high pressure ridge off the West Coast that has blocked winter storms. "That finally opened up the door" for a track of tropical moisture from Hawaii, she said. A cold front from the Gulf of Alaska turned the initial rain to snow in the mountains and foothills. The system, extending from the Oregon border, was largely spent by the time it reached Southern California and forecasters said the Los Angeles area would get no more than a tenth of an inch of rain. Although another low pressure system could bring precipitation to the California coastline Sunday night, Johnson said there was no way of knowing if the storm door will remain open next month, or slam shut. • CLICK HERE (http://latdevelopers.com/graphics/charts/reservoirs.html) to view an interactive graphic showing the state of California's water reservoirs. http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-brown-water-20140131,0,3070851.story (http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-brown-water-20140131,0,3070851.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 01, 2014, 11:28:52 am From the Los Angeles Times.... Want to cut Arctic warming in half? Curb emissions now, study says By TONY BARBOZA | 10:07AM PST - Friday, January 31, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan31iaig_zpsba078e85.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52ebdcc7/turbine/la-sci-sn-arctic-warming-sea-ice-carbon-emissi-001) Icebergs float in a bay off Ammassalik Island, Greenland. — Photo: John McConnico/Associated Press. GLOBAL WARMING is changing the Arctic so quickly that experts say we should expect an ice-free Arctic Ocean in the summer within just a few decades. But a group of scientists says there is a way to spare the Arctic from more disastrous climate change. In a new paper, they say that reducing global carbon emissions now could cut Arctic warming nearly in half by century’s end. Society already has released enough carbon dioxide into the Earth’s atmosphere that over the next few decades temperatures in the Arctic will continue to rise two to three times faster than in Earth’s middle latitudes, according to the study (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000162/pdf). “Over the next 20 or 30 years, the fix is in,” said James Overland, an oceanographer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and lead author of the scientific paper. “That means more access to drilling, shipping and resource exploration. But it's not very good news for polar bears or walruses that depend on the sea ice habitat.” Starting mid-century, society’s decisions about how to address climate change could begin to kick in, Overland said. If carbon emissions continue on their current trajectory, by century’s end temperatures across the Arctic could rise by 23.4 degrees in the late fall and 9 degrees in the late spring, according to the study, which used computer models to predict the effects of different greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. But if civilization levels off its emissions by mid-century, Arctic-wide warming would be limited to 12.6 degrees in the late fall and 5.4 degrees in the late spring, according to the paper accepted for publication in the journal Earth’s Future (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000162/abstract). The Arctic is hypersensitive to climate change and is seeing some of the earliest and most severe effects because of a vicious circle known as “Arctic amplification.” As Arctic sea ice shrinks to record lows (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/27/science/la-sci-sn-arctic-sea-ice-20120827), it is reflecting less sunlight and leaving behind more heat-absorbing ocean water. Thawing permafrost (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/12/science/la-sci-sn-carbon-sunlight-permafrost-20130211) is increasing heat storage on land and raising temperatures even higher. Already, the average annual temperature in the Arctic is 3.6 degrees higher than it was between 1971 and 2000, double the rise in lower latitudes during the same period, according to the study. Overland conducted the research with three other scientists from the University of Washington, the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, and the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The scientists wrote that their research “makes a strong case to begin mitigation activities for greenhouse gases,” adding that stabilizing carbon dioxide emissions by mid-century “is a plausible target if decisive actions are begun soon.” http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-arctic-warming-sea-ice-carbon-emissions-20140130,0,6296635.story (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-arctic-warming-sea-ice-carbon-emissions-20140130,0,6296635.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 01, 2014, 11:30:00 am From the Los Angeles Times.... California drought prompts first-ever ‘zero water allocation’ By BETTINA BOXALL | 2:04PM PST - Friday, January 31, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014jan31cd_zps0a4820be.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52ec1e61/turbine/la-me-ln-20140131-002) The State Water Project's zero allocation, which comes amid a crippling drought, is the first in the sprawling system's 54-year history. — Photo: Nhat V. Meyer/McClatchy-Tribune. OFFICIALS on Friday said that for the first time ever, the State Water Project that helps supply a majority of Californians may be unable to make any deliveries except to maintain public health and safety. They also said they were cutting releases from large reservoirs in the northern part of the state to preserve supplies in the face of what could be the worst drought in modern California history. “It’s about holding back water so we’ve got it tomorrow,” said Chuck Bonham, director of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The zero allocation for the State Water Project is the first in the sprawling system’s 54-year history. It will be reassessed monthly and could be adjusted upward if storms drop snow and rain on the parched state in the next three months. Most of the contractors that get water from the project have other sources, such as storage and groundwater, and state Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin stressed that the delivery cut did not mean faucets would run dry. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the state project’s largest customer, has said it has enough supplies in storage to get the Southland through this year without mandatory rationing. Cowin said it was necessary to take aggressive action now to ensure water would be available later for people, farms and fish. “This is not a coming crisis... This is a current crisis,” he said. The State Water Resources Control Board announced that it is temporarily dropping requirements for reservoir releases to maintain environmental standards in California’s water hub, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The board is also telling junior rights holders in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins that they will have to curtail diversions from rivers and streams. Officials said most of the 5,800 junior diverters, who are primarily agricultural, have access to groundwater or other sources. In another step, the board is limiting pumping from the delta to exports necessary for human health and safety, an action that in effect eliminates irrigation deliveries from the delta to the San Joaquin Valley. Cowin called the actions “largely unprecedented but also unavoidable.” http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-california-drought-zero-water-allocation-20140131,0,4678128.story (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-california-drought-zero-water-allocation-20140131,0,4678128.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 02, 2014, 11:10:37 pm (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uJzYbm5wTI0/UsrcoGKbRoI/AAAAAAAATt0/paCfa-cVDoM/s1600/Cartoon+of+the+day+423.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 06, 2014, 10:52:56 am from The New Zealand Herald.... New storms create new misery for UK southwest AFP | 9:04AM - Thursday, February 06, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/nzh_DevonStormDamage_06feb14_zps3f3b0b0b.jpg) Workmen assess a huge hole exposing ground services and exposed railway track after the sea wall collapsed in Dawlish, England. — Photo: Associated Press. MORE THAN 8000 homes are without power in southwest England after fresh storms battered the region, sending huge waves crashing onto the coastline and damaging sea defences. The main train service connecting the counties of Devon and Cornwall with the rest of Britain were suspended after part of the sea wall under the coastal railway line collapsed. Local member of parliament Ben Bradshaw said the line closure was a "devastating blow" to the regional economy. The Environment Agency issued nine severe flood warnings for the southwest, meaning there was a "danger to life", and Prime Minister David Cameron was due to chair a meeting of the government's emergency committee Cobra. The committee has been meeting almost daily over the past few weeks, as storms have brought flooding to much of Britain, including to the southwest county of Somerset, where one village has been cut off for a month. Speaking in parliament before Wednesday's meeting, Cameron announced an additional £100 million for flood repairs and maintenance over the coming year. "Whatever is required, whether it is dredging work on the rivers Tone and Parrett, whether it is support for our emergency services, whether it is fresh money for flood defences, whether it is action across the board, this government will help those families and get this issue sorted," he said. The electricity distribution network that covers Devon, Cornwall and Somerset said about 8200 properties still remained without power on Wednesday morning. "It's all weather-related. There's been absolutely no let-up," a spokeswoman for Western Power Distribution told AFP. A further 60,000 homes had been reconnected overnight, according to the prime minister. Meteorologists at the national weather centre, the Met Office, warned of further heavy rain and gale force winds to come on Wednesday and through to the weekend. Britain has been lashed by storms and heavy rain throughout the winter, with parts of southern England seeing the wettest January since records began in 1910. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11197504 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11197504) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 06, 2014, 06:16:52 pm Lots of pictures of Global Warming/Climate Change's handiwork here.... ❏ Crumbling homes are falling into the sea after battering by huge waves forced families to flee for their lives as railway line and coastal wall were destroyed (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2552027/Britains-coastline-battered-storms-hurricane-force-winds-sweep-Atlantic.html) (Daily Mail — 7:00AM GMT, Wednesday, 05 February, 2014) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 07, 2014, 09:12:33 am From the Los Angeles Times.... California's severe drought exposes civilization's thin veneer By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Thursday, February 06, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014feb06a_zpsc654ab5f.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52f33579/turbine/la-na-tt-californias-severe-drought-20140205) THE severe drought in California and much of the West is a reminder that civilized life is a paper-thin veneer that overlays the deep upheavals of nature. Humans carry on blithely, holding fast to the illusion that the natural world can be tamed and exploited with no unavoidable consequences. Then we get slammed by a hurricane, a flood, a tornado, a wildfire, a drought or a freezing polar vortex that lets us know how wrong we are. Yet, after each disaster, we forget again — which is the reason so few of us give any sustained attention to the climate change peril. It is similar to the way we think about death. We know it’s coming, but we would drive ourselves crazy if we thought about it all the time. As a result, we revert to living in the moment or counting on promises of heaven. With climate change, either we suspect it is too late to do anything about it or we just deny it is real. And even the vast majority of climate scientists who know it is a real phenomenon are quick with the caveat that no single weather event can be attributed to climate change with complete certainty. Nevertheless, now that extreme weather is hammering us with increasingly regularity, it is hard to argue that a profound shift is not underway. The drought in California’s agricultural lands may simply be part of a natural cycle that has kicked in independently rather than being a result of global warming caused by the sharp increase in atmospheric CO2 levels in the industrial age. Whatever the case may be, experts say it has been 500 years since it has been this dry. The last time it happened, the native cultures in the West were severely disrupted. The question facing us today is how much disruption our more complex society can handle. In the agricultural regions of California, where half of the nation’s fruits, nuts and vegetables are grown, many farmers are not planting crops this year because there is no water. Cattle and sheep are being sold off by ranchers because there is no grass. More than 25 million people who rely on dwindling local water sources are being told not to expect rescue because state and federal water reserves are quickly running out. Nevada, New Mexico and other western states face a similar crisis. Unemployment is rising among agricultural workers and American consumers will soon see food prices shoot up as well, as the bounty of the land dries up. A half millennium ago, the Anasazi people lived in marvelous cliff dwellings scattered throughout the American Southwest. No doubt the Anasazi expected their thriving culture to go on forever. The gods they prayed to lived in the sacred mountains and in the stars of the night sky and, like all humans, they prayed to those gods for bountiful harvests and safety in storms. But all their prayers could not protect them. Something made the ancient ones abandon their settlements — most likely a 300-year drought that began in the 12th century — and the Anasazi vanished. As the consequences of climate change become more stark and real, it is a delusion to think we are immune from existential change. Our civilization is more complex and technologically advanced than the Anasazi culture, but that may only make us more vulnerable. Those ancient natives could take their knowledge of simple agriculture and move on to seek more fertile ground and abundant water elsewhere. When our farmers can no longer feed us, where will we go? http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-californias-severe-drought-20140205,0,3634223.story (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-californias-severe-drought-20140205,0,3634223.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on February 08, 2014, 10:52:25 am re mess # 314 THE severe drought in California and much of the West is a reminder that civilized life is a paper-thin veneer that overlays the deep upheavals of nature. Humans carry on blithely, holding fast to the illusion that the natural world can be tamed and exploited with no unavoidable consequences. Then we get slammed by a hurricane, a flood, a tornado, a wildfire, a drought or a freezing polar vortex that lets us know how wrong we are. http://www.history.com/topics/dust-bowl/videos#america-black-blizzard http://www.history.com/topics/dust-bowl/photos#the-dust-bowl Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 10, 2014, 06:14:10 pm (http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/The-Conversation/2014/02/09/usa-snowfall-google-earth.jpg)
Over Two Thirds of Continental U.S. Covered in Snow More than two thirds of the continental United States is currently covered in snow, according to new data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). With 67.4% of the contiguous United States now covered with snow, up from 48.1% last month, the so called Polar Vortex would appear to be leaving Global Warming fear mongers lost in a vortex all their own. Contrast current data and images with these words from Dr. David Viner. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said. Not to be deterred in his battle against what some view as more climate fabulists, than scientists, Mark Steyn takes on a "Ship of Fools" in The Spectator this month. Yes, yes, just to get the obligatory ‘of courses’ out of the way up front: of course ‘weather’ is not the same as ‘climate’; and of course the thickest iciest ice on record could well be evidence of ‘global warming’, just as 40-and-sunny and a 35-below blizzard and 12 degrees and partly cloudy with occasional showers are all apparently manifestations of ‘climate change’; and of course the global warm-mongers are entirely sincere in their belief that the massive carbon footprint of their rescue operation can be offset by the planting of wall-to-wall trees the length and breadth of Australia, Britain, America and continental Europe. Big Climate is slowly being crushed by a hard, icy reality: if you’re heading off to university this year, there has been no global warming since before you were in kindergarten. That’s to say, the story of the early 21st century is that the climate declined to follow the climate ‘models’. Really, there's little that's more unsightly than an adult so called scientist crying test tubes full of tears over their broken model. Unfortunately for many, that's precisely what recent weather patterns have done - shatter the models these so called scientists have been employing in their war on capitalism for decades. How ironic that a Polar Vortex was just what was needed to heat up the climate war! http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/02/09/Over-2-3-of-US-Covered-in-Snow-despite-Snowfall-being-a-thing-of-the-past But theres more lol (http://www.bloomberg.com/image/i6NIoO1oD88c.jpg) Global-Warming Slowdown Due to Pacific Winds, Study Shows Stronger Pacific Ocean winds may help explain the slowdown in the rate of global warming since the turn of the century, scientists said. More powerful winds in the past 20 years may be forcing warmer seas deeper and bringing cooler water to the surface, 10 researchers from the U.S. and Australia said today in the journal Nature. That has cooled the average global temperature by as much as 0.2 degree Celsius (0.36 Fahrenheit) since 2001. Scientists have been trying to find out why the rate of global warming has eased in the past 20 years while greenhouse-gas emissions have surged to a record. Today’s paper elaborates on a theory that deep seas are absorbing more warmth by explaining how that heat could be getting there. “The net effect of these anomalous winds is a cooling in the 2012 global average surface air temperature of 0.1–0.2 degree Celsius, which can account for much of the hiatus in surface warming observed since 2001,” the researchers wrote. They’re led by Matthew England, a professor of oceanography at the University of New South Wales in Australia. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in September that the average temperature since 1998 has increased at less than half the rate since 1951. The world has warmed by an average 0.05 degree per decade since 1998, compared with the 1951-2012 average of 0.12 degree a decade, the UNIPCC said. Hiatus Persisting “This hiatus could persist for much of the present decade if the tradewind trends continue; however rapid warming is expected to resume once the anomalous wind trends abate,” the authors of today’s study said. “Volcanoes and changes in solar radiation can also drive cooler decades against the backdrop of ongoing warming,” they said. The scientists used computer models and weather data to determine the effect of the stronger winds on ocean circulation. Other institutions involved in the research include the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, the University of Hawaii, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organization. A paper in the journal Geophysical Research Letters in May found that ocean waters below 700 meters (2,300 feet) have absorbed more heat since 1999. A separate study in Nature in August linked the hiatus to a cooling of surface waters in the eastern Pacific, and today’s research builds on that. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-09/global-warming-slowdown-due-to-pacific-winds-study-shows.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 14, 2014, 02:15:15 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Ice storm paradox: It's colder because the Earth is warmer By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Thursday, February 13, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014feb13a_zps6e96279c.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52fc62f7/turbine/la-na-tt-ice-storm-paradox-20140212) WITH the American South locked in a deep freeze (http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-ice-storm-atlanta-georgia-20140212,0,3879249.story), you can be sure that plenty of the folks suffering through the snow and ice storms are interpreting the big chill as more proof that global warming is a hoax. “Warming?” they scoff. “How can the planet be warming when it’s so darn cold?” People in other parts of the world seem to have no great difficulty understanding the science but, in the good old USA where quite a few people consider science just another political opinion, it is going to take a lot longer to get most people to accept the cold facts about a warmer world. Put very simply, here is what the predominant science says: Average global temperatures have been rising in recent decades. Some of the warming could be part of a natural cycle but, almost certainly, increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere caused by the burning of fossil fuels are a pivotal factor in intensifying the phenomenon. The starkest evidence of the temperature jump is the rapid melting of the polar ice caps and the disappearance of the world’s glaciers. Climate scientists have said another key signal to watch for is a dramatic shift in weather patterns. It is close to impossible to attribute any single weather event — a snowstorm, a tornado, a hurricane — to temperature rise, but, once extreme weather becomes normal and what has been normal is no longer the norm, we will know we are in the throes of change that is likely irreversible. It sure looks like that could be where we are now. In just the last couple of years, Americans have experienced epic tornados in the center of the country, a monster storm that flooded Manhattan and ravaged New Jersey, extended drought in the West that threatens agriculture and water supplies, and an unprecedented number of wildfires in forests dried to the flammability of kindling. This winter, frigid polar air has slipped south, freezing much of the country, while in Alaska the season has been unusually warm. There are piles of snow in Atlanta, but a dearth of snow in the Sierra. Extreme and unusual weather has been rolling in with more frequency all over the world. Governments in most major countries have moved beyond debate about whether global warming is real. They are now busy making plans to deal with the costly disruptions and lethal disasters that climate change has already begun to bring. Not in this major country, however. Though the Republican nominee for president in 2008, Senator John McCain, declared that all the things that need to be done to cope with and combat climate change would be worth doing even if warming was not happening, the dominant voices in the party sharply disagree. They seem fixated on loony conspiracy theories that imply that the scientists of the world are spinning lies in order to destroy American capitalism. This week’s ice and snow will eventually melt and spring will come to the South, but too many American minds will remain in a deep freeze of denial. And because so many of the deniers hold seats in Congress, climate change will stay on the growing list of daunting problems that our political system is unable to address. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-ice-storm-paradox-20140212,0,7056061.story (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-ice-storm-paradox-20140212,0,7056061.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 24, 2014, 11:44:41 am from Hawke's Bay Today.... Arctic warmth creates big freeze By BRUCE BISSET | 9:00AM - Saturday, February 22, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/hbt_SevereWeather_22feb14_zps093ccfd1.jpg) With severe weather events happening regularly everywhere it is time for the masses to finally realise they have been lied to. WHAT I LOVE (NOT!) about climate change deniers is how they cherry-pick data in a very superficial way and then overstate their misinterpretation of it, as if doing so somehow turns a random observation into irrefutable proof. Take the severe snowstorms and floods affecting America and Europe. A raft of deniers have been having a field day claiming this proves the myth of global warming - and doubtless to many ordinary folk, at first glance that might seem so. If the Earth is warming, why is it freezing? So it can't be warming. QED. But in fact it is precisely because the Earth is warming that these never-before-seen freezes are happening. In this case, the "polar vortex" that almost crippled Canada and the USA last month, and the storms and floods afflicting Britain now, are directly related to the Arctic as a whole — and the area between Greenland and Russia in particular — warming far more rapidly than anywhere else. Temperatures there are already 2°C to 5°C greater than usual. By century's end, while the global average rise will be about 2.5°C above today's norm, the eastern Arctic will have warmed by 20°C — or more. Which is the tricky thing about averages. On a global scale, "average" is meaningless. Some places will get cooler! But some will get far hotter. The Arctic is one such. Problem is, it's the most crucial place in terms of the effects generated by warming, as we are now witnessing. See, the primary currents of the seas and the winds are controlled by temperature. If the Arctic ocean, or air, or both, warms or cools too much, those macro-mechanisms change their behaviour. And of course the oceanic and atmospheric systems interact. In the water, the currents at different depths rely on temperature differentials between them in order to keep operating as they should. If any layer warms or cools too much, the whole system gets thrown out of whack and could even cease to function. Which was, you may recall, the over-played but still relevant scenario used by disaster movie The Day After Tomorrow. In the air, latest research shows the circumpolar jet stream is "dipping" lower than normal into the Atlantic because it is warmer, and therefore weaker, so it is getting diverted by local weather systems. This forces the jetstream south, bringing polar storms with it; and those storms hang around far longer than usual because the jetstream now lacks the force to push through them — so the storms eddy in place instead of moving on. Much as a back-current might eddy in the corner of a diversion race in a stream, while the main flow diverts elsewhere. Result? The US and Europe freeze and flood — and all because the Arctic is warming. A denier — someone who deliberately misleads, rather than someone merely taken in by "the obvious" — will not explain these things to you. Because to admit the "myth" is real would open people's eyes to the fact human-induced climate change is just as real. And that can't be allowed, because it is the dirty, polluting, climate change-causing business of coal and oil that has made the rich. But with severe weather events happening regularly everywhere — such as Australia's burning droughts and our cyclonic summers — the time is upon us where the masses will finally realise they have been lied to: consistently, deliberately, for a long time. On that day, I bet you won't be able to find a denier for any money. That's the right of it. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11207317 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11207317) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 24, 2014, 03:11:52 pm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2dkFG2oJ3w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2dkFG2oJ3w) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 02, 2014, 11:30:40 am What a load of rubbish from the lil childrens brainwashing department Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 02, 2014, 11:35:41 am (http://www.loveshift.com/images/PolarBear.jpg)
I knew i should have had some swimming lessons Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on March 02, 2014, 12:07:32 pm What's a Polar Vortex? http://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/polar-vortex.htm 4or 5 pages, so keep reading ... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 02, 2014, 01:06:37 pm (http://cdn2.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/blogs.dir/11/files/2013/10/Polar_Surf_se.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 20, 2014, 11:06:28 am From the Los Angeles Times.... Scientists warn of global warming's abrupt changes A report by American Association for the Advancement of Science lays out in plain language the potential for harmful consequences should governments delay action. By TONY BARBOZA | 9:00PM PST - Tuesday, March 18, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014mar18oco_zps181f33a3.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5329233a/turbine/la-me-0319-climate-change-20140319) An artist's rendering of NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory, one of five Earth science missions launching in 2014. It will help answer questions about the planet's carbon dioxide levels. — Picture: NASA/JPL-CALTECH. A GROUP of scientists warned Tuesday that world leaders must act more swiftly to slow greenhouse gas emissions or risk "abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes" from climate change. The American Association for the Advancement of Science's blunt report contains no new scientific conclusions. But by speaking in plain, accessible terms it seeks to instill greater urgency in leaders and influence everyday Americans. Scientists said many previous assessments have been long and ponderous, and have failed to shift public opinion on global warming. The goal "is to move policy forward by making science as clear and straightforward as we possibly can," association Chief Executive Alan Leshner said. "What we're trying to do is to move the debate from whether human-induced climate change is reality … to exactly what should you do about it." The 18-page report, titled "What We Know" (http://whatweknow.aaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AAAS-What-We-Know.pdf%20), lays out many effects of human-caused climate change already underway. It warns that the consequences are growing more severe the longer governments delay action. "The sooner we make a concerted effort to curtail the burning of fossil fuels as our primary energy source and releasing the CO2 to the air, the lower our risk and cost will be," the report says. Its release marks a new approach by the world's largest general scientific society, which has more than 120,000 members. A panel of 13 U.S. climate scientists, including oceanographers, ecologists and public health experts, worked with Climate Nexus, a communications nonprofit, to produce the succinct report and a website (http://whatweknow.aaas.org). A one-minute online video (see below) posted with the report illustrates the problem of climate change and its consequences. Footage shows a mountain biker careening down a bumpy trail and skidding toward the edge of a cliff as a narrator says "the sooner we put the brakes on climate change, the better off we'll be." http://vimeo.com/88817119 (http://vimeo.com/88817119) Though recent polls (http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/scientific-and-public-perspectives-on-climate-change) show many Americans think global warming remains a topic of scientific disagreement, 97% of climate scientists agree that humans are causing climate change — a level of consensus comparable to the science linking smoking to heart and lung disease, the report notes. "The evidence is overwhelming: levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are rising," the report says. "Temperatures are going up. Springs are arriving earlier. Ice sheets are melting. Sea level is rising. The patterns of rainfall and drought are changing. Heat waves are getting worse as is extreme precipitation. The oceans are acidifying." The planet has warmed by about 1.4 degrees since the late 1800s as carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases have built up in the atmosphere from human activity. If emissions keep climbing, temperatures could rise another four to eight degrees over the century, the report says, pushing the climate beyond the range experienced in millions of years and increasing the odds of irreversible damage. The scientists did not prescribe specific solutions, "but we believe that the full suite of innovative instruments, whether it's technologies or markets or policies, should be brought to bear on this problem," said James McCarthy, a professor of biological oceanography at Harvard University who co-chaired the panel. A report last month by the National Academy of Sciences and Britain's Royal Society struck a similar tone, distilling the latest climate science into an easy-to-read series of twenty questions and answers (http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/more-resources-on-climate-change/climate-change-evidence-and-causes). The United Nations' body of climate scientists, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, will meet in Yokohama, Japan, next week to complete its latest assessment. That report (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/11/local/la-me-climate-change-20131112) will focus on the effect of climate change on nature and society, including the risks warming poses to the world economy, food, water supplies and security. http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-0319-climate-change-20140319,0,234455.story (http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-0319-climate-change-20140319,0,234455.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on March 20, 2014, 11:48:03 am (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/Ash01/Gifs/ChickenLittle_zpsaa18064d.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Ash01/media/Gifs/ChickenLittle_zpsaa18064d.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 05, 2014, 09:05:42 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/3426_DenierFlatEarther_04apr14_zpsb3ed208d.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 05, 2014, 09:07:43 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/3427_TheDenialistDodo_05apr14_zps837f4fe2.jpg) (http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf) Click on the cartoon to download the FULL IPCC “CLIMATE CHANGE 2013” report (365.29 PDF document) on global warming/climate change published on March 31st, 2014. You can (if you wish) right-click on the cartoon, then left-click on Save target as... in the menu which appears and select where you want to save the document to on your computer's hard-drive, then open it from there. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 05, 2014, 09:44:57 pm Al Gore bought his multi million dollar beach home because he wants to watch it go under water lol
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 05, 2014, 09:53:12 pm I notice that the IPCC report has pages and pages of names of the eminent scientists (with plenty of letters after their names) who peer-reviewed it. Perhaps the Denier Dodos might like to publish the pages and pages of names of the eminent scientists who have peer-reviewed the head-in-the-sand denials? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 05, 2014, 10:31:18 pm It's all about an agenda about stealing everyone's money with a tax that will change nothing.
If the powers that be wanted it,we could all have free energy because they have technology that is 50 years advanced that the stuff they show us. Sadly they are keeping it for their own advantage and for the military industrial complex. We are only getting dribs and drabs of this technology they could change the whole planet any time they ever feel like it. We are all the slaves of a stupid money chasing system that's on it's last legs and is about to fall apart. They want to keep this system going as long as they can to keep you and me in our place, that is under these mad blue bloods power and control, wake up Bruce Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 09, 2014, 12:32:55 pm From the Los Angeles Times.... Republicans abandon Americans to the calamities of climate change By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Thursday, May 08, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_2014may08a_zps9c2d4711.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-536b288d/turbine/la-na-tt-calamities-of-climate-change-20140507) OF all the ways the strident wackiness of the Republican Party is harming our country, the absolute worst is the obstinate, willfully ignorant refusal of GOP leaders to deal with the biggest existential threat facing the United States: climate change. Tuesday was the release date of a congressionally mandated status report on the effects of climate change written by more than 240 scientists, businesspeople and a range of other experts. It details for every region of the country the negative effects already being experienced due to global warming. “Climate change, once considered an issue for the distant future, has moved firmly into the present,” states the report, officially known as the National Climate Assessment. “Corn producers in Iowa, oyster growers in Washington state and maple syrup producers in Vermont are all observing climate-related changes that are outside of our recent experience.” The report goes further than ever before in asserting that more frequent floods, huge wildfires sweeping across the tinder-dry West, new infestations of insects in forests and the drought that is turning crop land and grazing areas to desert from California to Texas are happening not as part of some normal cycle, but because human activity — primarily the burning of fossil fuels — is overloading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide, driving up global temperatures and rapidly altering the Earth’s climate and weather. On the coasts, sea levels are rising as the polar ice melts. In coming years, beaches will disappear and low-lying cities will be flooded. And, in the Pacific Ocean, the scariest and least noted development is increased CO² levels that are making the water more acidic, threatening to kill off entire species. At a minimum, local, state and national governments need to prepare for the impact climate change will have on infrastructure, the environment and the economy. And, beyond planning for that nasty stuff, truly wise leaders would be taking steps to curb carbon emissions so that a very bad situation does not become an utter calamity. But don’t look for those leaders among Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said the climate assessment was just another excuse for President Obama to impose a tax on energy. “And I’m sure he’ll get loud cheers from liberal elites — from the kind of people who leave a giant carbon footprint and then lecture everybody else about low-flow toilets.” Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, a virulent critic of climate scientists, was apparently sharing a talking-points memo with McConnell when he said, “With this report the president is attempting to once again distract Americans from his unchecked regulatory agenda that is costing our nation millions of job opportunities and our ability to be energy independent." Translation of the comments of both senators: Do not impinge on the profits of the coal and oil extractors in our respective home states. McConnell rails against “elites”, but, of course, he does everything to protect his favored elites in the fossil-fuel-based energy industries while condemning farmers, ranchers, fishermen, timber workers and all the small businesses connected to their activities to a scorched-earth future. Along with the Republican servants of oil and coal, there are those who serve a constituency with a medieval mindset. Minnesota’s Representative Michele Bachmann and a large cohort of the House Republican caucus are in harmony with a narrow but fervent sector of the Christian community that believes science is a tool of the devil and that droughts and floods and wildfires are just punishments sent by God. There is nary a House Republican who accepts that climate change is a product of human activity and blessed few with that level of enlightenment among GOP senators. For now, even as the oceans turn to acid and our land burns and bakes, the last place to look for leadership is among the confederacy of dunces that is today’s Republican Party. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-calamities-of-climate-change-20140507-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-calamities-of-climate-change-20140507-story.html) “Along with the Republican servants of oil and coal, there are those who serve a constituency with a medieval mindset. Minnesota’s Representative Michele Bachmann and a large cohort of the House Republican caucus are in harmony with a narrow but fervent sector of the Christian community that believes science is a tool of the devil and that droughts and floods and wildfires are just punishments sent by God.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/TooFunny.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingPinkPanther.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ROFLMAO_Dog.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingHard.gif)(http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ItchyBugga.gif) Gotta luuuuurve those dumb flat-earthers and their stupid superstitions, eh? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/09_ROFLMAO.gif) (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/05_Laughing.gif) (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/06_ROFL.gif) (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/07_LaughOutLoud.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 12, 2014, 11:43:12 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROGTV7GkWAE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeC_J6Pk_1w Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on May 19, 2014, 07:41:37 pm Professor Bengtsson's research suggested carbon dioxide may be less damaging to the planet than feared Says he's been subjected to 'unbearable' pressure from other researchers Has warned of increasing politicisation of the once 'peaceful' science Others describe a 'poisonous atmosphere' fuelled by plotting researchers Clicky thing (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630958/I-victimised-challenging-zealots-says-Professor-Poison-plots-battle-neuter-climate-change-critics.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 21, 2014, 11:36:49 am (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5374686f/turbine/la-na-tt-marco-rubio-on-climate-20140514) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-marco-rubio-on-climate-20140514-story.html) (click on the cartoon to read more) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 22, 2014, 11:00:53 am (http://www.trbimg.com/img-537cbda1/turbine/la-na-tt-jerry-brown-climate-20140521) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-jerry-brown-climate-20140521-story.html) (click on the cartoon to read more) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 25, 2014, 08:36:18 pm Global warming is a scam and it's time to wake up... The earths temp has not gone up for the last 16 years it's getting cooler. Every summer they show the arctic ice melt and say its global warming then when the winter the ice cover comes it is record breaking huge but this goes unreported... Global warming is a lie to tax everyone and it does nothing except rob people. 129 Climate Scandals 94 climate-gates total 28 new gates 145 links to reports with details - See more at: http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/#sthash.NWPmTEvC.dpuf Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 28, 2014, 03:09:53 pm This global warming is getting me down at the moment i have never felt it this warm before Brrrrrrrr bring it on ::)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 11, 2014, 11:28:50 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/20140611_10144529sr_zps14374f7b.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10143754/Live-updates-weather-lashes-north) (click on the picture to read the news stories) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on June 11, 2014, 07:49:58 pm What we used to call storms in the 50's &60's. Used to watch the old gum trees flailing away in winds so strong that they would bend the big upright branches so far over that they would brush the ground. Ferries would run aground in Wellington harbour. Streams would break their banks and flood low lying housing.
Since then, there have been a few decades where the weather has been a bit milder, before again now cycling into the heavier weather. Apparently nowadays these storms are called catastrophes, or natural disasters, or somesuch . [I'm sure there's no agenda by NIWA and its running mates in their descriptive nomenclature?] Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: robman on June 11, 2014, 11:04:34 pm What we used to call storms in the 50's &60's. Used to watch the old gum trees flailing away in winds so strong that they would bend the big upright branches so far over that they would brush the ground. Ferries would run aground in Wellington harbour. Streams would break their banks and flood low lying housing. Short memories coupled with a growing trend to build in places nobody would have fifty years ago.Since then, there have been a few decades where the weather has been a bit milder, before again now cycling into the heavier weather. Apparently nowadays these storms are called catastrophes, or natural disasters, or somesuch . [I'm sure there's no agenda by NIWA and its running mates in their descriptive nomenclature?] Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on June 12, 2014, 09:16:29 am The post should be call the shitty weather page for climate change religion retards.
I believe its all just a load of warm air coming out of KTJ's bum(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/01_BrownEye.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 25, 2014, 09:57:38 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) An inordinate fear of no water By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 5:59PM PDT - Tuesday, June 24, 2014 IT SEEMS simple enough, even a little romantic, a little American-dreamy: I’m looking to buy some property. Northward. Woodsy. Modernrusticsexycool. Just the sweetest and most perfect getaway property ever, is all, something about an hour or two from San Francisco, up in the more lushly arboreal regions of Sonoma or Napa counties, remote enough to quell the City’s roar but not so remote to be inhaling all the off-gasses from regional meth labs or suffering any gunfire from Mendocino’s cranky pot kingpins. Is it too much to ask? A modest home-slash-retreat space on a few acres that can maybe house a handful of yoga students and/or writers for a long weekend, accessible to civilization but not so snobbish that you can’t run around naked and covered in chocolate and bourbon and dreams, and all of it on columnist/yoga teacher’s budget? (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_20140624_stilthouse_zpsf3be339a.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/files/2014/06/stilthouse.jpg) You know, like this (Tom Kundig! Call me). It might be. Obvious Problem No.1: I don’t work for Google, or Oracle, or FaceTwitChat, and therefore am not up to my flaccid fleece hoodie (http://www.sfgate.com/style/article/Are-you-hard-core-normcore-See-why-S-F-rules-5567289.php) in mountains of tech-bro cash that I can throw around like Monopoly money; I don’t even have an extra $2 million to buy a closet-sized condo in the Mission. It makes things a little rough. But I’m not bitter. Just… realistic. There’s still plenty of lovely opportunities to be had, even if prices have leapt into the near-stratosphere pretty much everywhere. Translation: from what I’ve seen so far, my modest budget limits me to places that are a little hardscrabble, a little rough-hewn, a little needful of significant upkeep of their aging septic systems, coarse landscapes and, invariably, spring-fed water. Wait, what? Right, the water. The Looming Issue. The Unexpected Fear. Water — or rather, the potential lack thereof — is something I didn’t realize I’d be quite so worried about when I started my search. But now? It’s damn near unavoidable. Problem is, I work in media. Every day I see the stories. Every day I read the reports, scan the graphs, am stunned by charts showing nearly the entire state of California — not to mention huge swaths of the world — drenched in dark purple or blood red (http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/RegionalDroughtMonitor.aspx?west), hovering somewhere between “severe drought”, “exceptional drought” and “OMG we are so f*cked”. Did you know this past May was the hottest May the world has ever known (http://mashable.com/2014/06/23/may-earths-warmest-record)? Did you read it was just 110 degrees in Mumbai… at 1:00 in the morning (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/06/11/india_s_heat_wave_is_unbearable_extreme_temperatures_in_new_delhi_mumbai.html)? Did you know global warming is no longer a preventable possibility, but a exceedingly brutal reality? The Southwest’s savage drought is just the beginning. How about the fact that California’s record drought just got worse (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-drought-worsens-across-california-20140619-story.html), given how the meager winter snowpack is gone and hence the fire danger is already at ridiculous levels? There is no more fire season, per se. It’s now just one continuous threat that never ends. The facts swirl and threaten, mingle and conflict (http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_26009266/california-drought-snowmelt-path-shows-impact-sierras-pacific). What to believe? How fearful and anxious to be, exactly? Forget skyrocketing real estate prices. Is it just too risky to buy rural property around here anymore? How long until all those wells and springs run dry? Until the big lakes no longer feed the reservoirs? Until fire danger is out of control? Did you know, just this past January, before the meager rains finally came, that 17 California counties were at risk of completely running out of water within two to four months? It’s hard to know where to look for answers. I do know, for example, that something like 85 percent of CA’s water goes to agribusiness. And much of that goes to grow grain, to feed industrial cattle, to supply fast-food addictions and excess beef consumption. The basic rule persists: Want to save the most water? Stop eating so much meat. And almonds. And California rice. And so on (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going). (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_20140624_quickie_zps1e3e918a.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/files/2014/06/quickie.png) Cute. Now go tell the farmers. Despite this fact, San Francisco just launched a “sexy” new water-saving ad campaign (http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/2014/06/23/make-it-a-quickie-s-fs-sex-themed-water-campaign), encouraging urbanites to cut back 10 percent by “making it a quickie” in the shower, which is all cute and fun until you learn that SF actually uses the least water of any major county in the state, less than a fifth of what Sacramento gulps per capita. And even Sacto’s gluttony is half of what Palm Desert sucks away (http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_25090363/california-drought-water-use-varies-widely-around-state) for all those ridiculous lawns, golf courses and pools. But all of California’s urbanites combined come nowhere near to the amount of water that goes to big agribusiness — and by and large, they have little or no regulation at all. Bottom line: even if SF cuts back 10 percent, we’re only saving what, about one percent of the total? Two? I went canoeing down the Russian River just last week, and it was still all kinds of beautiful, despite dramatically low water levels, less than a foot deep in many places, at a time of year when the river should be roaring. Burke’s Canoe Rentals, in operation for generations, says it hasn’t been this bad in 40 years. They should know. The numbers are bizarre and disorienting. Tom Stienstra, who’s been writing the San Francisco Chronicle’s Outdoors column for something like 100 years, just toured many of the state’s most popular lakes. He found most are well below normal and some are downright catastrophic, but he still managed to find 25 (out of 125) that are nearly 100 percent full (http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Multiple-lakes-in-California-are-in-good-5570106.php), pristine and gleaming and ready for summer splashes. It all has to do with controlled runoff, drainage, dams, who gets what, who steals what, who has rights and power and political leverage. How to process it all? How to properly understand the real risks, the false alarms, the ominous and seemingly imminent potential for collapse? Surely it’s not that bad. Surely we’re good for another handful of years, at least. Surely those natural springs that feed all those rural properties up north, the ones that have been flowing ceaselessly since the days of the first settlers, will still have enough to sustain a small home in the woods for a decade or three, until I’m too old to care, until I’ve long moved away to Costa Rica or Bali or Portland. Right? (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfg_d0240624_omgcalifornia_zps1cb7dbcc.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/files/2014/06/omgcalifornia.png) Not a blue state anymore. Or maybe the rains will come back. Maybe next year’s potential (mild) El Niño (http://mashable.com/2014/06/20/el-nino-extreme-weather-charts) will save California for a few more years. Maybe Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma, both essential to the region I’m most interested in and both already well below half of normal, won’t dry up completely. One thing we know for sure: It’s not advisable to live in fear. It’s a fool’s game to base your life choices around what might happen. After all, the Big One has been inevitable in SF for decades (and it still is). Human extinction, too. Las Vegas won’t last another 20 years (http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/03/las_vegas_water_conservation_it_s_a_mirage.html). There isn’t a town in America that isn’t at risk for some kind of natural catastrophe, be it hurricanes, floods, ice storms, tornadoes, tsunamis, earthquakes, locusts, snakes, reality TV, Republicans. But water? That’s a little different. That’s a little… unsolvable. Irreparable. Devastating. I don’t need a garden. I don’t need an almond grove. Maybe just an occasional shower, a tiny hot tub, something to drink in the summer to help replenish what makes up about, oh, 60 percent of the human body. Is that too much to ask? • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2014/06/24/an-inordinate-fear-of-no-water (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2014/06/24/an-inordinate-fear-of-no-water) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 19, 2014, 01:40:13 pm from The Dominion Post.... Storms on the way and the warmest winter on record By OLIVIA WANNAN and SHABNAM DASTGHEIB | 11:34AM - Saturday, 19 July 2014 NORTHLAND could be in for another bout of severe weather over the next 24 hours with MetService predicting strong easterlies, heavy rain and thunderstorms. A severe weather warning is in place with about 60mm of rain predicted between midday and 6am Sunday. This will intensify in the eastern hills from the Bay of Islands to Whangarei with about 90mm expected there. Northland is already "soggy" and Metservice forecasters said given those conditions rivers and streams would rise rapidly and flooding was likely in some areas. Last weekend's storm caused widespread damage, drove families from their homes, cut off some communities and left others without power. This weekend's heavy rain was expected to spread southwards with a possibility of severe gales around northern Auckland this evening and overnight. Easterlies could reach gusts of up to 100 km/h this afternoon before easing tonight. These winds would be followed by southerly gales gusting up to 90km/h. WARMEST WINTER ON RECORD Last year set records for high temperatures around the world, giving New Zealand its warmest winter, and Australia its hottest year since records began. The warming climate also brought with it droughts, floods and storms — the only silver lining was that Kiwis were a bit less likely to get sunburnt. Over the past two summers, the ozone hole was smaller, weaker and broke up sooner than in past years, according to the State of the Climate in 2013 report, published yesterday by the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Warmer air at the South Pole means chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) do less damage to ozone, the atmospheric material that filters out much of the UV radiation the Earth is bombarded with. Over winter, clouds form high over the poles and turn CFCs into their active, ozone-degradation forms, National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research ozone researcher Olaf Morgenstern says. These clouds last, breaking up ozone, until temperature goes above a certain threshold. "Less of that happens in a warm winter." Morgenstern said the largest ozone hole was recorded in 2006, and since then it had fluctuated in size. While not as badly affected by ozone depletion as Antarctica, New Zealand experiences higher levels of UV radiation because of the loss of the ozone layer. With peak UV intensities high, Kiwis have the highest death rate in the world from skin cancer — about 300 a year. Victoria University climatologist James Renwick, who collaborated on the report, said the conclusions showed the globe was continuing to heat up. While many Kiwis might take comfort in warmer winters, he warned such seasons came hand-in-hand with more severe storms, droughts, floods, and sea level rise. "You hear about global warming of two or three degrees and you think that's the difference between 9 o'clock in the morning and midday. But what we consider a warm year now will be considered a cold year in future." Renwick said last year's North Island drought was a warning that the agricultural industry would increasingly feel the pinch. It was adaptable — farmers might swap cold-climate crops such as apples to dry-suited pineapples and bananas — but without significant emissions changes, it was unavoidable, he said. "In one farmer's working life — if they started out today — by the time they're ready to retire, the climate will be noticeably different." The compounding effects of global warming were also seen in the destruction of last year's Typhoon Haiyan, noted in the report, when a powerful storm strengthened by warms seas met raised sea levels, Renwick said. "It's like the straw that breaks the camel's back." BY THE NUMBERS New Zealand's weather in 2013: • $1.12 billion: The economic impact of the January-April drought. • 16.5 degrees: The highest average temperature, for Dargaville. The national average was 13.4. • 39 percent: Of all New Zealand locations had their warmest winter on record. • 35.1 degrees celcius: The highest temperature for the year, recorded in Clyde, Central Otago, and Gisborne. • 20 percent: Drop annual rainfall fornorthern North Island and South Island's West Coast. • 28,000: Homes lost power in the September 10th-11th storm. • 200km/h: Gales recorded on Wellington hills during the June 20th-21st storm. • 600mm: Rain at Tekapo during June storm. The eastern South Island had four times its annual June rainfall. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/10285595/Storms-on-the-way-and-the-warmest-winter-on-record (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/10285595/Storms-on-the-way-and-the-warmest-winter-on-record) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 19, 2014, 08:46:35 pm Can you please send some global warming down here - Its currently minus 3º C and dropping. This morning the pipes were frozen - something else that didn't happen last year
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 30, 2014, 01:14:26 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... U.S. can be a global winner by going lean on energy consumption By DAVID HORSEY | 1:00PM PDT - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_20140729dh_zpsa125ba99.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-53d7ef39/turbine/la-na-tt-energy-consumption-20140729) THERE ARE endless metrics to gauge whether the United States is ahead or behind other countries. Finland does education better and cheaper. Russians and central Europeans beat Americans in alcohol consumption. But it takes only five minutes for the average American to earn enough money to buy a pint of beer — far less time than in any other nation. And, when it comes to meat consumption, only the Australians come close to matching the amount of dead animal we eat in the land of the free and the home of the obese. Whatever the measure, no one in this country really cares how we stack up against Ethiopia or Uruguay or Vanuatu. That is like comparing the Dodgers with a T-ball team. The competitor we really care about is China. The U.S. still beats China in movie-box-office revenues, number of Internet users and spending on the military, but China has leaped ahead in spewing carbon emissions into the atmosphere. That is quite a dramatic feat, given the amount of CO2 generated by the U.S. Still, Americans are far more productive than the Chinese in this arena. With a mere 5% of the planet’s population, we consume 20% of global energy, and it is the consumption of all that energy — largely produced from fossil fuels — that unleashes all that extra carbon. World Population Balance (http://www.worldpopulationbalance.org/population_energy), a group that promotes population control as a means of ensuring that human consumption does not outstrip natural resources, offers a useful observation that Americans may want to take to heart: “Next time you hear about a woman in India who has seven children, remember that she’d have to have more than 10 children to match the impact (on resources) of an American woman with just one child!” This does not imply that Americans should have no children at all, but it does mean we should do all we can to guarantee a better future for those children. That would be a future where our economy no longer relies on the burning of oil and coal; a future where the most extreme effects of climate change have been forestalled by dramatic reductions in carbon emissions. Much as the obesity epidemic is teaching us we need to eat better and smarter, we need to also go lean in energy consumption. This is not a terrible sacrifice, except for the extracting industries that want to keep us chained to 19th century energy sources. For the United States as a whole, it means moving to head of the pack in renewable resources, clean energy jobs and high technology. And if the rest of the world wants to compete with us in that race — come on, China! — it would be a very good thing for us all. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-energy-consumption-20140729-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-energy-consumption-20140729-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 30, 2014, 03:47:45 pm A pile of Horsey shit
(http://visibility911.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/horseshit.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 30, 2014, 04:09:51 pm The NON-stupid merely have to observe the numerous WARMEST on RECORD records being established during recent winters. As for the non-NON-stupid (ie....the plain STUPID)....well there is no hope for them, so better to sit back and laugh at them when the inevitable summer storms flood and/or trash their homes. Naturally, they'll be too STUPID to comprehend why their insurance premiums are rocketing skywards....(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/19_HammerHead.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 30, 2014, 09:37:21 pm Jump right in KTJ they will make room for you (http://reclaimourrepublic.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/ship-of-fools.jpg?w=640) If i wish hard and pretend the damn fools will give me money (http://reclaimourrepublic.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/gore-reuters.jpg?w=640) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 30, 2014, 09:49:21 pm Nope....nobody is going to give you money. Instead, your insurance company is going to demand higher and higher premiums as increasingly extreme weather events caused by climate change caused by average global temperature warming pushes the cost of repairing the resultant damage to property through the roof, resulting in ALL insurance companies recouping the vastly increasing amounts they are paying out. Naturally, you can cease insuring your property if you don't wish to pay those rapidly increasing premiums, but then, when the “inevitable” eventually occurs to your property during extreme weather events caused by climate change/global warming, then you'll be severely fucked when your property gets fucked over by those extreme weather events. Perhaps you could then blame god or some other similar delusion for your misfortune? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/42_Whip.gif) You could even put it down to god punishing you for something! (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/09_ROFLMAO.gif) (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/07_LaughOutLoud.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 30, 2014, 11:04:08 pm That's your god Al Gore it looks like he's taking a dump on your head (http://reclaimourrepublic.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/gore-reuters.jpg?w=640) Insurance price increases were caused by Christchurch earthquakes you dumb arse ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 31, 2014, 12:16:16 am The increase in costs caused by the Christchurch earthquakes were but a mere piffling amount compared to the HUGE increase in costs to insurance companies repairing the damage caused by the vastly increasing numbers of extreme weather events around the world year by year as the planet warms up. Open your eyes to what is going on before it swallows you. Particularly note how even mainstream economists and business people are noticing how the cost to insurance companies repairing damage from extreme weather-related events have caused insurance premium increases to go ballistic all around the world. Mainstream business, economists, and insurance companies “get it!” The truly STUPID don't get it, but they eventually will as they are overwhelmed when it happens to them, and not just once either, but eventually multiple times when the weather well & truly fucks them and their property over. In the meantime, the truly STUPID are free to keep their heads buried in the sand, if they wish, until they feel their arses being undermined, then wonder where that came from. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 31, 2014, 03:54:49 pm So your saying that we dont have any problems from the massive world wide money printing causing inflation,causing rising costs for everything,and all our rising insurance fee's are just caused by the weather and not the sun (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/MSN%20emoticons/42emhot.gif) LMAO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9HE5uQHiJ0 Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists A cold Arctic summer has led to a record increase in the ice cap, leading experts to predict a period of global cooling (http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02664/arctic_2664700b.jpg) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html Cooling is climate change hahaha it's freezing my arse off, I might bury my head in the sand to keep my ears warm lol but wait there's more lol Global Cooling is Here Evidence for Predicting Global Cooling for the Next Three Decades http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 31, 2014, 05:20:18 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/3427_TheDenialistDodo_05apr14_zps837f4fe2.jpg) (http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf) Click on the cartoon to download the FULL IPCC “CLIMATE CHANGE 2013” report (365.29 PDF document) on global warming/climate change published on March 31st, 2014. You can (if you wish) right-click on the cartoon, then left-click on Save target as... in the menu which appears and select where you want to save the document to on your computer's hard-drive, then open it from there. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 31, 2014, 05:22:25 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013aug22al_zps2b156cf1.jpg) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821,0,6254618.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 31, 2014, 05:23:32 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013nov14a_zps716be008.jpg) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-typhoon-haiyans-20131113,0,921020.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 31, 2014, 08:11:52 pm KTJ lol (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/3427_TheDenialistDodo_05apr14_zps837f4fe2.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 08, 2014, 02:50:26 pm from The Press.... Extreme weather costs insurers $135m By NICOLE MATHEWSON | 1:27PM - Monday, 08 September 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/20140908_10472913sr_zps63ea93d2.jpg) (http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1410141995/913/10472913.jpg) DESTRUCTION: A small tornado ripped Blaketown on the South Island's West Coast, damaging roofs and uprooting trees. — SARAH-JANE O'CONNOR/Fairfax NZ. THIS YEAR is shaping up to be one of the most expensive for New Zealand's insurers, with weather-related damage costing more than $135 million so far. New data released by the Insurance Council of New Zealand today showed 2014 was looking to be one of the costliest years for the country's insurers, with seven major weather events contributing to $135m worth of claims. Chief executive Tim Grafton said the final cost of the Easter storm that hit the West Coast had risen to $55.3m, up from an initial estimate of $45m. The storm was the biggest events of the year so far, resulting in about 10,000 claims and $32m worth of damage to homes, contents and vehicles. The provisional cost for the storm that hit Northland, Auckland and the Coromandel in July added another $15.1m worth of claims to insurers, with about $8m of that relating to homes and contents. “Homeowners also bore the brunt of the July storm, which highlights the importance of New Zealand's generally high levels of insurance uptake to ensure a quick economic recovery at times like these,” Grafton said. Weather-events cost insurers $175m in New Zealand last year, making 2013 the second most expensive year since 1968, the year of the Wahine disaster. 2014 WEATHER COST July 8th-11th: Severe weather in Northland, Auckland and the Coromandel (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10246343/Winds-hammer-upper-North-Island) — $15.1m (provisional). June 25th: Nelson-Tasman district wind and floods — $4.3m (provisional). June 9th-11th: Severe weather across New Zealand (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8823953/Major-storm-mop-up-gets-under-way) — $29.8m (provisional). April 17th: West Coast Easter storm (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/your-weather/9956601/Easter-storm-batters-South-Island) and floods — $55.3m. March 15th-16th: Cyclone Lusi — $3.6m. March 4th-5th: Canterbury (Floods swamp Christchurch (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/your-weather/9790499/One-in-100-year-flood-swamps-Christchurch)) and lower North Island storm — $4.8m. February 23th: Canterbury storm (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9755161/Storm-brings-hail-tornado-to-Canterbury) — $22.5m. February storm cost $5m (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/your-weather/10229340/February-storm-cost-5m-in-insurance). Related photograph galleries: • Easter storm (http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/the-press/9956617/Easter-storm) • Storm hits the north (http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/national/photos/10244282/Storm-hits-the-north) • Storm hits North Island (http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/national/videos/10247796/Storm-hits-North-Island) • Christchurch flooding — March 5th, 2014 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/the-press/photos/9791692/Christchurch-flooding-March-5-2014) • St Albans Flooding (http://www.stuff.co.nz/lightbox/the-press/videos/9793227/St-Albans-Flooding) http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/10472363/Extreme-weather-costs-insurers-135m (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/10472363/Extreme-weather-costs-insurers-135m) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 08, 2014, 02:56:27 pm We should ban weather hahahaha i nearly pissed myself (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/09_ROFLMAO.gif)
High cost is caused by the fact that our money is not worth the paper it is written on which is the same reason our food and everything else cost such a lot Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 08, 2014, 03:34:20 pm (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/08/30/1409435267461_Image_galleryImage_polar1_JPG.JPG)
Myth of Arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html#ixzz3CgwBSMT0 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 03, 2014, 11:27:35 am from The Guardian.... IPCC: rapid carbon emission cuts vital to stop severe impact of climate change Most important assessment of global warming yet warns carbon emissions must be cut sharply and soon, but UN’s IPCC says solutions are available and affordable. By DAMIAN CARRINGTON in Copenhagen | 1:23PM GMT - Sunday, 02 November 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/guardian_20141102_CarbonEmissions_zpsb2181023.jpg) (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/11/1/1414880289907/7f611d11-36f2-45e6-ac95-d2be9bf10956-460x276.jpeg) Carbon emissions, such as those from the Mehrum coal-fired power plant in Germany, will have to fall to zero to avoid catastrophic climate change, the IPCC says. — Photo: Julian Stratenschulte/Corbis. CLIMATE CHANGE is set to inflict “severe, widespread, and irreversible impacts” on people and the natural world unless carbon emissions are cut sharply and rapidly, according to the most important assessment of global warming yet published. The stark report states that climate change has already increased the risk of severe heatwaves and other extreme weather and warns of worse to come, including food shortages and violent conflicts. But it also found that ways to avoid dangerous global warming are both available and affordable. “Science has spoken. There is no ambiguity in the message,” said the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, attending what he described as the “historic” report launch. “Leaders must act. Time is not on our side.” He said that quick, decisive action would build a better and sustainable future, while inaction would be costly. Ban added a message to investors, such as pension fund managers: “Please reduce your investments in the coal- and fossil fuel-based economy and move to renewable energy.” The report, released in Copenhagen on Sunday by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (http://www.ipcc.ch), is the work of thousands of scientists and was agreed after negotiations by the world’s governments. It is the first IPCC report since 2007 to bring together all aspects of tackling climate change and for the first time states: that it is economically affordable; that carbon emissions will ultimately have to fall to zero; and that global poverty can only be reduced by halting global warming. The report also makes clear that carbon emissions, mainly from burning coal, oil and gas, are currently rising to record levels, not falling. The report comes at a critical time for international action on climate change, with the deadline for a global deal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/global-climate-talks) just over a year away. In September, 120 national leaders met at the UN in New York (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/live/2014/sep/23/un-climate-change-summit-in-new-york-live-coverage) to address climate change, while hundreds of thousands of marchers (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/live/2014/sep/21/peoples-climate-march-live) around the world demanded action. “We have the means to limit climate change,” said Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the IPCC. “The solutions are many and allow for continued economic and human development. All we need is the will to change.” Lord Nicholas Stern, a professor at the London School of Economics and the author of an influential earlier study, said the new IPCC report was the “most important assessment of climate change ever prepared” (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/02/tony-abbott-must-put-climate-change-on-the-g20-agenda-in-brisbane) and that it made plain that “further delays in tackling climate change would be dangerous and profoundly irrational”. “The reality of climate change is undeniable, and cannot be simply wished away by politicians who lack the courage to confront the scientific evidence,” he said, adding that the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people were at risk. Ed Davey, the UK energy and climate change secretary, said: “This is the most comprehensive and robust assessment ever produced. It sends a clear message: we must act on climate change now. John Kerry, the US secretary of state, said: “This is another canary in the coal mine. We can’t prevent a large scale disaster if we don’t heed this kind of hard science.” Bill McKibben, a high-profile climate campaigner with 350.org (http://350.org), said: “For scientists, conservative by nature, to use ‘serious, pervasive, and irreversible’ to describe the effects of climate falls just short of announcing that climate change will produce a zombie apocalypse plus random beheadings plus Ebola.” Breaking the power of the fossil fuel industry would not be easy, McKibben said. “But, thanks to the IPCC, no one will ever be able to say they weren’t warned.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/guardian_20141102_Singapore_zps3e0784c1.jpg) (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/11/2/1414921762280/70da5395-0e61-4f23-8822-b49e8cc463d8-460x276.jpeg) Singapore shrouded by a haze as carbon emissions soar. — Photo: Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images. The new overarching IPCC report builds on previous reports on the science (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/27/ipcc-world-dangerous-climate-change), impacts (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/31/climate-change-threat-food-security-humankind) and solutions for climate change (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/13/averting-climate-change-catastrophe-is-affordable-says-ipcc-report-un). It concludes that global warming is “unequivocal”, that humanity’s role in causing it is “clear” and that many effects will last for hundreds to thousands of years even if the planet’s rising temperature is halted. In terms of impacts, such as heatwaves and extreme rain storms causing floods, the report concludes that the effects are already being felt: “In recent decades, changes in climate have caused impacts on natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans.” Droughts, coastal storm surges from the rising oceans and wildlife extinctions on land and in the seas will all worsen unless emissions are cut, the report states. This will have knock-on effects, according to the IPCC: “Climate change is projected to undermine food security.” The report also found the risk of wars could increase: “Climate change can indirectly increase risks of violent conflicts by amplifying well-documented drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks.” Two-thirds of all the emissions permissible if dangerous climate change is to be avoided have already been pumped into the atmosphere, the IPPC found. The lowest cost route to stopping dangerous warming would be for emissions to peak by 2020 – an extremely challenging goal — and then fall to zero later this century. The report calculates that to prevent dangerous climate change, investment in low-carbon electricity and energy efficiency (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/12/ipcc-report-world-must-switch-clean-sources-energy) will have to rise by several hundred billion dollars a year before 2030. But it also found that delaying significant emission cuts to 2030 puts up the cost of reducing carbon dioxide by almost 50%, partly because dirty power stations would have to be closed early. “If you wait, you also have to do more difficult and expensive things,” said Jim Skea, a professor at Imperial College London and an IPCC working group vice-chair. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/guardian_20141102_JulietteGeorgia_zps88d2a22f.jpg) (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/11/2/1414922068127/565b03d2-cbad-4752-b52d-0ed712e65613-460x276.jpeg) The coal-fired Scherer plant in operation in Juliette, Georgia. — Photo: John Amis/Associated Press. Tackling climate change need only trim economic growth rates by a tiny fraction (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/13/averting-climate-change-catastrophe-is-affordable-says-ipcc-report-un), the IPCC states, and may actually improve growth by providing other benefits, such as cutting health-damaging air pollution. Carbon capture and storage (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/carbon-capture-and-storage) (CCS) — the nascent technology (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/01/canada-switches-on-worlds-first-carbon-capture-power-plant) which aims to bury CO² underground — is deemed extremely important by the IPPC. It estimates that the cost of the big emissions cuts required would more than double without CCS. Pachauri said: “With CCS it is entirely possible for fossil fuels to continue to be used on a large scale.” The focus on CCS is not because the technology has advanced a great deal in recent years, said Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, a professor at the Université Catholique de Louvain in Belgium and vice-chair of the IPCC, but because emissions have continued to increase so quickly. “We have emitted so much more, so we have to clean up more later”, he said. Linking CCS to the burning of wood and other plant fuels (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26994746) would reduce atmospheric CO² levels because the carbon they contain is sucked from the air as they grow. But van Ypersele said the IPCC report also states “very honestly and fairly” that there are risks to this approach, such as conflicts with food security. In contrast to the importance the IPCC gives to CCS, abandoning nuclear power or deploying only limited wind or solar power increases the cost of emission cuts by just 6-7%. The report also states that behavioural changes, such as dietary changes that could involve eating less meat, can have a role in cutting emissions. As part of setting out how the world’s nations can cut emissions effectively, the IPCC report gives prominence to ethical considerations. “[Carbon emission cuts] and adaptation raise issues of equity, justice, and fairness,” says the report. “The evidence suggests that outcomes seen as equitable can lead to more effective [international] cooperation.” These issues are central to the global climate change negotiations and their inclusion in the report was welcomed by campaigners, as was the statement that adapting countries and coastlines to cope with global warming cannot by itself avert serious impacts. “Rich governments must stop making empty promises and come up with the cash so the poorest do not have to foot the bill for the lifestyles of the wealthy,” said Harjeet Singh, from ActionAid. The statement that carbon emissions must fall to zero was “gamechanging”, according to Kaisa Kosonen, from Greenpeace. “We can still limit warming to 2°C, or even 1.5°C or less even, [but] we need to phase out emissions,” she said. Unlike CCS, which is yet to be proven commercially, she said renewable energy was falling rapidly in cost. Sam Smith, from WWF, said: “The big change in this report is that it shows fighting climate change is not going to cripple economies and that it is essential to bringing people out of poverty. What is needed now is concerted political action.” The rapid response of politicians to the recent global financial crisis showed, according to Smith, that “they could act quickly and at scale if they are sufficiently motivated”. Michel Jarraud, secretary general of the World Meteorological Organisation, said the much greater certainty expressed in the new IPCC report would give international climate talks a better chance than those which failed in 2009. “Ignorance can no longer be an excuse for no action,” he said. Observers played down the moves made by some countries with large fossil fuel reserves to weaken the language of the draft IPCC report written by scientists and seen by the Guardian, saying the final report was conservative but strong. However, the statement that “climate change is expected to lead to increases in ill-health in many regions, including greater likelihood of death” was deleted in the final report, along with criticism that politicians sometimes “engage in short-term thinking and are biased toward the status quo”. Click the links to download the reports: • CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 — Synthesis Report (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_LONGERREPORT.pdf) (3.4MB PDF) • CLIMATE CHANGE 2013 — The Physical Science Basis (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf) (375.0MB PDF) • CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 — Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability … Part A: Global and Sectorial Aspects (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg2/WGIIAR5-PartA_FINAL.pdf) 98.0(MB PDF) • CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 — Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability … Part B: Regional Aspects (http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg2/WGIIAR5-PartB_FINAL.pdf) (78.0MB PDF) • CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 — Mitigation of Climate Change (http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/) (links to download individual chapters) http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/02/rapid-carbon-emission-cuts-severe-impact-climate-change-ipcc-report (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/02/rapid-carbon-emission-cuts-severe-impact-climate-change-ipcc-report) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 05, 2014, 10:01:25 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/20141105_ExcitementKiller_10702053sr_zps9fb7cfc5.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/news/10698753/All-talk-no-action-on-climate-change) click on the cartoon Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2014, 02:23:35 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Right wing freaks out over China-U.S. climate change deal By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Thursday, November 13, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_20141113dh_zps8d1343e0.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-54642f80/turbine/la-na-tt-chinaus-climate-deal-20141112) ABOUT five seconds after the announcement came from Beijing that the United States and China had reached an unexpected and ambitious climate change agreement, Republicans in Washington declared it the worst deal since the Trojans accepted a big wooden horse from the Greeks. Climate scientists had a different reaction. If China and the U.S. actually reach the goals to which they are committing, and if other nations follow their lead, climate experts are saying the world will have made a huge leap toward averting the worst effects of rising global temperatures. You would think everyone would be cheering, but the boos and catcalls from the right have just begun. Throughout his campaign for reelection, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell said it would be foolhardy to raise carbon dioxide emissions standards on American companies as long as China, the world’s biggest generator of greenhouse gases, was sticking to business as usual. But now that China has agreed to take a big step away from coal as its primary fuel source, McConnell still is not satisfied and stands ready to fight implementation of the new agreement once he becomes Senate majority leader in January. In McConnell’s case, it is transparently obvious that his prime motivation is to protect his state’s coal industry. If that industry happens to be contributing to shifts in climate that threaten civilization, that’s tough luck. McConnell is far more concerned about the profits of the energy industries that finance his, and his party’s, campaigns. The Senate’s chief climate change denier, Oklahoma Senator James M. Inhofe, also damned the China deal, branding it a “nonbinding charade”. The rest of the right wing chimed in with similar sentiments, asserting that the Chinese had bamboozled President Obama. Because there are no hard and fast requirements in the deal, just aspirational goals, the critics assert that the sneaky Chinese will do nothing while Obama’s reckless and unnecessary new emissions standards wreck the U.S. economy and turn the nation into an impoverished vassal of Beijing. Besides ignoring the positive bump the American economy would receive from turning to renewable energy sources, the conservatives’ argument misses a very big factor driving China’s sudden willingness to do something about the bad stuff their factories and cars are spewing into the atmosphere. The pollution clouding Chinese cities is a political danger to the regime. China’s President Xi Jinping has agreed to cap emissions and move 20% of the country’s energy consumption to alternative fuels by 2030, not to please the international community or to pull a fast one on Americans, but to avoid a revolt in his own smog-choked country. It’s called self-interest. Unfortunately, in the United States, too many politicians interpret self-interest as whatever it is that will get them re-elected. The true self-interest of our nation is far larger. It is to keep heartland farms from drying up, to avert extreme sea level rises that would flood coastal cities and to avoid increasingly intense and destructive wildfires, tornadoes, blizzards, floods and hurricanes — all the calamities that will come with climate change. Anyone who actually cares about America — and the future American economy — would welcome the deal with China as a step in the right direction and would be engaged in making sure it is fully implemented by both countries. Instead, we have pseudo-patriots in Congress and the conservative media doing what they do best: spreading paranoia and protecting the interests of those who are getting rich today by forsaking generations of Americans to come. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-chinaus-climate-deal-20141112-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-chinaus-climate-deal-20141112-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on November 15, 2014, 09:08:17 am http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/20157286 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 27, 2014, 10:07:36 am from the Los Angeles Times.... California drought puts a chill on L.A. pool time By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_20141126dh_zps2af9b6d7.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5475aaab/turbine/la-na-tt-california-drought-20141126) AS the East Coast gets pummeled with rain and heavy snow, messing up Thanksgiving plans for thousands of travelers, folks here in Southern California are looking forward to a Turkey Day with temperatures in the 80s. Please pass the sunblock and cranberry sauce. Enjoying day after day of nice weather makes a person feel somewhat disconnected from the meteorological travails that beset the rest of the country. Last week, when icy air and heaps of snow blasted most of the U.S., it was still possible to walk around in shorts and a T-shirt here in L.A. — and worry about a sunburn. Newscasters kept noting that there were freezing temperatures in all 50 states, but, in California, that was in the Sierras, not in the city. Not having lived in Los Angeles until recently, I now understand why Angelenos are generally so good-natured and laid back. Who wouldn’t be if almost every day can be a beach day? When I tell people here I moved down from Seattle, a look of pity crosses their faces and they ask how I ever survived all the rain. When I note that, for three or four months of the year, Seattle is often as dry and sunny as San Diego, the fact doesn’t even register. For them, Seattle equals rain. Chicago equals cold wind. Boston equals icy winters. New York equals humid, muggy summers. And everywhere else is just a wasteland of tornadoes, ticks and hurricanes. Los Angeles equals sunshine. Yet, not all is serene in La La Land. There is way too much of a good thing. This year has been the hottest on record in California. According to the National Drought Mitigation Center, every area of the state is stuck in an extended drought, with about two-thirds of the state experiencing “exceptional drought”, the highest level. The lack of rain is slamming California’s agriculture industry and, as a result, food prices are likely to shoot up all over the country. Already, the drought has cost the state more than $2 billion and has killed more than 17,000 jobs, according to a study done at the UC Davis. As the state dries up, wildfire “season” is becoming a misnomer. Fire danger is a near constant. All those additional fires are not only burning the land, they are polluting the air. Wetter weather may come, but it is most likely to arrive as torrential rains that create mudslides yet do little to replenish groundwater, rivers and snowpack. UC Davis researchers do not expect the drought to end this year or next year. In fact, they predict it will stretch into 2016. This means water is going to get even more scarce. There will be a lot less for irrigation, for drinking, for taking showers, for watering golf courses, for washing cars, not to mention the low river levels that will inhibit salmon from swimming out to sea. In various parts of the state, mandatory restrictions on consumption have been put in place to conserve water supplies. In a few remote towns in Central California, though, it is already too late. Wells have gone completely dry and residents drive to towns miles away to get a ration of water to take back home. All of this sends a little metaphorical gray cloud into the sunny sky. When pondering the fate of those poor schmucks back in Buffalo with a mountain of melting snow covering their front lawns, it’s no longer easy to feel smug. Sure, lying back and relaxing in a lounge chair in the sunshine is better than shoveling slush, but it’s not quite the same when the shimmering swimming pool a few steps away only reminds you it may need to be drained one day so your family will have something to drink. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-california-drought-20141126-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-california-drought-20141126-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on November 27, 2014, 02:06:25 pm ...."but it’s not quite the same when the shimmering swimming pool a few steps away only reminds you it may need to be drained one day so your family will have something to drink."
...and which day exactly is that ;) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 13, 2014, 04:55:21 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202014/20141213_10925004sr_zpsd855e48a.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/64120759/Deadly-storm-buries-houses-washes-away-roads) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 13, 2014, 08:12:56 pm Ah..so the conspiracy theorists are blaming every storm on climate change now....probably hard to prove..buy hey..lets not let the FACTS get in the way of a good conspiracy theory ;)...the reasoning is up to your usual standard...there aint any ::)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 15, 2014, 06:20:40 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/20141210_SaveThePlanet_10900023sr_zps21925ec4.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 15, 2014, 01:03:40 pm ...Finally the 194 nations at the UN climate talks agree ;)...to try and find an agreement next year..... :o 14 December 2014 UN members agree deal at Lima climate talks COMMENTS (1065) A dried up irrigation reservoir in the Yala national park in Sri Lanka - 11 September 2014 Developing countries have accused wealthier nations of failing to take responsibility for climate change Continue reading the main story United Nations members have reached an agreement on how countries should tackle climate change. Delegates have approved a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted to a summit next year. Differences over the draft text caused the two-week talks in Lima, Peru, to overrun by two days. Environmental groups said the deal was an ineffectual compromise, but the EU said it was a step towards achieving a global climate deal next year in Paris. The talks proved difficult because of divisions between rich and poor countries over how to spread the burden of pledges to cut carbon emissions. 'Not perfect' The agreement was adopted hours after a previous draft was rejected by developing countries, who accused rich nations of shirking their responsibilities to fight global warming and pay for its impacts. Peru's environment minister, Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, who chaired the summit, told reporters: "As a text it's not perfect, but it includes the positions of the parties." Miguel Arias Canete, EU Commissioner for Climate Action and Energy, said the EU had wanted a more ambitious outcome but he still believed that "we are on track to agree a global deal" at a summit in Paris, France, next year. UK climate change minister Ed Davey said: "I am not going to say it will be a walk in the park in Paris." He described the deal as "a really important step" on the road to Paris. "That's when the real deal has to be done." Grey line Analysis: Matt McGrath, BBC News, Lima Peruvian environment minister Manuel Pulgar-Vidal shakes hands with his colleagues after sealing an agreement in Lima - 13 December 2014 There was a good deal of optimism at the start of these talks as the recent emissions agreement between the US and China was seen as an historic breakthrough. But that good spirit seemed to evaporate in two weeks of intense wrangling between rich and poor here in Lima. It ended in a compromise that some participants believe keeps the world on track to reach a new global treaty by the end of next year. None of the 194 countries attending the talks walked away with everything they wanted, but everybody got something. As well as pledges and finance, the agreement points towards a new classification of nations. Rather than just being divided into rich and poor, the text attempts to reflects the more complex world of today, where the bulk of emissions originate in developing countries. While progress in Lima was limited, and many decisions were simply postponed, the fact that 194 nations assented to this document means there is still momentum for a deal in Paris. Much tougher tests lie ahead. Climate deal heralds historic shift Grey line A delegate rests during a break at the UN climate change talks in Lima - 13 December 2014 The talks, which began on 1 December, had been due to end on Friday but ran over into the weekend The final draft is said to have alleviated those concerns with by saying countries have "common but differentiated responsibilities". "We've got what we wanted," Indian environment minister Prakash Javedekar told reporters, saying the document preserved the notion that richer nations had to lead the way in making cuts in emissions. It also restored a promise to poorer countries that a "loss and damage" scheme would be established to help them cope with the financial implications of rising temperatures. However, it weakened language on national pledges, saying countries "may" instead of "shall" include quantifiable information showing how they intend to meet their emissions targets. The agreed document calls for: An "ambitious agreement" in 2015 that reflects "differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities" of each nation Developed countries to provide financial support to "vulnerable" developing nations National pledges to be submitted by the first quarter of 2015 by those states "ready to do so" Countries to set targets that go beyond their "current undertaking" The UN climate change body to report back on the national pledges in November 2015 Environmental groups were scathing in their response to the document, saying the proposals were nowhere need drastic enough. Sam Smith, chief of climate policy for the environmental group WWF, said: "The text went from weak to weaker to weakest and it's very weak indeed." Jagoda Munic, chairperson of Friends of the Earth International, said fears the talks would fail to deliver "a fair and ambitious outcome" had been proven "tragically accurate". http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30468048 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2014, 01:12:37 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202014/20141217_MajorBreakThrough_10942835sr_zps09864d68.jpg) (http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1418727063/835/10942835.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 17, 2014, 08:38:38 pm Brian Fallow: Lima's main gain - We're all in it together
5:00 AM Tuesday Dec 16, 2014 Latest climate change talks not a train wreck this time but most of the decisions have been put off till next year. At least the global climate change conference at Lima was not a train wreck, like Copenhagen five years ago. But most of the divisive issues which generated so much rancour during the talks have been bulldozed forward into 2015. Achieving an agreement in Paris in a year's time which gives us a fighting chance of not rendering the planet inhospitable to us as a species remains a daunting challenge. One important principle was preserved at Lima. The agreement to come for the post-2020 period will be "applicable to all parties" to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, that is to most countries in the world. That is a vital step away from the 22-year-old dogma which has bedevilled the geopolitics of climate change: that the world can be neatly divided into developed countries, which must bear all the cost of curbing emissions, and the rest of the world which can concentrate on economic development. What is equally clear is that the form of the commitments countries will undertake - "independent nationally determined contributions" in the jargon - will vary widely in their nature and level of ambition. And Lima was unable to agree that the offers countries tabled have to be in a form that makes them able to be compared as to time-frames and base years or scope and coverage, or why they consider them fair and ambitious given their national circumstances. Climate Change Minister Tim Groser argues that abandoning the top-down uniformity of the Kyoto Protocol is a geopolitical necessity which reflects entirely different policy environments among even the big three emitters, China, the United States and Europe. China is prepared to commit to its emissions peaking before 2030, but not to a specific level, and to serious targets for emissions-free electricity generation. The US Congress will not agree to be legally bound to an agreement if China is not, but the Administration has offered a target which represents a significant reduction in emissions. Europe continues to lead the pack with an offer to reduce emissions to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2030. Groser says that at this point the focus needs to be on a wide-ranging agreement covering say 80 per cent of global emissions rather than how far the aggregate pledges fall short of what scientists say is needed to avoid dangerous climate change - lest the best be the enemy of the good. The Lima accord also agrees post-2020 pledges will represent progress beyond what countries have already undertaken to do. That suggests New Zealand's target will have to better the 5 per cent reduction from 1990 levels which is our commitment for the period out to 2020. Trouble is, actual emissions are running 25 per cent above 1990 levels and climbing, unconstrained by any meaningful carbon price from the emissions trading scheme. The post-1989 "Kyoto" forests which have generated credits to offset that emissions growth will have flipped from being a net sink to a net source of emissions by the 2020s. It is difficult to make big gains from decarbonising electricity generation when three-quarters of it is renewable already. And nearly half of national emissions arise from the bodily functions of livestock, which are harder to redesign than the propulsion systems of vehicles, for example. So coming up with a "respectable" target for the post-2020 period, as the Government must before May next year, will be challenging, Groser says, especially as the key legally binding ground rules for the international agreement, covering for example access to international trading and accounting for land use change and forestry, have yet to be agreed. - NZ Herald Read more by Brian Fallow Email Brian Fallow Save Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 22, 2014, 05:10:33 pm • Our stormy year came at a massive cost (http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/our-stormy-year-came-massive-cost-6210644) • 12 ways to deal with a climate change denier — the BBQ guide (http://theconversation.com/12-ways-to-deal-with-a-climate-change-denier-the-bbq-guide-26291) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 22, 2014, 05:23:07 pm Watchout out theres a squall coming through....bloody global warming ;)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 08, 2015, 10:11:44 pm Watchout out theres a squall coming through....bloody global warming ;) There are a shitload of scientists who can produce reports and studies proving that global warming (and the resultant climate change) is happening. And their reports and studies are peer-reviewed. The funny thing is that the denialists can only produce a few dodgy scientists who have been discredited by the mainstream scientific community. Yet the denialists keep on desperately clutching at straws. Talk about idiots! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 08, 2015, 10:11:51 pm from Radio New Zealand.... New Zealand glaciers retreating rapidly RNZ NEWS | 9:50AM - Tuesday, 06 January 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Global%20Warming%20Articles%20Pix/20150106_FranzJosefGlacier_zps3e212bad.jpg) (http://www.radionz.co.nz/assets/news/30905/four_col_glacier_very.jpg) Franz Josef Glacier. — Photo: AFP. SCIENTISTS say it could take hundreds of years to reverse any of the damage to the Fox and Franz Josef Glaciers brought on by climate change. The West Coast attractions had retreated rapidly over the last five years, and tour-operators could no longer take punters through on foot. Until a couple of years ago people could walk straight up to the Franz Josef Glacier, and before April last year it was the same on Fox Glacier. The ice had been melting since 2008, following decades of steady growth. But it was now back to historic lows and that meant it was too far, and too dangerous to make the trip by foot. Chief executive of Fox Glacier Guiding Rob Jewell said that meant fewer people taking tours. “We've had a reduction in our revenue. Obviously the flying only access is a higher price point and some travellers budgets can't quite stretch that far,” he said. “That's certainly meant that we've seen a bit of a reduction in numbers.” Glaciologist at Victoria University's Antarctic Research Centre Andrew Mackintosh said on current predictions the glaciers would become even smaller, harder to get to and less spectacular. He said glaciers naturally advanced and retreated but they were now doing so faster — and humans were at least in part to blame. “That includes a natural component, and it includes a human component. Answering that question is never completely straightforward but the changes we've seen recently have been so large and unprecedented that it's very likely it's had a ... human element.” Another glaciologist at the Research Centre Brian Anderson agreed things were not looking good for the two West Coast glaciers. He said undoing the damage caused by humans would be a hard task. “There will be short-lived readvances because that's what [glaciers] do, but overall it's going to retreat,” he said. “Certainly in this century we're not going to be able to pull it back. It's going to take a sustained effort over quite a few centuries ... to bring the temperature back to the level it has been in the last century.” Department of Conservation's conservation services manager for the area Wayne Costello said those tourists heading in for a closer look could also learn an important lesson. “It's a place that's a really visible example for us to look at what is happening as a result of humans looking at the planet,” he said. “Maybe it's a way in which we can engage with your everyday person to say, well we have to think about how we're living our lives differently.” Mr Jewell said he was hopeful the tide would turn for the glacier and they would be able to get groups through on foot again in the future. But glaciologists said on current trends, the helicopter tours were likely to be a long-term fixture. Radio NZ Summer Report audio: • It could take centuries to reverse damage to NZ glaciers (http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/summerreport/audio/20163038/it-could-take-centuries-to-reverse-damage-to-nz-glaciers) Related news stories: • Glaciers in Andes shrinking (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/126321/glaciers-in-andes-shrinking) • Glacier landings look set to increase (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/226579/glacier-landings-look-set-to-increase) • Glacier tourism could be under threat (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/244075/glacier-tourism-could-be-under-threat) • West Antarctic glaciers melting — NASA (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/244245/west-antarctic-glaciers-melting-nasa) http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/263094/nz-glaciers-retreating-rapidly (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/263094/nz-glaciers-retreating-rapidly) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 09, 2015, 09:21:58 am Deep sea waves focus of global study NZ Newswire January 7, 2015, 10:50 pm International researchers are coming together to investigate a powerful force that lurks in the Tasman Sea. But there are no jaws, teeth, tentacles or stingers involved, and this powerful giant exists hundreds of metres below the surface. It's known to scientists as a sub-surface wave, and it's impact on the global climate and marine ecosystem is significant, Hobart-based biological oceanographer Peter Strutton says. "The waves that happen deep in the ocean can be really large: 100 metres or more," the University of Tasmania associate professor told AAP. "And the middle of the Tasman Sea is a global hot spot with its strong tides and ridge along the sea floor, like a mountain ridge." It means that in the waters between New Zealand and Tasmania, waves gather pace and strength during a journey lasting about four days and covering 1400km before slamming into a shelf off the island state's east coast. Dr Strutton will be one of more than 60 scientists on two ships bound for the heart of Tasman Sea where they will make 15 moorings and monitor the waves and where the energy goes once they break. "We will run a line from the bottom to the surface and measure things like water density and salinity as it passes," he said. "This study is going to help us understand how these internal waves bring nutrients from the ocean floor and stimulate activity by providing food for plankton." The measurements will also provide a better understanding of how cold, low-density water from the depths comes to the surface in an essential ecological mixing process that moderates oceanic water temperature and takes carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. "Understanding these processes is a critical step in predicting our climate," Dr Strutton said. Sub-surface waves exist across the globe and researchers from five Australian universities are involved in the study, as well as others from the United States. The first of two US vessels - the Roger Revelle and Falkor - will set off from Hobart on Saturday to begin the research. https://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/25924789/deep-sea-waves-focus-of-global-study/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ...Wave Patterns[edit] Various subsurface currents conflict at times, causing bizarre wave patterns. One of the most noticeable of these is the Maelstrom. The word is derived from Nordic words meaning to grind and stream. Essentially, the maelstrom is a large, very powerful whirlpool, a large swirling body of water being drawn down and inward toward its center. This is usually the result of tidal currents. Subsurface currents have a large effect on life on earth. They flow beneath the surface of the water, allowing them to be relatively free of external influence. Thus, they function like clockwork, providing nutrient transportation, water transfer, etc., as well as affecting the ocean floor and submarine processes. ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsurface_currents Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 17, 2015, 08:54:11 am (http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/images/pics6/cartoon-global-cooling-future.png)
(http://www.iceagenow.com/Cooling_is_the_New_Warming.png) (http://www.iceagenow.com/IceAgeEnding.jpg) Global-warming Hoax Unraveling — Someone Tell Obama There’s one kind of disaster that will most assuredly never happen: The one everybody is worried about. History teaches this. While Winston Churchill warned of Adolf Hitler’s dangerousness, others pooh-poohed the matter and few foresaw WWII. Prior to then, how many expected the Great Depression? Did any Pompeians predict the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 A.D.? How many Romans worried about the Goths sacking the Eternal City in 410? Did medieval Europeans foresee the Black Death disaster of the 14th century? You can go right down the list. This brings us to what everyone is worried about today: global-war…er…climate chan…uh…. What’s the latest iteration? Ah, yes, “global climate disruption.” However they change the name, though, they can’t change a simple fact: The global-warming agenda is increasingly being revealed for the scam it is. There was the Climategate scandal of 2009, in which “scientists” at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit were conspiring to suppress data that contradicted their global-warming agenda; there was the British judge who ruled, in a lawsuit to ban Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth from UK government schools, that the movie contained nine significant errors; there was the revelation that the claim that 97 percent of scientists agreed with the AGW (man-caused global warming) thesis was bunk. Now a mainstream publication, the UK’s Telegraph, has published a scathing denunciation of warmist propaganda. Citing information from Steven Goddard’s blog Real Science, Christopher Booker writes: Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s] US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century. Booker also asks what it means when a theory has to be promoted with continual “fudging” of the data. Is it science at all? Perhaps, however, he has those English manners that preclude one from saying what I, in my colonial brashness, will put bluntly: these so-called scientists aren’t merely “fudging.” They’re lying. If they were Pinocchio, their collective nose would be the size of our national debt. If they were shepherds, they could be a whole boys’ school that cried wolf. Despite this, Western pseudo-elites are still running around like Chicken Little. For example, while Iraq becomes an Islamic state, Russia moves on Ukraine, China angles to be the world’s hegemon, and the United States is in moral freefall, Barack Obama gives a commencement speech at the University of California, Irvine, condemning climate-change “deniers” (translation: people in touch with reality). He also recently commended New Zealand prime minister John Key for being a fellow Chicken Little in his “crusade” against climate change, and Obama’s EPA continues to unconstitutionally enforce regulations designed to reduce carbon emissions, even though calling CO2 “carbon” is a lot like calling H2O “hydrogen.” Of course, Obama and Key have much company in their hen house. Former treasury secretary Hank Paulson, for instance, recently wrote the following in the New York Times (hat tip: Thomas Lifson): We’re staring down a climate bubble that poses enormous risks to both our environment and economy. The warning signs are clear and growing more urgent as the risks go unchecked. This is a crisis we can’t afford to ignore. I feel as if I’m watching as we fly in slow motion on a collision course toward a giant mountain. We can see the crash coming, and yet we’re sitting on our hands rather than altering course. We need to act now. Yes, act now, think later. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain! The irony of this is that even if the AGW thesis were correct, there would be little we could do about it. First, China and India — which together boast 36 percent of the world’s population — are rapidly building coal-fired power plants. Any Western reduction in CO2 will be dwarfed by these behemoths’ increases alone. Add to this other CO2-happy developing nations and Russia, and the fruitlessness of the uniquely Western climate-change obsession becomes apparent. Second, there are scientists who believe that AGW is a reality, but said long ago that it was too late to do anything about it, anyway. So are we cooked? Now the good news. Whatever the cause, there’s no reason to be afraid of the big bad climate change. Not if it’s in the direction of rising mercury, that is. Contrary to the doom-and-gloom rhetoric, it seems a warmer planet’s benefits far outweigh its downsides. Like eating? Note that greater temperatures probably mean more arable land. In addition, higher CO2 levels increase plant yields 30-plus percent across species; this begets better crops. This is why botanists pump the gas into their greenhouses, mind you. It’s why the age of the dinosaurs was one of dense foliage — CO2 levels were five to 10 times what they are today. The gas is not a pollutant. It’s plant food. Moreover, as the aforementioned Jurassic CO2 levels indicate, climate change is not unprecedented. There was a time when the waters surrounding Florida were 300 feet lower and another when they were 100 feet higher. The Earth was completely or almost completely covered with snow and ice during the Cryogenian period while during another time the snow and ice were virtually gone. There have been four or five major ice ages and numerous minor ones; there are 100,000-year glacial periods followed by 12,000-year interglacials (approximations) and 1,500-year cycles of heating and cooling within them. Climate is no more stable than are people. Speaking of which, there’s a philosophical point to be made here. The liberal climate alarmists are the first to say that humans are just animals, just part of nature like an amoeba. If this is true, however, wouldn’t we then just be another “natural” factor in naturally occurring climate change? At most, though, we appear a negligible factor. This raises a question: Why won’t Obama, Gore, Paulson, and the other Chicken Littles fly the coop of climate fear? One reason is that everyone needs something to give his life meaning, and, absent true faith, an environmental crusade in Gaia’s name perhaps best fits the bill. This means that, for some, leaving the Church of Warmism is like a jihadist leaving Islam. Related to this is that when you’ve devoted a good part of your life and your passion and energy to a cause, it’s hard to admit you’re wrong. But there’s another reason. Many individuals and companies, such as those producing ethanol, are profiting via doomsday prophesying. For instance, Al Gore — perhaps one of history’s most shameless con-men — “could become [the] world's first carbon billionaire,” reported The Telegraph in 2009. This, not to mention all the climate-change grants governments give malleable scientists for “research.” What this means is that, despite its unraveling, the climate-change con will be around for a while longer. But driven by a combination of naiveté (gullible followers), envy, and cash, at least we can say that the “green” movement has certainly earned its name http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/18555-global-warming-hoax-unraveling-someone-tell-obama Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 18, 2015, 10:51:39 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202015/20150116_LeavingTheHolocene_zps4ecf313d.jpg) (https://twitter.com/davpope/status/556245505341026304/photo/1) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 18, 2015, 04:08:06 pm Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record... but we're only 38% sure we were right
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2915061/Nasa-climate-scientists-said-2014-warmest-year-record-38-sure-right.html#ixzz3P99DGwjK Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 24, 2015, 10:53:07 am http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2922553/Global-warming-believers-like-hysterical-cult-MIT-scientist-compares-climate-alarmists-religious-fanatics.html?ito=social-facebook
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 24, 2015, 11:45:53 am • As “Spaceship Earth” approaches the end of the Holocene Age (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,14543.0.html) (A related thread at XNC2) Who cares, eh? You and I will be dead when everything turns to shit, and it will only be your grandchildren and great-grandchildren who will suffer the consequences of the current generation's “head in the sand” attitude. The ULTIMATE selfishness towards the following generations, eh? “I'm alright Jack, because I'll be dead soon!” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 24, 2015, 12:25:05 pm http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2922553/Global-warming-believers-like-hysterical-cult-MIT-scientist-compares-climate-alarmists-religious-fanatics.html?ito=social-facebook (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/rolleyes.gif) The Weekly Standard's Lindzen puff piece exemplifies the conservative media's climate failures The Weekly Standard suggests we should gamble our future on the climate scientist who's been the wrongest, longest http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jan/06/climate-change-climate-change-scepticism Has The Guardian been hacked? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 24, 2015, 01:08:18 pm There are all sorts of parallels really - For instance, take David Bain, who is topical at the moment. So much hysteria and flim-flam was raised over the years by Karam and his mob, that the result of his last trial was never in doubt. Due to all that smoke and mirrors, no-one could in all conscience state that they were sure beyond al reasonable doubt.
Same with human induced climate change. No thinking person would doubt or deny that climate change occurs - its been occurring for millennia, but reputations have been put on the line, both political and private, university budgets and industries rely on the scaremongering of the warmalists. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 24, 2015, 01:20:09 pm Oh well....throw your grandchildren and great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren to the dogs then. You won't care....you will be long dead (as will I) when life really turns to custard because of humans abusing the planet. Who cares, eh? Shit happens! (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix%202014/latimes_20141113dh_zps8d1343e0.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-54642f80/turbine/la-na-tt-chinaus-climate-deal-20141112) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 24, 2015, 03:45:50 pm You're having a laugh...
Your doomsday keeps on extending itself into the future. the hockey stick that foresaw death and destruction a decade back, the oceans that were going to riea hundred feet a by the turn of the millennium, The NIWA instruments that were moved to present more favourable data Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 24, 2015, 05:32:18 pm (https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/1499660_10152135878750281_1122299094_n.jpg?oh=5e10f764d5946be8d85b34194e0a74d3&oe=552D8CE3&__gda__=1433258825_0f0d5de49ed455440241cb4403957338)
The New York Times' Global Warming Hysteria Ignores 17 Years Of Flat Global Temperatures The New York Times feverishly reported on August 10 that the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is about to issue another scary climate report. Dismissing the recent 17 years or so of flat global temperatures, the IPCC will assert that: “It is extremely likely that human influence on climate caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010.” The draft report also says “There is high confidence that this has warmed the ocean, melted snow and ice, raised global mean sea level and changed some climate extremes in the second half of the 20th century.” And whereas the IPCC’s previous report modestly claimed a 90% chance that human activities were the cause, they’re now ratcheting up their confidence level to 95%. Obviously then, they must have some very strong evidence to back this amplified bluster. Right? Well, then again, maybe not so much after all. What Evidence Exists of Unnatural Recent Global Warming? Cyclical, abrupt and dramatic global and regional temperature fluctuations have occurred over millions of years. Many natural factors are known to contribute to these changes, although even the most sophisticated climate models and theories they are based on cannot predict the timing, scale (either up or down), or future impacts- much less the marginal contributions of various human influences. While global warming has been trumpeted as an epic climate change crisis with human-produced CO2, a trace atmospheric “greenhouse gas” branded as a primary culprit and endangering “pollutant,” remember that throughout earlier periods of Earth’s history CO2 levels have been between four and eighteen times higher than now, with temperature changes preceding, not following atmospheric CO2 changes. Has there been “recent” warming? Yes, the global climate has definitely warmed since the Little Ice Age (about 1400-1700 AD), and it will likely continue to warm for another 200-300 years, in fits and starts, towards a max temp roughly matching that of the Medieval Warm Period. That time followed a colder period before the founding of Rome between about 750 BC to 200 BC. By 150 BC the climate had warmed enough for the first grapes and olives to be cultivated in northern Italy. As recently as 1,000 years ago, Icelandic Vikings were raising cattle, sheep and goats in grasslands on Greenland’s southwestern coast. Then, around 1200, temperatures began to drop, and Norse settlements were abandoned by about 1350. Atlantic pack ice began to grow around 1250, and shortened growing seasons and unreliable weather patterns, including torrential rains in Northern Europe, led to the “Great Famine” of 1315-1317. Temperatures dropped dramatically again in the middle of the 16th century, and although there were notable year year-to-year fluctuations, the coldest regime since the last Ice Age (that so-called “Little Ice Age”) dominated the next hundred and fifty years or more. Food shortages killed millions in Europe between 1690 and 1700, followed by more famines in 1725 and 1816. The end of this time witnessed brutal winter temperatures suffered by Washington’s troops at Valley Forge in 1777, and Napoleon’s bitterly cold retreat from Russia in 1812. Although temperatures have been generally mild over the past 500 years, we should remember that significant fluctuations are normal. The past century alone witnessed two distinct periods of warming. The first occurred between 1900 and 1945, and the second, following a slight cool-down began quite abruptly in 1975. That second period rose at very modest rate, if at all, until 1998, and then stopped and began falling again after reaching a high of 1.16ºF above the average global mean temperature. There hasn’t been any warming for at least a decade and a half, and possibly, considerably longer. It’s also worth remembering that about half of all estimated warming since 1900 occurred prior to the mid-1940s despite continuously rising CO2 levels. Also consider that, even today, about 97% of all current atmospheric CO2 derives from natural sources. What Evidence Exists of Human CO2 Influences on Climate? All IPCC climate models incorporate theory which predicts that “anthropogenic” (human-caused) global warming will be evident in an “amplification” of a surface warming trend that is revealed as an atmospheric “hot spot” in the tropical troposphere. Instead, both satellite data and independent balloon data show a near-zero trend from 1979 to 1997, followed by a well-known 1998 temp “spike” which is universally attributed to a Super-El- Niño. This absence of an observed hot spot suggests that the land-surface temperature warming trend (1979-1997) is greatly overestimated, and should be close to zero in the Tropics. So where does the evidence needed to support the IPCC’s 95 percent certainty claim come from? The true answer is that there simply isn’t any. None at all. There never was…only totally unproven theoretical climate models. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/08/21/the-new-york-times-global-warming-hysteria-ignores-17-years-of-flat-global-temperatures/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 24, 2015, 05:44:48 pm http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/
(http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/monckton_2014_not_hot.png) http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/monckton_2014_not_hot.pdf Global Warming is a Hoax By Lord Christopher Monckton http://www.ideacityonline.com/video/global-warming-hoax-lord-christopher-monckton/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on January 24, 2015, 07:53:33 pm I look forward to the temperature in NZ being a bit higher...it will be perfect...should have done it years ago ;)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 25, 2015, 07:51:48 am You're having a laugh... Your doomsday keeps on extending itself into the future. the hockey stick that foresaw death and destruction a decade back, the oceans that were going to riea hundred feet a by the turn of the millennium, The NIWA instruments that were moved to present more favourable data (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/18_Gossip.gif) LOL. Even Dunedin's temp/weather gauges were removed from the http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/webcams/octagon to that of our international airport, inland on the Taieri Plains "heatbowl" - to present more favourable data (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/51_SniffingNoses.gif) sumpin stinks. Are we being conned ? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 25, 2015, 08:31:27 am http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2922553/Global-warming-believers-like-hysterical-cult-MIT-scientist-compares-climate-alarmists-religious-fanatics.html?ito=social-facebook When viewing the posts here on this site it seems to me that most of us have our fanatical "religions", ie politics, personal agendas, interests etc that we often defend or attack somewhat vehemently. I am waiting to make a few more posts, then I will be promoted from Almost a GOD to the position of XNC2 GOD and will be able to fix everything that needs to be fixed... v **I think** (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/16_Whistling.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on January 25, 2015, 11:40:33 am So excited for you ;)...great to see how hard work gets the big rewards in life :P...I am soooo envious :o
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 27, 2015, 08:13:55 am Global warming about to strike America hard!
Clicky thing (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/65441168/monster-snowstorm-could-dump-90cm-of-snow-on-northeastern-us) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 27, 2015, 08:35:07 am Global warming about to strike America hard! Clicky thing (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/65441168/monster-snowstorm-could-dump-90cm-of-snow-on-northeastern-us)[/url] Nitz nods sadly: I've been watching CNN's Sky channel : Morning Edition Airlines cancel 3,500 flights due to winter storm; Delta cancels 600 flights Jan 26, 2015, 7:34am EST Updated: Jan 26, 2015, 10:18am EST Carla CaldwellMorning Edition Editor- Atlanta Business Chronicle Airlines have cancelled more than 3,500 flights due to a major snowstorm that is expected to hit the Northeast late Monday and Tuesday. The storm could dump from 2 to 3 feet of snow in some areas. A blizzard warning has been issued for New York and Boston, USA Today reports. Airlines have grounded 1,851 flights for Monday and another 1,707 for Tuesday, according to FlightAware. Carriers are waiving change fees for flights at dozens of airports across the region, the paper reports. Atlanta-based Delta Air Lines, Inc. (NYSE: DAL) has canceled about 600 flights for Monday, an airline spokesman said Sunday, reports Reuters. Delta issued a waiver for ticket holders for Monday and Tuesday flights, allowing them to reschedule through Jan. 30. http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/morning_call/2015/01/airlines-cancel-3-500-flights-due-to-winter-storm.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on January 28, 2015, 01:19:26 pm ..climate change cancelled...just another snowstorm.... :-[ US weathermen get it wrong on snowstorm 1 HOUR AGO JANUARY 28, 2015 12:08PM A worker shovels snow from a sidewalk in Boston Meteorologists have apologised for getting the US snowstorm forecast wrong. Source: AAP IT was dubbed a Tidal Wave of Snow, a Snow Hurricane and Historic, but in the end the predicted blizzard forecasters said would hit New York and other major northeast US cities was just a snowstorm. SOME weathermen offered sheepish apologies after airports were closed, public transport was shutdown and travel was banned based on the forecasts. The bans in New York and New Jersey were lifted by mid-morning Tuesday. "My deepest apologies to many key decision makers and so many members of the general public," National Weather Service meteorologist in New Jersey, Gary Szatkowski, wrote in a tweet. North of New York, in Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island and New Hampshire, was hit by the brunt of the storm, but the ferocity was less than forecast. "We've dodged the bullet," New York Mayor Bill de Blasio told CNN. "This is nothing like we feared it would be." Chaos still remained for travellers across North America, where thousands of flights were cancelled. Many Australians have been caught in the havoc, with Qantas among airlines cancelling flights. "We continue to monitor the situation and will provide updates as they come to hand," Qantas said in a statement. The airline urged passengers to refer to the Flight Status page on its website. Qantas's US partner airline, American Airlines, cancelled many of its Qantas codeshare flights on Tuesday, particularly from New York's JFK Airport. Qantas codeshare flights to Los Angeles, Boston, Orlando, Toronto, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Montreal were among the casualties. http://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/us-weathermen-get-it-wrong-on-snowstorm/story-e6frfkui-1227198964233 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 28, 2015, 09:04:04 pm Does the climate change ? Yes and it always has done
Do humans affect the climate ? bugger all except for KTJ as he is full of hot air (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/11_SmileyEyes.gif) Be still my heart while i wait for some more of Brucey's climate fear porn cartoons lol The ice is melting,greenhouses gases are expanding,animals are farting too much, Give Al Gore your money and save the planet. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 29, 2015, 05:35:20 am Re mess #395 luvvit, Pantsy, (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/06_ROFL.gif), well said (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/38_Cool.gif) now here's another for us to ponder on that I had aired elsewhere but I think it's worth repeating: Magnificent blue glow of Hong Kong seas also disturbing Yahoo7 News January 26, 2015, 6:11 pm Eerie fluorescent blue patches of water glimmering off Hong Kong's seashore are magnificent, disturbing and potentially toxic, marine biologists say. The glow is an indicator of a harmful algal bloom created by something called Noctiluca scintillans, nicknamed Sea Sparkle. It looks like algae and can act like algae. But it's not quite. It is a single-celled organism that technically can function as both animal and plant. ... read the rest and see the pics at https://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/26100507/magnificent-blue-glow-of-hong-kong-seas-also-disturbing/ so if weather extremes don't getcha this critter probably will sooner v v or v v later (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/12_Ooops.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on January 29, 2015, 06:23:43 am Global warming about to strike America hard! Clicky thing (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/65441168/monster-snowstorm-could-dump-90cm-of-snow-on-northeastern-us) yeahbut Massachusetts cleans up from flooding after blizzard Home » News » World Thu, 29 Jan 2015 Ocean Street in the waterfront Massachusetts town of Marshfield was littered with lobster traps, downed wires and chunks of houses the day after a massive blizzard hammered New England. Notably absent was much of the 30cm of snow that blanketed much of the Boston area, since for much of the storm, Ocean Street was under water because of flooding from a breached sea wall. ... ...Millions across Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island and New York were digging out on Wednesday from the storm, which dumped up to 3 feet (90 cm) of snow in places, though it largely bypassed New York City. ... much more at http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/331401/massachusetts-cleans-flooding-after-blizzard Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on February 02, 2015, 06:56:47 pm Global Warming signs in Brooklyn NY!
clicky thing (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2935399/Brooklyn-warehouse-turned-ice-castle-overnight-firefighters-continue-battle-blaze-broke-20F-temperatures-winter-storm-Linus-threatens-road-conditions-Chicago-ahead-Super-Bowl.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on February 02, 2015, 11:00:00 pm ::) (https://nz.news.yahoo.com/news-gallery/photo/-/26178501/snowstorm-blankets-us-midwest/26178726/) ^ another trickier clickier thingiemajigie Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on February 03, 2015, 08:43:28 am ::) (https://nz.news.yahoo.com/news-gallery/photo/-/26178501/snowstorm-blankets-us-midwest/26178726/) ^ another trickier clickier thingiemajigie Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on February 03, 2015, 10:14:52 am ::) (https://nz.news.yahoo.com/news-gallery/photo/-/26178501/snowstorm-blankets-us-midwest/26178726/) ^ another trickier clickier thingiemajigie Sure beats the Tiny Url thingy that I used to use. Until now, I didn't know an emoticon would work as a click-on-the-pic link! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on February 19, 2015, 10:18:59 am More signs of global warming!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2958849/Niagara-Falls-frozen-extreme-winter-weather-continues-East-Coast-going-colder.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 18, 2015, 01:43:07 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) California Water Anxiety Syndrome: Feel it yet? By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 3:00AM PDT - Tuesday, March 17, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317a_Chair_zpsv98py1ki.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/chair.jpg) The apocalyptic furniture showroom formerly known as Almaden Reservoir. — Photo: Marcio Jose Sanchez/Associated Press. IF YOU live here, you already know: The feeling is inescapable, palpable, more than a little scary. I’m talking about California Water Anxiety Syndrome (CWAS), of course, that sinking feeling to trump all sinking feelings, that sour knot in the pit of the collective stomach, unnerving and strange and, let’s just admit, unutterably depressing. California, as you might have heard, is running out of water (http://ca.gov/drought). Very, very quickly. And there’s not a damn thing anyone can do about it. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317f_CaliforniaSnowpack_zps8u47zyvv.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/ca-snowpack.png) Snowpack as of March 2015. Dismal-er and dismal-er. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317j_FolsomLake_zpsghnlmylm.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/folsom-lake.jpg) The pond formerly known as Folsom Lake. Anyone wanna buy a boat? Perhaps you read NASA senior water scientist Jay Famiglietti’s rather terrifying op-ed in the Los Angeles Times (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-famiglietti-drought-california-20150313-story.html), declaring that, by all available measures, our state has only one year of water storage left? True. What’s more, farmers are desperately pumping out the last remaining groundwater so fast, just to survive, that the ground itself is sinking. That’s our “backup” water. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever. Famiglietti declares what nearly everyone already feels: the time to start a mandatory statewide (individuals, farmers, industry, everyone) rationing program is right now. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317e_CaliforniaDrought2014_zps9jifcqtm.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/california-drought-2014.jpg) Upside: California has the BEST before/after pictures. And by “best” I mean, horrifying. Care to argue with him? Best go look at this chart (http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/snowapp/sweq.action) first; it shows how the state’s snowpack currently stands at a harrowing 13% of normal, which is itself half of last year’s dismal 25%, which was already a record low. Blame climate change or blame the farmers and their water-intensive crops all you want. Fact is, the state’s been losing massive volumes of water for more than a decade. The problem is everyone’s. By the way? Winter, in case you missed it, is over. Big rains ain’t coming. No more snowstorms. No more flood warnings. San Francisco had its first ever rain-less January 100 years. Or was that 1,000? Is this drought is the worst in 20,000 years, or just 1,200 (http://time.com/3621246/california-drought-study)? Does it matter? Water Anxiety Syndrome is growing, and it’s something new, something unprecedented in modern life. The prospect of the world 7th largest economy (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-16/brown-s-california-overtakes-brazil-with-companies-leading-world) (that’s us, bigger than Russia, Italy, Brazil) running out of water and triggering the collapse of multiple industries, from agriculture to recreational tourism, invites a very unique feeling of epic helplessness. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317g_HeavySnow_zpshyf5flt1.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/heavysnow.jpg) Tahoe used to look like this, every year. Might be awhile before it ever does again. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317m_SnowyMountain_zpscbupwrci.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/snowy-mtn.jpg) Amazing how thick, water-ready snowpack can suddenly appear more valuable than a mountain full of diamonds. We cannot make it snow. We cannot ever replace that pumped-out groundwater — need another Ice Age for that. We cannot refill our dried lakebeds. There is no pipeline large enough to transport trillions of gallons over from Boston. This is what we’re not accustomed to: No amount of money, no amount of political posturing, no display of military might, no act of Congress, no amount of chemicals, no amount of whistling by the graveyard can bring more water. It’s even more difficult to fathom if, like me, you believe there’s almost nothing we can’t handle. Our species is stupendously adaptable, exceedingly quick to shift our needs or our usage when called upon. Despite what politicians or Big Energy wants you to believe, we are actually excellent at conserving, at rationing, at getting very serious, very quickly about doing what needs to be done. And the polls back it up: 94% of Californians — that’s pretty much everyone with a functioning brain — says they’re ready and willing to make some dramatic changes, and soon. When do we start? How do we do it? And more importantly, will it be enough? (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317b_Oroville_zpsoudxztk6.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/oroville.jpg) Lake Oroville. Sort of. — Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317c_Salmon_zpshuchuicg.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/salmon.jpg) Salmon! But not for much longer. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317d_Sprinkler_zpsk7pqnndo.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/sprinkler.jpg) Good time to put in that rock garden. Maybe a cactus. History, I’m afraid, is not in our favor. I just saw a documentary, one of National Geographic’s hugely popular “The Truth Behind…” (http://decider.com/2015/02/11/national-geographic-the-truth-behind) episodes, on Netflix, each one of which attempts to explain a particular mystery or phenomena (crop circles, Druids, Freemasons, Dead Sea Scrolls and so on). They’re smart, they’re fun, and they mostly get right to the debunking point. This one discussed the astonishing Nazca lines (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/_/articles/nasca-lines-buried-secrets-facts), in southern Peru, those enormous, miles-long geoglyphs the Nazca people carved, scraped and dug into an immense area of flattened mountaintop between 100 B.C. and 700 A.D. The region is staggering in size. The Nazca lines, a World Heritage Site since 1994, cover some 190 square miles. Theories as to why a small, rugged tribal people would create such epic carvings run the gamut: were they irrigation systems? Astronomical calendars? Ritual patterns? Landing strips for alien spacecraft? This particular episode offered a newer possibility. Archaeological evidence now suggests the lines are actually elaborate “outdoor temples”, vast geometric shrines, humble offerings to the Nazca gods, requesting divine favor. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317h_ChauchillaCemetery_zpsxq6eflm8.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/chauchilla-cemetery.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317k_NazcaLinesMonkey_zpsdxfvyffx.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/nazca-lines-monkey.jpg) LEFT: California! Meet the Nazca. They ran out of water, too. | RIGHT: A Nazca monkey. Not good enough to bring water. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317i_NazcaLinesBird_zps7l3bkmh7.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/nazca-lines-bird.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150317l_NazcaBird_zpstyh1b7pp.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/california-water-anxiety-feel-it-yet/nazca_bird.jpg) LEFT: The Nazca carved enormous glyphs, lines, diagrams, hoping to appease the gods. | RIGHT: Birds, animals, human figures, miles-long geometric patterns — nothing seemed to make it rain. But why? For what? Why would a relatively primitive tribal people go to such intense, laborious lengths to appease the gods? Why scrape hundreds of miles of lines, patterns and shapes into the dry, hot, unforgiving mountaintop? What could have possibly compelled them? It’s water, of course. The Nazca, some now believe, were fast running out of water. The climate was changing. The already parched region was drying up. The lines are simply a dying people’s desperate attempt to beg their gods to please deliver some rain. Didn’t work. The Nazca soon vanished. Their culture disappeared forever. Seems the gods, then as now, weren’t much concerned with our plight. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/03/17/california-water-anxiety (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/03/17/california-water-anxiety) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 23, 2015, 12:22:29 am http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,14622.0.html
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 04, 2015, 08:03:50 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Relentless drought is turning California into Nevada By DAVID HORSEY | 2:04PM PDT - Friday, April 03, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20150403dh_zpsoi33sdhk.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-551ef737/turbine/la-na-tt-california-into-nevada-20150403) A COUPLE OF of weeks ago, I was flying to a conference in Sun Valley. The passenger next to me was looking out the window, down at the dry, barren landscape below. He asked me if I knew where we were and I said, “I think it’s Nevada, but it could be the moon.” Nevada is a perfectly fine state, but it is largely arid and empty. From a few thousand feet in the air, it bears no resemblance to the parts of the planet that are wet and green and verdant. With Governor Jerry Brown’s implementation of unprecedented water-use restrictions in response to California’s fourth year of severe drought, it’s not unreasonable to wonder if the Golden State is becoming Nevada. Brown made his announcement that all jurisdictions in the state must cut water consumption by 25% while he stood on dry ground in the Sierra that he said normally would be covered by five feet of snow. The mountain snowpack is just 12% of average, which means dramatically diminished runoff going into reservoirs that currently have about a year’s supply left. That does not mean there will be no water for Californians. The reservoirs will get a small boost from whatever rains do come. There are also vast, ancient aquifers with reserves of water that could last a decade. But, unlike the reservoirs, the aquifers filled up in millenniums long past and would take a century or more to restore. California’s Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural regions the world has ever seen, sits on top of those aquifers. The people who grow the strawberries, pistachios, almonds and other crops that feed America have been forced to pump more and more water from the aquifers in order to stay in business. Now, the land is sinking as the space underground is emptied. Geologists and hydrologists warn that overpumping is bringing farmers closer to a day when the only water left in the ground will be too deep, too poor in quality and too costly to bring to the surface. Agricultural interests, though, have successfully lobbied against state regulations that would restrict groundwater use. For now, growers can drill a well wherever they want and keep sucking up water from the aquifers. It’s not hard to understand what the growers are thinking. They just want to hang on long enough to see the drought end and water for irrigation spilling down from the mountains once again. Wetter days will return to California, but it could be temporary. Scientific projections about climate change strongly suggest that the new normal will be far drier than in the past century, when the state’s agriculture industry was built on irrigation of otherwise unproductive land. If drought, occasionally interrupted by a diminished dose of rain and snow, is the new normal, then farmers will be hard pressed to survive. And that would be not just a tragedy for them or a disaster for California’s economy, it would be a huge problem for the country. According to the Western Farm Press, California “produces a sizable majority of American fruits, vegetables and nuts; 99 percent of walnuts, 97 percent of kiwis, 97 percent of plums, 95 percent of celery, 95 percent of garlic, 89 percent of cauliflower, 71 percent of spinach, and 69 percent of carrots and the list goes on and on. ... No other state, or even a combination of states, can match California’s output per acre.” If that productivity goes away — along with a significant share of the state’s huge livestock industry — consumer prices throughout the United States will shoot up and people’s food choices will be severely pinched. What is truly scary is that, if the science is right, it is difficult to imagine how such a dried-up future can be avoided. If California’s agricultural heartland becomes as much a desert as Nevada, even reviving empty farming towns with a string of Reno-style casinos would not come close to replacing the bonanza that water once created. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-california-into-nevada-20150403-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-california-into-nevada-20150403-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on April 04, 2015, 09:28:54 pm Here in Hanoi, Vietnam...I was surprised to see supermarket shelves loaded up with Californian apples and oranges......maybe soon Californian supermarket shelves will be loaded up with NZ apples and oranges😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 05, 2015, 01:39:49 pm More Horse Pucky from ktj
climate change is natural and beyond human control (http://21stcenturywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/1-Climate-Change.jpg) More Global Warming Hot Air, As Climate Fundamentalists Continue Inflating a False Reality JANUARY 18, 2015 BY 21WIRE 53 COMMENTS 1-Patrick-henningsen-BW1Patrick Henningsen 21st Century Wire We’re told this week that Washington’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center (NOAA) had finally crunched its numbers for 2014, and Al Gore is a very happy man, as are the armies of amateur climate experts who take government scientific announcements as gospel. Not surprisingly, NPR was very excited about this latest government proclamation, running the headline, “It’s Official: 2014 Was The Hottest Year On Record, NOAA Says”. Yes, NOAA speaks! Who dares to defy the great and powerful NOAA? There’s only one big problem with all of this. I really love dolphins, and all sea life, but at the end of the day, NOAA is still an arm of the US federal government, and therefore, it’s can be just as political as any other federally-funded agency. So why is the government-media-complex pushing so hard with global warming now? 1-Global-Warming The top two inflated celebrity scientists fronting the UN IPCC public relations drive, Penn State’s Michael Mann and East Anglia University’s Climatic Research Unit head Phil Jones – have both been exposed long ago as failures and were caught through ‘Climategate’ manipulating data sets in order to fit their own government-funded and highly biased theoretical theses on anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. Michael Mann was so damaged by Climategate that he eventually went on a legal rampage, attempting to sue his way out of the scandal’s orbit. On top of all this, Mann, the UN’s IPCC rock star ‘climate scientist’, had his fictional “hockey stick” global warming graph – thoroughly debunked by multiple scientists and academics - read just one of those critiques here. Mann’s contrived hockey stick graph was made famous by Al Gore’s since discredited 2006 ‘documentary’ entitled, An Inconvenient Truth (a more ironic title couldn’t be found). A decade on, a number of experts are growing tired of how creative computer-modeled fantasies are influencing long-term policy and carbon taxation schemes. Veteran meteorologist and founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, explains: “There has not been any significant man-made global warming in the past, there is none now, and there is no reason to expect any in the future,” he said. “The computer models that predicted the warming have failed to verify. There has been no warming in 18 years. The ice at the poles is stable. The polar bears are increasing. The oceans are not rising.” Think of the IPCC as a 16th century Vatican who may have believed the earth was flat, even though Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan knew it wasn’t. And just like the church of old and with other institutes of control, Gore and Mann hope to use their modern mythology of global warming in order to monetize guilt with a global regime of indulgence taxes. There are a number of obvious fundamental flaws with the latest government sermon which claims that 2014 was “the hottest year ever”, and whether or not man-made global warming theory is anything more than that – a theory (and a well-funded one at that). Climate Depot’s Marc Morano adds here, “There are dueling global datasets – surface temperature records and satellite records – and they disagree. The satellites show an 18 year plus global warming ‘standstill’ and the satellite was set up to be ‘more accurate’ than the surface records.” Also, the US surface temperature measurement network of stations has many inherent flaws, and may not be as accurate due to issues like heat pollution. Bottom line: this latest announcement is the latest in a long line of parlour tricks – and the parlour trick is a time-honored government tradition. What about the scientific ‘consensus’? We hear a lot about it, but in reality, it does not exist anymore than 9 out 10 dentists say fluoride is good for your teeth. Scientist Art Robinson decided to ask top scientists throughout the US, Europe and beyond, what they thought of this supposed “consensus” that’s Al Gore and others promoted so heavily between 2005-2012. Thus far, Robinson has already collected 31,487 signatures from scientists to help form The Petition Project, which testifies that, “no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the earth’s climate.” Those who have bought into the modern Armageddon-based mythology of global warming (rebranded later as ‘climate change’) will likely use the highly pejorative term, ‘climate denier’ to describe me, or anyone else who dares to challenge the Gore orthodoxy, something akin to an apostate by today’s collective climate fundamentalist standards. They will also conflate the theory of climate change with real toxic pollution, as if these are one in the same thing (when clearly they are not). It’s no surprise then that the inventors of the term ‘climate denial’ specifically chose that term to reflect the term ‘holocaust denial’ in order to parlay additional negative connotations, automatically insinuating that to be in denial equates to a crime. Again, another parlour trick, using a NLP crowbar to try and administrate a new politically correct term. Like the term ‘conspiracy theorist’, the term ‘climate denial’ was created for the same reason ‘conspiracy theorist’ was invented – as a deadly little pc linguistic widget designed for lazy commentators and self-appointed cultural gatekeepers who wish to shut down and curtail any rational or genuine scientific debate on the subject. Closet collectivists, shills for central government policy and other creatures of the nanny state, will always use these words and terms to avoid having to actually dig their heals in. No, I am not a climate denier. Far from it; I love the climate and the environment too, but I also recognize that our climate does change – in fact, it always has, and always will - even without mankind’s (and Al Gore’s) input. I am an opponent of government propaganda, social engineering and the modern technocracy. Anyone who is so naive as to believe that they would not fudge-up their figures and theses in exactly the same way the federal government constantly fudges down its unemployment figures (5% we were last told, ‘lol’ as the kids say) and inflation figures. should ponder the term “jobless recovery” for one moment, and you’ll see what I mean. That’s what appears to have happened this time too. For reasons not confined to job security, or funding, NOAA seems to have left out some important qualifiers in what can hardly be described as a definitive declaration of global warming. Science author Bob Tisdale explains,”According to NOAA definitions, global surface temperatures for 2014 were “More Unlikely Than Likely” the highest on record, but they failed to note that on the main page of their State of the Climate report. NOAA used a specific ENSO index to claim that El Niño conditions did not exist in 2014, when at least one other index says El Niño conditions existed. And, NOAA failed to discuss the actual causes of the elevated global sea surface temperatures in 2014, while making it appear that there was a general warming of the surfaces of the global oceans.” “NOAA never stated specifically that 2014’s record high surface temperatures were a result of human-induced global warming, but they implied it… thus, all the hoopla. NOAA has omitted key discussions within that report, which biases it toward human-induced global warming. In other words, the NOAA State of the Climate report was misleading. NOAA has once again shown it is a political entity, not a scientific one. And, that’s a damn shame. The public needs openness from NOAA about climate; we do not need to be misled by politically motivated misdirection and misinformation.” In a world full of hypocrisy and corruption, some media presenters and ‘journalists’ simply see the climate debate as that one safe place where everyone should be in agreement. By purchasing their ticket on the climate bandwagon, they think they’re being compassionate and humanitarian. But it’s not humanitarian at all, it’s political. Members of the media who feel it’s enough to simply parrot the federal government line on global warming, or regurgitate the New York Times front page spread today – are as guilty as bought-and-paid-for scientists like Mann and Jones, and could be considered journalistic failures on this subject. The irony of this debate is that it’s much more likely, if you follow actual science (as opposed to multi-million dollar federally funded, contrived computer modelling projections), that the earth is currently slipping in to a global cooling phase. On the whole, a drop in temperatures is many times deadlier for mankind on this planet than a rise in temperature is. If you cannot figure out why global cooling is more dangerous, then perhaps you should watch the films The Colony, and Snowpiercer, and maybe think just a little bit harder about where your food really comes from. Is man’s CO2 production warming the planet’s atmosphere? Certainly it is, but it’s likely to be so tiny that it would be (and is) actually impossible measure, and so small that it would be almost impossible to isolate as a number. A drop in the bucket at best, and at least – insignificant – in terms of pushing up global temperatures. In truth, the primary driver of the earth’s climate was, is and always will be: the sun. Overwhelmingly, solar cycles determine our planet’s climate cycles, and anyone who is not paying attention to this, will miss the real event horizon – when it finally arrives. Meanwhile, real environmental threats go unchallenged, like GMO’s (note how Monsanto has recently bought into the climate alarmist industry), nuclear radiation, geoengineering and toxic chemical waste. Political gravy trains, financial gravy trains. Scientists and academics who have already pledged their allegiance to the cult of climate change are too busy notice, preoccupied with filling out their federal research grant applications for next year – hoping to keep their job, the house, and ultimately, their reputations. It’s easy to join the climate congregation and enjoy a sense of safety in numbers, but it’s a lot harder to face up to the truth: that we’ve been played by the same charlatans who’ve always played us. READ MORE CLIMATE CHANGE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Climate Files http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/01/18/more-global-warming-hot-air-as-climate-fundamentalists-continue-inflating-reality/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on April 05, 2015, 01:57:33 pm Haha..."more horse pucky...."
Yes.....as per usual.....😜 But seriously...if humans can change our climate...could we make it a bit warmer in NZ before the onset of winter😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 06, 2015, 09:06:00 pm Ooooh, looky....a couple of “head in the sand” idiots have farted. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/TooFunny.gif) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingPinkPanther.gif) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ROFLMAO_Dog.gif) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LaughingHard.gif) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/ItchyBugga.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on April 06, 2015, 11:30:49 pm Haha...the scared and weak little rabbit has summoned the courage to leave the burrow😜...and say nothing...typical militant lazy unionist rail worker😳
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 09, 2015, 08:12:14 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) Does California’s catastrophic drought have an upside? By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 3:00AM PDT - Wednesday, April 08, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408a_Golf_zpsrixkdfzy.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/golf.jpg) Pretty. And also a pretty stupid waste of land, water, energy, time, “sport”. DO you know what politicians, particularly conservative politicians, despise the most? Hint: It’s the same thing organized religions fear above all else, the same thing governments both large and small are often aggressively reluctant to embrace, the same thing we as a species, as a culture, as individuals are told, over and over again, that we should resist, perhaps even violently and blindly, lest the gays and the vegans and the terrorists come and take away our iPhones. It’s change, of course. Life’s most upsetting, dreaded and yet fantastically enduring aspect. Did you already suspect? It’s simple, really: Most forms of change freak us out because we’re trained to detest the discomfort of the new, that awkward, even painful adjustment period that forces our beloved habits, beliefs and addictions into weird new shapes (once we adjust, all is fine, of course; it’s that clumsy liminal phase we aren’t well adapted to cope with). (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408b_Buckets_zpsa9pguliq.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/buckets.jpg) You ready? Investment tip: Bucket manufacturers. Thank me later. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408c_Almonds_zpssyeuffg3.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/almonds.jpg) Almond orchards. Massively thirsty, massively profitable, often controlled by wealthy families or corporations. It’s not always bad, of course: some change — fresh love, a new puppy, pec implants, your first successful orgy — can spark us alive, can give you hope and wish for even more of same. Change that brings gifts, bounty, fulfillment, some finely toned abs? We like. It’s the other kind of change we can’t stand: loss, heartbreak, lack of security, threats to our fragile moral certainties, to our most beloved habits and ingrained cultural behaviors. We love our stuff. Ask us to limit or even eliminate some previously abundant, gluttonous, sort of thoughtless conduct we’ve become accustomed to — oil, energy, food, housing, transportation, shopping, cheap gas, dumb entertainment, water? That’s grounds for uprising, pal. Or so we are told. And taught. And it’s a silly and dangerous lie. Behold! California, deep in the initial stages of a jarring, lifestyle-shattering drought, one that threatens to forcibly restructure, at nearly every level, the 9th largest economy in the world. And no politician, religion, or fistful of money can stop it. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408e_BucketWater_zpsomawoirh.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/bucket-water.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408d_KidsSprinkler_zpswmlfdhfz.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/kids-sprinkler.jpg) LEFT: More precious than we imagined. | RIGHT: Replace the grass with sand and the sprinkler with magic dreams, and you’re on to something. Take a picture, parents. This idyllic scene isn't long for this world, much less this state. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408g_SoloSprinkler_zpsl6j7eaoc.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/solo-sprinkler.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408h_Sprinklers_zpse5zaaxsd.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/sprinklers.jpg) LEFT: Lawns are pretty. Lawns are nice. Lawns are almost as ridiculous as growing rice. | RIGHT: No idea if this is a pot farm, but illegal pot growers abuse water perhaps even more than almond farmers. And there's zero regulation. How are we to respond? What sort of unprecedented melodrama awaits in the coming summer, and the next? One thing we know: Lack of water is going to change us in ways we are only barely beginning to fathom, and it won’t just be arguments over pools, golf courses and almond orchards. I am here to propose a possibility: Perhaps all is not so dire. Perhaps, despite all the grim adjustments that await (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/business/economy/in-parched-california-innovation-like-water-has-a-limit.html), despite the political maneuvering, the invisible billionaires (http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Billionaires-influence-felt-in-state-s-water-5430496.php) who control way too much of the state’s economy (including water), we are, nevertheless, on the cusp of something sort of amazing, a profound — and profoundly beneficial — psychological shift that can serve us well into the future. Is it possible? After all, as pointed out by multiple experts and historians (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/can-californians-adapt-to-their-catastrophic-drought/389501), it’s a freak historical anomaly that we’ve been living in an age when you can merely turn on the tap and boom, there’s all the free, clean, drinkable water you could possibly want, enough for a million swimming pools, golf courses, lawns galore, not to mention enough to flood a semi-arid state with a trillion acre-feet of water to grow all sorts of products we have no business growing. This is not normal. This is not how it’s been, ever before, in human history. Such a bizarre, environmentally abusive framework of water gluttony was never long for this world. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408f_Pool_zpsxfrzudcn.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/pool.jpg) Pools waste a fraction of what agriculture wastes in California. Still, a luxury most can live without. Here is our chance. Here’s the opportunity to defy everything conservative politicians and religions alike tell us to fear and dumbly ignore — all the waste, corruption, resource abuse that’s plagued our state, our country, since forever, to the benefit of, well, of them. This drought is an equal opportunity transformer. No one is immune. No one will not be challenged to adapt in new and curious ways. Of course we can survive, even thrive, with far more dramatic cutbacks, with far less water. It will be strange and difficult. Careful, thoughtful resource management is not, after all, the American way. But should this drought continue unabated and should we, therefore, quickly realize just how valuable, how beautiful, how not to be taken for granted is the water we have left, we’ll cultivate perhaps the most precious resource of all: gratitude. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150408i_Toilet_zpsnivo1jrk.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/drought-its-all-about-the-gratitude/toilet.jpg) The least of our water-use worries, really. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/04/08/does-the-catastrophic-drought-have-upside (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/04/08/does-the-catastrophic-drought-have-upside) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on April 09, 2015, 10:06:15 pm "Sport a waste of time, water, land and energy"
I think your mate Mark" the moron" Morgford is a bit of a communist.. Maybe he can start a political party.....and wait for the tsunami of support😜 Tell ya what...after you have lived in a cave for one year , I will too😜 Can't be fairer than that😀 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 10, 2015, 04:08:55 am i heard they shut down major water catchments there and have used it as a way to control the place now they are putting smart meters to suck the peoples money.
if they wanted they can fix the problem but they didn't spend the money for over one hundred years they had trouble with water supplies there it not a new thing it was a dust bowl in some past times. Heres some pictures for ktj to wank over https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=dust+bowl+relocation+california+1930s&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ZKMmVcfsD8vc8AXEgIGIAg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1120&bih=642 sick of your climate fear porn brucey haha Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on April 10, 2015, 01:16:18 pm Perhaps they could bring in the user payed system.....
...or buy water from Canada.... ...or buy all the desalination plants that Australia spent zillions building and now don't use😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 25, 2015, 03:25:18 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... William Shatner boldly goes after Northwest water for California By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Friday, April 24, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20150424dh_zpsrtuknmcl.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5539d67b/turbine/la-na-tt-shatner-boldly-goes-after-water-20150423) ON THE voyages of the Starship Enterprise, Mr. Spock was always the logical one, while Captain Kirk led with his heart. No surprise then that William Shatner, the actor who played Kirk in the original “Star Trek” television series, has boldly gone where few have dared by proposing a $30-billion pipeline to carry water from the Pacific Northwest to drought-ravaged California. Shatner says there is too much water in places like Seattle, so no one would miss it. “How bad would it be to get a large, 4-foot pipeline, keep it above-ground — because if it leaks, you’re irrigating!” Shatner told an interviewer. “It’s simple. They did it in Alaska — why can’t they do it along Highway 5?” Well, as Spock would respond, “It’s not logical.” Despite the stereotypical image that most people in the country have about the far, upper left hand corner of the United States, it doesn’t always rain there. In fact, New York City gets more total rainfall than Seattle. The difference is that Seattle rain is generally more of a mist that stretches the cloudy days out over weeks and, sometimes, months, which is why the city is a great place for cozy coffee shops, movie theaters and public libraries — anywhere to escape the soggy gray. It may or may not be true that the weather inspires more suicides, but it certainly is the reason that Northwesterners all dress like mountain climbers, even if they are headed to the opera. The hidden secret, though, is that, from July through September, Seattle is usually as sunny and rainless as Los Angeles. Surrounded by mountains, lakes and Puget Sound, the place is spectacularly beautiful. It makes the gray months worth enduring. This year, though, even those gray months have not been so gray and definitely not as wet. Like the rest of the West Coast, the snowpack in the Cascade range is way below normal. Already, large sections of Washington and Oregon are seriously parched. It’s easy for people unfamiliar with the region to overlook the fact that the eastern halves of both states are arid. Like the Central Valley in California, it is massive irrigation that keeps vast agricultural areas of the Northwest from drying up and returning to dust and tumbleweeds. The region’s salmon fisheries also depend on water from the Columbia and other rivers. And the industrial sector of the economy is built on cheap hydroelectric power. That is why officials in Oregon and Washington have quickly rebuffed past schemes by Californians thirsting for a share of all that water up north and why they will certainly say no again. So, Shatner’s pipeline scheme is not likely to get off the ground. He could, of course, try pitching the plan using Spock’s often-stated assertion that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” There are, after all, close to 40 million human beings in California and just 11 million in Washington and Oregon, combined. Think of all the Golden State crops to be irrigated, the lawns to be watered, the cars to be washed, the swimming pools to be filled, the golf courses to be kept lush and green! On second thought, do not think of the golf courses. Or the pools. Or those dust-streaked Maseratis and Teslas. And don’t think badly of Shatner. He has made his proposal with tongue firmly planted in cheek. After receiving a negative response from folks up in the land of Amazon, Starbucks, REI and Microsoft, Shatner sent out a tweet that read: “Dearest Citizens of Seattle if you think I'm an idiot or evil enough to steal your much needed water; you don't know me very well.” See? We knew he was a hero. What Shatner is really hoping to do is bring attention to a big challenge — not just the drying up of California, but the drying out of the entire West. It is a challenge that needs to have brought to it some bold, futuristic ideas. It is a worthy mission for everyone, from border to border. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-shatner-boldly-goes-after-water-20150423-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-shatner-boldly-goes-after-water-20150423-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 25, 2015, 07:07:58 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 10, 2015, 03:00:31 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Jerry Brown aims to lead a climate change revolution By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Thursday, July 09, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20150709dh_zpsswog3adm.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-559e1d8d/turbine/la-na-tt-brown-climate-revolution-20150708) THIS WEEK most American news junkies have been tuned in to the emotional debate over the Confederate flag or mesmerized by Donald Trump’s hijacking of the Republican presidential contest, so a quieter news story from north of the border will not have been on their radar. Still, it’s a significant story for anyone who cares about the fate of the human race. Governor Jerry Brown has been in Toronto at a climate change conference for the last couple of days. He is seeking new governmental partners to join a push to reduce the greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change. Right now, there are 17 states and provinces in the Western Hemisphere, Africa and Europe that have pledged to make significant progress toward curbing the planet-warming pollutants between now and 2050. In Toronto, Brown added Quebec to the list with Ontario hoping to follow. Washington Governor Jay Inslee, also at the gathering, said that he wants his state to get on board as well, and that if legislators fail to go along, he will mount a statewide ballot measure. The climate pact was announced in Sacramento earlier this year. It may not sound like such a big deal, but, given how painfully slow national governments have been in facing up to a threat that grows more frightening with each passing year, Brown believes much can be accomplished by creating a coalition of sub-national entities that get out ahead of recalcitrant national politicians. “The real source of climate action happens to come from states and provinces,” Brown said in his conference address on Wednesday. “The real energy has to come from below.… We’re going to build up such a drumbeat that our national counterparts, they’re going to listen.” Brown and his allies are hoping to play an influential role when representatives of the world’s governments gather in Paris later this year for a summit on climate change. Brown plans to be there and, if he has the backing of enough state and provincial leaders from around the globe, he may get a hearing for his ideas. That, of course, may not be enough to impel real commitments to change. In fact, given the sad record of past environmental summits, there is plenty of reason to be pessimistic. Nevertheless, the effort Brown is leading could have a positive impact. Imagine if, in the United States, a significant number of major states buy into the idea that cutting emissions is good for the country and that shifting from fossil fuels to alternative energy sources is good for the economy. It could make the deniers, foot-draggers and shills for the oil and coal companies in Washington, D.C., irrelevant. In Toronto, Brown branded those who refuse to recognize the need for dramatic action on the climate issue “troglodytes” and insisted it was time for them to stop standing in the way. "Climate change doesn't wait for anybody," Brown said. "We're not doing enough. We're taking baby steps.” The pact between the states and provinces may be one of those baby steps, but it has the potential to mature into something big. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-brown-climate-revolution-20150708-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-brown-climate-revolution-20150708-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 10, 2015, 03:08:11 pm I think global warming is just a conspiracy theory..I'm bloody freezing...can we speed it up ;)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 10, 2015, 08:28:52 pm I do believe climate change is a reality. I don't believe humanity has much, if any, influence on it.
A volcano dwarfs humanities puny outputs in a few days. The cause of change is much further afield than Joe Blow tooling down the pike in his V8 Landcruiser. 93 million miles further afield in fact. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n6j4TGqVl5g Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 11, 2015, 12:18:13 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202015/20150711_SickPlanet_12187195sr_zpsedore0mk.jpg) (http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1436527525/195/12187195.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 11, 2015, 12:44:37 pm only sick thing is you lol
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 12, 2015, 07:24:07 pm Tom Scott is old and doddery..probably has alzs'....well past his use by date....probably time to move home to England and retire :o
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 16, 2015, 11:52:31 am (http://static.timetobreak.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/creepy7.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 16, 2015, 12:01:02 pm (http://static.timetobreak.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/bunny2kids-Optimized.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 16, 2015, 02:20:59 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) Denmark or bust! What’s YOUR climate change escape plan? By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 7:45AM PDT - Wednesday, July 15, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715a_Arctic_zpsuzhypddg.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/arctic.jpg) Climate scientists can't measure the ice loss fast enough. It's accelerating and compounding so quickly, the data looking so dire, they're getting depressed. And they're moving somewhere safer. DO YOU have one yet? Have you considered what you might do, where you might go, should the climate situation get so dire, so extreme, so hot/cold/wet/dry/stormy/violent/desperate that you’d feel not merely justifiably cautious, but emotionally compelled — for the sake of your sanity, your health, your kids’ future — to get the hell out of the state/country and move somewhere slightly more stable? Somewhere… safer. Somewhere with lots of water, fewer violent weather patterns, perhaps a federal government not halfway staffed by savagely dimwit Republican climate deniers with their fingers in their ears and their heads You wouldn’t be alone, that’s for sure. As John Richardson’s excellent, much-discussed, highly miserable Esquire piece (http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a36228/ballad-of-the-sad-climatologists-0815) made gruesomely clear, even some of the world’s smartest, most unflappable climate scientists and environmental activists – not normally an anxious, panicky bunch – have had enough. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715b_FlagExhaust_zpspwtfuabe.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/flag-exhaust.jpg) Only China produces more CO² per year than the USA, and that's changed only VERY recently. We were the world's No.1 polluter for decades. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715c_SunsetRefinery_zpskornonhe.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/sunset-refinery.jpg) The sun sets over a refinery — in BOTH senses of of the phrase! (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715d_Swim_zpsh6vcmo9t.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/swim.jpg) Sure, when the flood comes, you can TRY to swim for it, but that one dude in the blue cap will probably get to Angel Island first and horde all the organic scones and the shotguns and the Philz coffee. And THEN what will you do? It’s getting personal, you see. Emotional. Alarming on a very real, very immediate level, so much so that moving somewhere safer is becoming, for many, nothing short of a moral imperative. This is what happens when you’re pummeled on a daily basis by so much doomsday data you can no longer maintain your professional cool, when you can’t deny that gnawing, inexorable dread deep in your gut, when that inner turmoil gets strong enough that devising a your own exit seems entirely reasonable — unless, due in large part to conservative America’s ignorance, the hate mail, the death threats, the endless GOP attacks — you’ve already left. Many have. This is how you know, yes? When the smartest people in the room, the ones who are in the thick of it, the ones who see, often firsthand (studying ice loss, measuring retreating forests, counting species die-offs) the direct effects of our stupefying inaction every single day — when these people start moving away, start buying land in Canada, or Denmark, or Ireland or other secret places they won’t mention lest they be run over by the panicked zombie hordes? This is how you know: It might well be time to join them. It’s a privileged position, obviously. After all, the vast majority of humans have no access to any sort of escape. The vast majority of humanity is, to put it mildly, sort of screwed. Hundreds of millions, perhaps a billion people or more, facing displacement, water shortages, food crisis, famine? It’s no longer a potential future scenario. There is no “maybe”. It’s here. It’s underway. And it’s accelerating. The only real question is: How bad? Maybe you don’t believe it? Maybe you think it’s best to stay positive, compartmentalize, hold out hope for a reasonable solution as you do what you can in your own life to engage, love your family, enact change wherever possibly? I agree. I feel you. It’s a nice way to be. It’s in our nature. But for many, it’s not nearly enough. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715m_JebIdiot_zpsqhvjhffr.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/jeb-idiot.jpg) The solution to the world's vast, overwhelming, massively destabilizing and deadly climate change problem, according to Jeb Bush? “Some person in a garage somewhere” who will come up with some neat-o technology to save us all. See? Science is really cool and helpful! Unless it's a liberal scam! Also: Jeb is a moron. Or maybe you’re like Jeb “Idiot Brother” Bush, who actually believes climate change will be solved by “a person in a garage somewhere”. He actually said that (http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/jeb-bush-thinks-climate-change-will-be-fixed-by-a-person-in-a-garage-somewhere-7739675). Isn’t that quaint? That Jeb actually thinks some wacky inventor will stumble across a magical, glacier-making gizmo that will save the world, cost pennies and can be freely installed on your lawnmower? Jeb is, of course, a simpering fool. And the Koch brothers are criminals. And aren’t you Republicans just so wacky, always hoping that science will save us from your own savage hatred of — and ignorance about — science. Fact is, researchers already have an answer. They know more or less exactly what needs to be done: zero out humanity’s carbon emissions (http://www.vox.com/2015/7/13/8949701/carbon-removal), as quickly as possible. Stop pumping 110 million tons of CO² into the atmosphere every single day (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/07/13/sunspot_cycles_won_t_cause_a_mini_ice_age_by_2030.html). Enable technologies that will remove some of the CO² that’s already there (http://www.vox.com/2015/7/13/8949701/carbon-removal). And so on. In other words, radical change, and be quick about it. It can still be done, they say. There is still hope. And some good is already happening (http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/5-key-insights-into-Obama-s-climate-change-deal-5889096.php). But much more needs to happen, and fast. Simple, right? As if. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715e_AlmondPicker_zpskq02nkxd.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/almond-picker.jpg) Not a good time to start up an almond orchard in California. Just FYI. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715f_Pope2_zpsnemjnmo0.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/pope2.jpg) When even this guy says we'd better do something about the climate, and quick, you know things are getting real. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715g_Climate_zpsokibqf7f.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/climate.jpg) Growth at any cost! Including our own imminent obliteration! So, what about you? Where would you go? What would you do if you agreed with (increasing numbers of) very smart scientists that the situation is only going to get far worse, far more quickly than even the most aggressive models predicted, just a few years ago? You could stay close. Lots of people like the Pacific Northwest, Seattle or Portland, what with their vast repositories of rain and more rain, with some extra rain for good measure. Sounds good, right? Not anymore. Even those cities are feeling the effects of too much heat and too little snow this year (http://www.opb.org/news/article/northwest-water-supplies-dropping-amid-drought-conditions/?t=717222) — which, by the way, is on track to be the hottest year ever recorded by man (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/04/15/_2015_is_hot_a_weirdly_warm_pacific_ocean_is_set_to_make_this_year_the_warmest.html). (Damn you again, science). But even more dire is the news that the Pacific Northwest is due for a massive shakeup, a thoroughly devastating earthquake (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one) that could effectively obliterate the entire coastal Northwest, all within the next 50 years. Can you believe that? Maybe you don’t; it’s just more scientists yammering, after all. Probably another liberal hoax. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715h_Portland_zps0bjm6tey.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/portland.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715i_Seattle2_zpsmawishlw.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/seattle2.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715j_DenmarkBikes_zpsmekbrpiu.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/denmark-bikes.jpg) LEFT: Portland! Crunchy, friendly, hipsters galore, not yet as obscenely expensive as Seattle or San Francisco. Only one catastrophic, devastating earthquake imminent, too! | CENTER: Not as rainy as it used to be. And expensive as hell to live there. Not to mention the “catastrophic, devastating earthquake is coming soon” thing. Otherwise, awesome! RIGHT: The Danes do love their bikes. And they're so much healthier. What's not to like? Canada! That might be nice. Easygoing. Lots of land. Just need to avoid the vast regions currently being raped by the oil companies for bitumen/tar sands. And the fracking. And the much-loathed, environment-hating PM, Stephen Harper, who’s turning Canada into an international embarrassment (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/opinion/stephen-harper-continues-his-path-transforming-canada-international-pariah). Oh well. Denmark? Fine choice. Lovely people. Lots of water, alternative energy, decent wifi. Ireland? Sweden? Greenland? Problem is, not many places left that won’t feel the effects. What can you do? Shall we pause to at least enjoy the irony? How it wasn’t that long ago — hell, it’s still happening right now — that only the silliest, the least educated, the most paranoid among us were scrambling for the bunkers and dashing away to build their creepy off-grid compounds in preparation for the apocalypse, fearing the government (or Jesus, or the zombies, or the Muslims) were about to come and take away their bullets and their Cheez-Whiz? Not anymore. Now it’s the best and brightest who are, however reluctantly, getting ready for the worst. Now it’s the ones we should trust the most who are trying very, very hard not to sigh heavily and shake their heads in despair… and failing. Shall we join them? See you in Denmark! (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715k_Denmark_zpshbq68feo.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/denmark.jpg) Denmark! Lovely all around. Bikes galore, progressive politics, a female PM, lots of water, alternative energy, NOT near a coastline that's about to rise 10 feet and flood the place. Shall we? (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715n_CrackedDirt_zpsmilmvumh.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/cracked-dirt.jpg) Your California backyard, soon enough. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150715o_ChinaSmog_zpsdvxhj2c6.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/denmark-is-lovely-this-time-of-year/china-smog.jpg) China. Now the world's No.1 producer of CO². At least their government doesn't believe humanity isn't the cause of climate change. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/07/15/denmark-or-bust-climate-change (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/07/15/denmark-or-bust-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 16, 2015, 05:55:04 pm k.j....."What’s YOUR climate change escape plan?"
....is that a trick question.....take off the outermost layer of clothing i guess :o Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 20, 2015, 02:53:58 pm • Climate extremes around the world in 2014 (http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201763042/climate-extremes-around-the-world-in-2014) • 2014 was Earth’s warmest year on record (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150717141444.htm) • STATE OF THE CLIMATE IN 2014 (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/2014-state-climate-highlights) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 20, 2015, 04:00:51 pm bullshit alarm
the modern coal power plants mostly giving off water vapor great picture fuck heads are pretending its smoke haha Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 20, 2015, 06:52:50 pm Please speed up the global warming.....I'm freezing😳
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 20, 2015, 08:06:54 pm people who believe in global warming are out of their minds and just want the mommy daddy government to scam everyone's money
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 21, 2015, 10:08:19 am The problem is, those more astute people that can see the scam for what it is, will have to pay the scammers - along with the sheep who cannot think for themselves.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on July 21, 2015, 12:32:02 pm I have research which parts of this country are going to be affected by lower rainfall/more droughts and I have plans not to move there.
I have been watching the water supply problems associated with the ever growing city I am living in now. 60% of the population increase is now coming from children born in this city. I ain't staying here long term. There are parts of NZ where the rainfall is predicted to increase by 10% - that is where I plan to buy land, above areas prone to flooding. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 21, 2015, 02:45:58 pm Don't move to California. They are totally screwed when it comes to an adequate water supply. Google “Oroville Dam” (the largest freshwater reservoir in California) and select images. You'll be shocked at what has happened to the lake behind that dam. The old Western Pacific Railroad route through the lower Feather River Canyon was submerged beneath 80 metres of water after that dam was completed, yet the old railway formation (including bridges and tunnels) has now been exposed as water shortages have caused the lake to drop to a tiny fraction of the volume it used to be. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 21, 2015, 06:16:55 pm Sp....."There are parts of NZ where the rainfall is predicted to increase by 10%- that is where I plan to buy land."
....yes..West coast of the South Island ....beautiful part of the world to .......uhm.....visit😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 21, 2015, 09:13:15 pm Quote Don't move to California. They are totally screwed when it comes to an adequate water supply. they have been having the same problems there in cycles for hundreds of years only thing that changed is more population more water needs plus its call the fruit bowl of america nice oranges mean it always been hot there the weather patterns have always been changing there so no change Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 21, 2015, 09:52:58 pm NASA Study Finds 1934 Had Worst Drought of Last Thousand Years
October 14, 2014 A new study using a reconstruction of North American drought history over the last 1,000 years found that the drought of 1934 was the driest and most widespread of the last millennium. Using a tree-ring-based drought record from the years 1000 to 2005 and modern records, scientists from NASA and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory found the 1934 drought was 30 percent more severe than the runner-up drought (in 1580) and extended across 71.6 percent of western North America. For comparison, the average extent of the 2012 drought was 59.7 percent. (http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/673xvariable_height/public/farmer_walking_in_dust_storm_cimarron_county_oklahoma2_0.jpg?itok=iFWHOZO_) This photo shows a farmer and his two sons during a dust storm in Cimarron County, Oklahoma, 1936. The 1930s Dust Bowl drought had four drought events with no time to recover in between: 1930-31, 1934, 1936 and 1939-40. Image Credit: Arthur Rothstein, Farm Security Administration It was the worst by a large margin, falling pretty far outside the normal range of variability that we see in the record," said climate scientist Ben Cook at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. Cook is lead author of the study, which will publish in the Oct. 17 edition of Geophysical Research Letters. Two sets of conditions led to the severity and extent of the 1934 drought. First, a high-pressure system in winter sat over the west coast of the United States and turned away wet weather – a pattern similar to that which occurred in the winter of 2013-14. Second, the spring of 1934 saw dust storms, caused by poor land management practices, suppress rainfall. "In combination then, these two different phenomena managed to bring almost the entire nation into a drought at that time," said co-author Richard Seager, professor at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University in New York. "The fact that it was the worst of the millennium was probably in part because of the human role." Brown colors of the PDSI indicate strong drought conditions across the U.S., in summer of 1934. Brown colors of the Palmer Drought Severity Index, or PDSI, indicate strong drought conditions across the United States in the summer of 1934. PDSI was calculated from monthly averages of precipitation, temperature and other factors from 1934, available from the Climate Research Unit. Image Credit: GISS/Lamont-Doherty According to the recent Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, climate change is likely to make droughts in North America worse, and the southwest in particular is expected to become significantly drier as are summers in the central plains. Looking back one thousand years in time is one way to get a handle on the natural variability of droughts so that scientists can tease out anthropogenic effects – such as the dust storms of 1934. “We want to understand droughts of the past to understand to what extent climate change might make it more or less likely that those events occur in the future," Cook said. The abnormal high-pressure system is one lesson from the past that informs scientists' understanding of the current severe drought in California and the western United States. "What you saw during this last winter and during 1934, because of this high pressure in the atmosphere, is that all the wintertime storms that would normally come into places like California instead got steered much, much farther north,” Cook said. “It's these wintertime storms that provide most of the moisture in California. So without getting that rainfall it led to a pretty severe drought." This type of high-pressure system is part of normal variation in the atmosphere, and whether or not it will appear in a given year is difficult to predict in computer models of the climate. Models are more attuned to droughts caused by La Niña's colder sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean, which likely triggered the multi-year Dust Bowl drought throughout the 1930s. In a normal La Niña year, the Pacific Northwest receives more rain than usual and the southwestern states typically dry out. But a comparison of weather data to models looking at La Niña effects showed that the rain-blocking high-pressure system in the winter of 1933-34 overrode the effects of La Niña for the western states. This dried out areas from northern California to the Rockies that otherwise might have been wetter. As winter ended, the high-pressure system shifted eastward, interfering with spring and summer rains that typically fall on the central plains. The dry conditions were exacerbated and spread even farther east by dust storms. "We found that a lot of the drying that occurred in the spring time occurred downwind from where the dust storms originated," Cook said, "suggesting that it's actually the dust in the atmosphere that's driving at least some of the drying in the spring and really allowing this drought event to spread upwards into the central plains." (http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/673xvariable_height/public/dust_storm_1934_sd.jpg?itok=JaotZJud) Dust clouds reflect sunlight and block solar energy from reaching the surface. That prevents evaporation that would otherwise help form rain clouds, meaning that the presence of the dust clouds themselves leads to less rain, Cook said. "Previous work and this work offers some evidence that you need this dust feedback to explain the real anomalous nature of the Dust Bowl drought in 1934," Cook said. Dust storms like the ones in the 1930s aren't a problem in North America today. The agricultural practices that gave rise to the Dust Bowl were replaced by those that minimize erosion. Still, agricultural producers need to pay attention to the changing climate and adapt accordingly, not forgetting the lessons of the past, said Seager. "The risk of severe mid-continental droughts is expected to go up over time, not down," he said. › Read the paper at Geophysical Research Letters http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/1934-had-worst-drought-of-last-thousand-years/#.Va4Uj_mqpBf Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 22, 2015, 04:33:23 am anyway all america needs to do is stop wasting their money on war,get the federal reserve to print them a few trillion dollars then build a huge sea water distiller that create clean drinking water, put pipes in and send it to wherever its needed
it would take a few million years to use up all the sea water,shit it could even be solar powered to keep the green fundy save the planet religious bigots happy. there you go problem solved Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 22, 2015, 07:32:30 am Think of the fish though!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 23, 2015, 04:27:57 am yeah yak i never thought of the fish haha Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 26, 2015, 07:03:35 pm GLOBAL WARMING EXPEDITION ON HOLD BECAUSE OF TOO MUCH ICE
by Cameron Slater on July 26, 2015 at 7:30am ngcc_amundsen_f Just like the Ship of Fools expedition in Antarctica there is now another expedition to study the effects of global warming that has been abandoned due to there being too much ice. That ice, of course, was supposed to be gone completely by 2012. An expedition to study the effects of global warming was put on hold Wednesday. The reason? Too much ice. The CCGS Amundsen, a Medium Arctic icebreaker and Arctic research vessel operated by the Canadian Coast Guard, was to travel throughout Hudson Bay, a body of water in northeastern Canada, but was rerouted to help ships who were stuck in the icy water. A Coast Guard officer said the conditions were the “worst he’s seen in 20 years,” reports CBC news. “Obviously it has a large impact on us,” says Martin Fortier, executive director of ArcticNet, which coordinates research on the vessel. “It’s a frustrating situation.” ArcticNet is a network of scientists who study “the impacts of climate change and modernization in the coastal Canadian Arctic.” Too much ice? In summer? I thought we had global warming? The ship even has a blog post that it has been updating. Here is an excerpt: “Meanwhile, we’ve run into ice and out of darkness. During our night of action, the sun didn’t set, so only the face of my watch was there to tell me that it was 3 AM as we were tying down incubators. At five thirty in the morning, as the sun rose — or, rather, got a bit brighter in the sky — filling the world with a deep pink, and the waves turned glassy and viscous and bright, our fingers finally fell numb and our setup was finally done, just in time for a quick nap before breakfast. Tonight, likely, well see the stuck ships.” Oh dear, another fail from the warmists. – The Daily Caller Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on July 27, 2015, 06:54:21 am All went well till I saw Cameron Slaters name up the masthead!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on July 27, 2015, 07:23:23 am Quick...kill the messenger ....😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on July 27, 2015, 06:53:46 pm they will need to wait to the summer for the ice to melt that and take a picture of a polar bear on an ice berg lol
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 02, 2015, 11:36:58 pm from The Washington Post.... White House set to adopt sweeping curbs on carbon pollution By JOBY WARRICK | 11:59PM EDT - Saturday, August 01, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20150801_AmosPowerPlant_zpsuktj8m0s.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/01/Health-Environment-Science/Images/2015-07-28T144013Z_01_TOR452_RTRIDSP_3_USA-COURT-AIRPOLLUTION-1474.jpg) The John E. Amos Power Plant, a coal-fired plant, is seen behind a home in Poca, West Virginia, in 2014. — Photo: Robert Galbraith/Reuters. THE Obama administration will formally adopt an ambitious regulation for cutting greenhouse-gas pollution on Monday, requiring every state to reduce emissions from coal-burning power plants and putting the country on a course that could change the way millions of Americans get their electricity. A retooled version of the administration's Clean Power Plan, first proposed a year ago, will seek to accelerate the shift to renewable energy while setting tougher goals for slashing carbon emissions blamed for global warming, according to administration officials briefed on the details. The new plan sets a goal of cutting carbon pollution from power plants by 32 percent by the year 2030, compared with 2005 levels — a 9 percent jump from the previous target of 30 percent — while rewarding states and utility companies that move quickly to expand their investment in solar and wind power. Many states will face tougher requirements for lowering greenhouse-gas emissions under the revised plan. But state governments also will be given more time to meet their targets and considerably more flexibility in how they achieve their pollution-cutting goals, according to two senior officials knowledgeable about the rule. For the first time, the officials said, the plan also includes a “reliability safety valve” that can buy states additional time if needed to avoid disruptions in the power supply. The rule — the first to regulate carbon emissions as a pollutant — is certain to face legal challenges as well as fierce opposition from the Republican-controlled Congress. Opponents blasted last year's proposed regulation as a possibly illegal federal overreach that would impose costly burdens on utility companies and their customers. All sides agree that the rule, if it stands, could substantially alter the U.S. energy landscape, driving the expanded use of “clean” energy while further diminishing coal's long dominance as a source of power for homes and businesses. White House officials say Americans will see major gains in improving air quality and fighting climate change as a result. “This is the most significant action any U.S. president has taken to curb greenhouse gases,” said one of the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the revised plan had not yet been made public. “It will form the foundation of the country's efforts to take on climate change for decades to come.” The formal unveiling of the plan on Monday will kick off a major White House initiative on climate. The campaign starts with a series of policy addresses and includes a visit to the Alaskan Arctic by President Obama to call attention to the effects of global warming. In September, Obama will entertain Pope Francis, an equally ardent apostle for battling climate change. The effort is expected to culminate in December with talks on a proposed international treaty curbing global carbon emissions. In a recorded video message to be released early on Sunday, Obama describes the Environmental Protection Agency's plan to rein in coal-burning as “the biggest, most important step we've ever taken to combat climate change.” “Power plants are the single biggest source of the harmful carbon pollution that contributes to the climate change,” Obama said, according to a transcript of the video provided to The Washington Post. “But until now, there have been no federal limits to the amount of that pollution those plants can dump into the air. Think about that.” Years in the making, the Clean Power Plan is a cornerstone of the administration's efforts to reduce emissions that scientists say are driving a rapid and potentially destructive warming of the planet. The White House has already promulgated regulations to dramatically improve energy efficiency in passenger cars and heavy trucks while also reducing emissions of heat-trapping methane from oil and gas production. Coal-burning produces about 40 percent of the electricity used by Americans, but reliance on coal has been slowly falling for several reasons, including government pollution controls, lower prices for solar and wind energy, and a resurgence of cheap natural gas. In the spring, natural gas surpassed coal as the biggest single source of electricity generation. The Clean Power Plan seeks to capitalize on the recent market trends by encouraging states to accelerate the shift to cleaner sources of energy. The rule requires each state to cut carbon emissions from its energy sector over the next 15 years — the exact amount of reductions vary, depending on each state's energy mix — while allowing governments to choose from a menu of options, including closing older coal-burning power plants and increasing reliance on solar and wind energy. In many states, the energy transformation is well underway as utility companies replace outdated coal-fired power plants with new ones that use natural gas or renewable energy. A White House fact sheet said the intention was to encourage states to speed up the transition. “The rule drives early reductions from renewable energy and energy efficiency, which will drive a more aggressive transformation in the domestic energy industry,” the document states. The version of the plan introduced in June 2014 drew skepticism from many states and furious opposition from congressional Republicans, particularly lawmakers from coal-producing states. Opponents warned that the regulation would devastate the coal industry and force utility companies to raise electricity rates, slowing the economic recovery and hurting consumers, especially the poor. Independent studies produced wildly different estimates of the regulation's potential cost, ranging from onerous to negligible. “This proposed plan is already on shaky legal grounds, will be extremely burdensome and costly, and will not seriously address the global environmental concerns that are frequently raised to justify it,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican-Kentucky) wrote in a March letter to all 50 governors, urging them to simply ignore the EPA rule. The revised plan includes significant changes intended to soften political opposition and deflect future legal challenges, according to the officials briefed on the measure. As described by these officials, the altered version includes:
The new version also includes an expanded Clean Energy Incentive Program that offers extensive credits to states for acting quickly to invest in renewable energy, the administration officials said. The program is structured specifically to reward investment in solar and wind power, essentially ensuring greater reliance on renewables in the future, they said. Because of these inducements, the percentage of U.S. electricity coming from renewables is expected to rise to 28 percent by the year 2030, compared with 22 percent under the previous version of the rule, the officials said. The White House predicts that electricity bills will drop for U.S. consumers by an average of $85 a year by 2030. “The impact will not just be in this decade, but far into the future,” the officials said. • Joby Warrick joined The Washington Post’s national staff in 1996. He has covered national security, intelligence and the Middle East, and currently writes about the environment.. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • How U.S. generates its electricity (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants) • New EPA rule on greenhouse gases the latest blow to King Coal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/new-epa-rule-on-greenhouse-gases-the-latest-blow-to-king-coal/2015/08/01/c8bd3936-3791-11e5-9739-170df8af8eb9_story.html) • What you need to know about Obama’s biggest global warming move yet — the Clean Power Plan (http://www.washingtonpost.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-biggest-global-warming-move-yet--the-clean-power-plan/2015/08/02/da4b3051-283d-4ba6-b4bd-b83fce3a9161_story.html) • New regulation would be latest blow to coal industry (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/new-epa-rule-on-greenhouse-gases-the-latest-blow-to-king-coal/2015/08/01/c8bd3936-3791-11e5-9739-170df8af8eb9_story.html) • Some states see easier road to meeting carbon-cutting goals (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/with-new-epa-regulations-looming-some-states-gain-from-coals-free-fall/2015/07/23/80001208-2c93-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html) • Pope Francis takes on climate skeptics with encyclical (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/how-pope-franciss-not-yet-official-document-on-climate-change-is-already-stirring-controversy/2015/06/17/ef4d46be-14fe-11e5-9518-f9e0a8959f32_story.html) http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-set-to-adopt-sweeping-curbs-on-carbon-pollution/2015/08/01/ba6627fa-385c-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-set-to-adopt-sweeping-curbs-on-carbon-pollution/2015/08/01/ba6627fa-385c-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on August 03, 2015, 03:53:59 am yup...lets get rid of all coal jobs ::)
...and then train jobs :o Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2015, 12:11:42 pm I am proud to be able to declare that I have never (in 39½-years of driving trains) hauled coal in any train I have ever driven....(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/19_HammerHead.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on August 03, 2015, 03:35:36 pm what..your employers dont trust you carting high value goods :o
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 03, 2015, 04:12:54 pm Coal is sooooooo 19th and 20th century. It is for backwards-looking losers like you. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on August 03, 2015, 06:15:50 pm Think you will find thaty coal is still very big business in the 21st century...you gotta get out more ;)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 04, 2015, 05:44:55 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202015/20150722_GlobalWarmingRisingSeaLevels_zpsqezk2o1d.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2015/07/22/thursdays-cartoon-revenge-of-planet-earth) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 04, 2015, 10:16:20 pm from The Dominion Post.... Window closing fast on climate change options By RALPH CHAPMAN | 9:24PM - Tuesday, 04 August 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202015/20150804_1438680267785s_zpsn6mrcfpa.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/5/z/w/5/w/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.165pwi.png/1438680267785.jpg) A larger investment in wind power would be a major boost to New Zealand's renewable energy goals. — Photo: Reuters. PILOTS know that there is a brief window of time between losing oxygen and passing out, a period in which some life-saving action is possible. With climate change, we are at that moment now. As climate destabilisation gathers pace, balanced democratic decision-making in many countries will become more difficult, and short-term palliatives will prevail over more rational long-term mitigation strategies. This country has spent most of the last 25 years dithering on climate change. Inaction poses an increasing risk to New Zealand's reputation. We are lagging behind in action and in planning to address climate change, and this is being noticed by our international partners. In advance of the UN climate summit in Paris this December, New Zealand has proposed a weak mitigation offer that has rightly been dismissed as “inadequate” by Climate Action Tracker, a highly credible group of European policy analysts. Now, with US President Barack Obama's latest clean power plan, the pressure on all countries to act is ratcheting up. A reputation as a good international citizen carries weight. I know from personal experience in helping to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol, some years ago, that New Zealand can be effective in encouraging other nations to act in the common interest. The recent publication of a global soft power index in The Economist shows New Zealand scoring well on the “ability to coax and persuade” — we are not irrelevant when it comes to diplomacy, or in our capacity to act as a global conscience. But we can make no claim to being a useful global conscience if we are falling behind in addressing climate change. Where is New Zealand's comprehensive low-emissions strategy? Even where we are not behind, such as in our use of renewable electricity, the Government offers feeble excuses for inaction. It is illogical to claim that, because our electricity is already largely renewable, we cannot do more. We can. Take wind power, for example. New Zealand has about 700MW of wind installed and this generates about 5 percent of our total electricity output over a year. But an additional 2000MW is consented, and still has not been built. Pushing ahead with these wind projects, now, might increase New Zealand's wind power to over 15 percent of total electricity output, an amount that would bring us much closer to the 100 percent renewable ideal. One of the main reasons renewable electricity is not being developed more quickly is the low carbon price on gas and coal, a laughable $7 per tonne of CO2. This could be lifted to around $50 per tonne by, for example, the Government introducing a rising floor price in the emissions trading system (ETS). This price would be in line with estimates of the “social cost of carbon” (the damage caused by carbon emissions). With such a floor, it is likely the remaining coal power plant at Huntly would close, for example. The price of electricity would rise marginally, but carbon emissions would fall. Real progress requires positive action by both central and local government. The momentum for this is building, but it must be accelerated. A fundamental danger posed by New Zealand's policy stance on climate change is that our inaction will add to a sense of global powerlessness in the face of climate change, perpetuating indecisiveness at precisely the moment when it is most critical to act. The scientific evidence is now absolutely compelling about the urgent need to act on climate change. Increasingly ominous warnings have been sounded by many, from the World Bank to the International Energy Agency. These point to climate change as intensifying the threat to global security. Every country, no matter how small, should be taking urgent action. We need to do our absolute best to cut emissions over the critical next two decades, or we run the medium-term risk of the international community starting to fracture under the stress of growing climate destabilisation. It is time for robust policy from a Government that no longer says “we can't do much more,” but says instead, “we will do everything we must.” • Associate Professor Ralph Chapman is director of the graduate programme in environmental studies at Victoria University of Wellington, and the author of Time of Useful Consciousness: Acting Urgently on Climate Change, a BWB Text published this week. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/70810722/window-closing-fast-on-climate-change-options (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/70810722/window-closing-fast-on-climate-change-options) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on August 05, 2015, 06:47:30 pm Please send me some global warming...its freezing up here :o
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on August 06, 2015, 03:44:40 pm And when the sun blithely ignores humanities pitiful attempts to restrain it and carries on with altering the climate just as it has done for millennia, I don't suppose Ralph Chapman will be anywhere to be seen.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 22, 2015, 02:28:12 pm An interesting photograph gallery on The Washington Post's website.... • Frightening, yet beautiful: Greenland’s melting glaciers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/greenlands-melting-glaciers/2015/08/19/4e747112-4691-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_gallery.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on August 23, 2015, 07:14:21 pm haha ....brucie..... why are you shitting your pants over the bogeyman...global (hurry up its freezing) warming ;)
...how many kiwis did global warming kill last year ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on September 11, 2015, 07:44:31 am Pacific leaders agree to disagree on climate change at leaders forum
Pacific leaders have agreed to disagree on climate change. From left Kiribati President Anote Tong, PM John Key, PNG PM Peter O'Neill and Australian PM Tony Abbott. New Zealand and Australia have held their ground on climate change at the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and made no extra commitments ahead of world talks in Paris. Pacific leaders took part in a retreat today where five key areas of climate change, fisheries, connectivity, health and human rights abuses in West Papua were nutted out. It was clear discussions hadn't gone smoothly when the press conference was delayed by more than two hours, with leaders staying behind closed doors to work through points of difference. Kiribati President Anote Tong has long been advocating for the Pacific to step up its game on climate change and on Thursday following the retreat he said he hadn't got the outcome he would have liked. "Whether we accept it or not is a different question," he said. Those islands barely 2m above sea level were the ones on the "frontline" dealing with the issues of climate change, he said. Kiribati's President Anote Tong would have liked more to have come out of climate change talks at the Pacific Islands Forum. Kiribati's President Anote Tong would have liked more to have come out of climate change talks at the Pacific Islands Forum. "We're not totally disagreeing - we have a position we'll advance in Paris at the end of this year," Tong said. While Key and Abbott hadn't committed to any new targets on climate change they acknowledged small island nations wanted no more than a 1.5 degree increase in global temperature. Currently the UN mandate is for no more than a 2 degree rise. "There is agreement that we as Pacific countries accept for low lying states they are particularly vulnerable, and they would seek an even more ambitious target in Paris," Key said. "In the end we'll see what Paris comes out with." Abbott said both Australia and New Zealand would go to the UN conference in Paris with "very ambitious targets" but no further commitments would be made as a result of PIF. "The point I certainly make is that we believe we can get emissions down, that we can be constructive global citizens when it comes to climate change, without clobbering our economy with new taxes and massive new charges. Ad Feedback "Because none of us are in the business of damaging vital industries like agriculture in the case of New Zealand or resources in the case of Australia," Abbott said. "We must be good environmental citizens but we must also have strong economies with prosperity and jobs for our people." Fisheries also featured heavily at the forum and leaders agreed to take a closer look at New Zealand's quota management system in an effort to better sustain, in particular, the region's tuna population. Key said fisheries ministers from PIF would travel to New Zealand to look at the quota management system and talk with scientists about its benefits. Abbott also made a commitment to pump more money into aerial surveillance of the Pacific region to keep a closer eye on fisheries. Human rights abuses in the Indonesian province of West Papua have had emotions running high at this year's forum including protests at PIF calling for Pacific leaders to do more. Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O'Neill said as a result of the retreat there would be a discussion with Indonesia about the "possibility of a fact finding mission". O'Neill denied that the forum had been a "missed opportunity" to do more for West Papua and he said he was "encouraged by what we're hearing from Jakarta". "It's just the first of many steps for us," he said. The leaders commended the Indonesian Government for coming to the table about the human rights concerns. On Friday leaders would be involved in post-forum dialogue and Key would open the new trade and enterprise office in Port Moresby and announce a new Trade Commissioner for the country. - Stuff Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 11, 2015, 06:48:00 pm from the Los Angeles Times… Congress fiddles while the West burns By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Monday, September 07, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20150907dh_zps9r9siye4.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-55ed2541/turbine/la-na-tt-west-burns-20150906) IMAGINE a 55-mile-long lake that starts in the Sierras and ends in the wine country of Paso Robles, or, for an even more precise description, picture a lake with the Alps at one end and Tuscany at the other. That would be Lake Chelan, a glacial fjord that carves its way out of the Cascade Mountains and flows into the dry vineyard-and-orchard-wrapped terrain of eastern Washington state. Lake Chelan is where my family has vacationed nearly every summer for a quarter century, but I've never written about it, not wanting to encourage even more tourists to swamp the place. The secret is out, though. If you checked the top news in the Los Angeles Times or watched any national news reports last month, you will have seen images of Lake Chelan with houses along the shore — and even boats and docks — burned to charred ruins. You will have seen thick smoke choking the air and blocking the normally blue sky. For a number of days, the town of Chelan at the dry end of the long lake was the epicenter of a huge wildfire, one of many that made this the worst fire season in Washington's history (the previous record for worst was set only last year). There were dozens of other major fires in California, Oregon, Idaho and other parts of the West and many of them — including the conflagration near Chelan — have yet to be fully contained. As Governor Jerry Brown has observed, there is not a fire “season” anymore; thanks to climate change, wildfires are becoming a year-round phenomenon. At one point, when it seemed half the country was going up in smoke, the folks fighting the flames around Chelan called for reinforcements and there were none to be found. All available firefighting crews were already in burning woodlands scattered throughout several states. To meet the need for more able hands, Washington Governor Jay Inslee called up the National Guard, then asked for citizen volunteers who were willing to be trained on the job. Not only has manpower been stretched to the limit and beyond during this year's wildfire war, but the budget of the U.S. Forest Service has been drained by the endless fight. And, guess what? It is only going to get worse as rising global temperatures continue to dry out millions of acres of forest. The good news is that there are mitigation and prevention efforts that could help the problem. Over the last five years, the federal Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program has diminished the likelihood of massive fires on 1.43 million acres. Better management of forests, including controlled burns and the removal of dry underbrush and insect-damaged trees, could do even more. The bad news is that the Forest Service does not have enough money to carry through with these measures because all the money is being spent fighting fires. In other words, they cannot pay for preventing fires because they are busting the budget trying to put out the ones that are burning. There is a way to fix the funding problem. Wildfires are clearly natural disasters, just like hurricanes, floods and tornadoes. If the costs of fighting wildfires were charged to FEMA, the federal agency tasked with handling big disastrous events, the Forest Service could use its money the way it was intended — managing the forests. There is only one thing standing in the way of that logical policy: America's do-nothing lawmakers. Congress has, for years, failed to give the Forest Service enough money to do its job. A new Wildlife Disaster Funding Act has languished while our senators and representatives have been busy doing as little as possible about most of the problems facing the nation. It isn't just partisan gridlock that has prevented action. Narrow-visioned budget hawks have failed to see that a miserly approach to the Forest Service budget actually costs the country more money as preventable wildfires go unchecked and the economies of the western states get hit over and over. The climate change deniers in Congress add to the problem by refusing to recognize that wildfires are one of many challenges that must be addressed as environmental realities shift. Wildfires are burning homes, destroying natural resources and habitats, wrecking vacation areas, hurting rural communities, threatening agricultural economies and taking lives, including those of three firefighters who were brought down by a blaze north of Chelan. It may be too great a stretch to say members of Congress have blood on their hands, but if they fail to act before another summer of burning begins, they will certainly share a big part of the blame for the tragic results. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-west-burns-20150906-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-west-burns-20150906-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on September 12, 2015, 07:50:16 am Pacific forum not perfect but better than not meeting at all - John Key
There's nothing "perfect" about bringing together Pacific leaders to discuss issues facing the region but it's better than not talking at all, says John Key. The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) in Port Moresby has almost wrapped up and while New Zealand has pumped $50 million into improving fisheries in the Pacific, little has changed in terms of climate change commitments and putting a stop to human rights atrocities in West Papua. Key disputed suggestions PIF was simply a talk-fest, and said he was used to those claims at a range of different multi-lateral forums. "The question you have to ask yourself is, is this perfection? Probably not, but what's the alternative? The alternative is we don't meet and I don't think that would help." Pacific forums would always have "challenges" because of the range of countries and their different economies being brought together. "Australia and New Zealand are developed OECD countries with different economies to say, for instance, Kiribati," he said. Reports of human rights abuses in West Papua have long been on forum agendas and some Pacific nations have pushed for the Indonesian Government to be held to account for the injustices. Key went into talks at the retreat on Thursday with no plans to support a fact-finding mission despite non-government organisations working in West Papua and the Green Party calling for an investigation. Ad Feedback As a result of PIF the forum chairman, Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O'Neill, would now speak with Indonesian officials about the possibility of a fact-finding mission. "The realistic point is of course that we'd prefer to do that with the support of the Indonesians otherwise it can become a very difficult thing to do," Key said. "I think we're making progress but I accept some people would want it to happen more quickly but if you don't have buy-in from the Indonesians then there will always be challenges around the credibility of it." Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully said New Zealand had already tried to do more in West Papua and had planned to have a policing project set up there more than a year ago. "Because we couldn't arrive at conditions acceptable we decided not to proceed with it." McCully said he had spoken with the Indonesian vice minister of foreign affairs in Port Moresby this week and stressed that the fact the issue was so prominent at PIF shouldn't be ignored. "The best way to get them to respond is to ask them nicely but firmly." "Shouting from the rooftops and expecting Indonesians to salute is just not going to work," he said. If a fact-finding mission got the green light, McCully said he would consider financing it if New Zealand was asked to. "I certainly hope if the idea was put forward (Indonesia) would respond to it positively but I didn't get a very reassuring response to that." "The best way to avoid human rights abuses in West Papua is to focus the Indonesian authorities on the fact that the international community wants them to do better," he said. Indonesia was a "young country and their institutions aren't perfect" but "they've accepted they need to work on these things and need international support to do so," McCully said. - Stuff Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2015, 05:02:36 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) Everything is on fire and no one cares By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 10:19AM PDT - Monday, August 24, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824a_Firemen_zpsjbnuthoi.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/firemen.jpg) 2015 is fast on track to have more firefighters, more money spent, more resources dedicated to fighting wildfires than any time in modern history. EVERY SUMMER of my existence, I've spent at least a week or two — if not major portions of my childhood — up at a postcard-perfect family getaway cabin in northernmost Idaho, on a stunning lake called Pend Oreille, mere minutes from a scrappy little Western town called Sandpoint (surviving though “sheer grit and perseverance” (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/us/assignment-america-sandpoint-idaho.html), according to the New York Times). Magical barely begins to cover it. And every summer for fast approaching five decades, it's been gloriously the same: mid-July through late August, it's a near-perfect bouquet of 90-degree days and crystalline, star-soaked nights, the air itself becoming imbued with a soft, healing quality and all of it interrupted by the occasional feral, window-rattling summer thunderstorm to remind you of nature's omnipotence, right up until Labor Day, when faint hints of fall begin to paint the breeze. In short, it's just sort of stupidly idyllic, a spectacular way to clear the mind and the lungs at one of the more pristine, unpretentious places on the planet, as yet despoiled by mega-developments or decimated by the roiling national economy. But this year, for the first time since I can remember — and maybe for the first time in a century or more — something changed. This year, there were wildfires. Not the typical wildfires, mind you. Not the normal smattering of (relatively) easily controlled seasonal blazes that nature herself always ignites to help purge and clear; I mean all the massive, drought-amplified, state-engulfing wildfires you've been hearing about all season long — nearly all of them larger, earlier and more frequent than any time in modern history, ranging from a few thousand acres to the largest in the country, the Soda fire (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/15/wildfires-soda-fire-idaho-becomes-largest-us), currently engulfing upwards of 265,000 acres in southern Idaho, which joins with all the other Pacific Northwest fires (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/08/18/with-7-million-acres-burned-so-far-this-year-the-u-s-wildfire-situation-is-looking-dire) burning throughout Washington (http://www.sfgate.com/news/us/article/Easing-winds-predicted-for-raging-Washington-6459261.php), Oregon and Montana. And here you thought just California was ablaze. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824b_HorsesFire_zpspewdtcf1.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/horses-fire.jpg) 17,000 square miles burned in Alaska and Canada alone. The loss of wildlife? Unimaginable. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824b_HorsesFire_zpspewdtcf1.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/fire-beauty.jpg) It's often a gorgeous kind of terror that wildfires bring. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824d_BurningIsland_zpsp68qdrez.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/island.jpg) The views are getting more disquieting by the year. Do you know about Alaska? Nearly five million acres have burned throughout that unusually hot, dry state this year, which is a record, which is something like the size of Connecticut (combined), which is more staggering than your heart can process. Go ahead, try it. And then add in Canada's staggering wildfires, and you hit upwards of 11 million scorched acres (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/07/13/2015-is-on-pace-to-be-the-worst-year-on-record-for-alaska-wildfires-heres-why-thats-scary) — that's 17,000 square miles, and still going strong. That's terrifying (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/07/26/alaskas-terrifying-wildfire-season-and-what-it-says-about-climate-change). The scariest part? Fire season, historically speaking, doesn't even begin until September. Did you know 2015 is already officially the hottest year ever recorded on Earth (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/08/20/july_2015_sets_a_horrifying_new_high_the_hottest_month_ever_recorded.html)? Did you know Alaska recorded its hottest month ever, in 91 years of record keeping, in May? Or that Washington's biggest fire could keep burning until it snows (http://mashable.com/2015/08/24/washington-okanogan-fire-largest/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link)? The worst — as nearly every scientist, climatologist, environmentalist in the world is all too sick of saying these days — is yet to come. How dire do you want it? What's it going to take? As Eric Holthaus over at Slate recently put it WRT the huge and immediate changes needed right now from the UN and various self-serving, combative, greedy world leaders to combat this downward spiral: Where is everyone? (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/08/20/july_2015_sets_a_horrifying_new_high_the_hottest_month_ever_recorded.html) (Here's your must-read of the month: The New Yorker profile (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/24/the-weight-of-the-world) of the amazing Christiana Figueres, head of the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change — the U.N.F.C.C.C. — and just what she's up against in trying to rally member nations to make real changes, right now). This year, my summer visit to Idaho was swallowed, most days, in a thick, gauzy haze. It was as though the sky was overlaid with a bleakest of Instagram filters; the smoke was often so dense, it blocked the blue light spectrum entirely, washing everything in a pale, flat yellow, a creepy, apocalyptic tint that contrasted well with the redness in your eyes and the gray dryness of your throat. Here's the thing: It wasn't just weird. It's not just “an unusually hot and dry season.” You can feel it in your very cells: this is all part of a increasingly vicious, mean-ass vortex of accelerating evidence (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/07/20/the-worlds-most-famous-climate-scientist-just-outlined-an-alarming-scenario-for-our-planets-future) that the planet and all its animals — of which we are merely one — are under a potentially fatal stress like no other time in modern history. Put another way: It's not merely about preparing for rough weather. It's not about stocking up on extra water, flashlight batteries, a solar iPhone charger. Climate change doesn't merely mean life is going to get much more difficult, much more quickly than most people — particularly the rich and oligarchic — can possibly imagine. It means it's going to get much more disquieting. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824e_NoaaHottest_zpsbtoytkcl.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/noaa-hottest.png) The NOAA map. 2015 is officially the hottest year ever recorded by humans. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150824f_LakeHaze_zpsatlwj9at.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/everything-is-on-fire/lake-haze.jpg) Pend Oreille lake, in northern Idaho, as seen though a pale, hazy filter of very creepy beauty. The very tone and timbre of life is changing. The air is shifting, the light. As ecosystems collapse, as animals either hatch in bizarre megaswarms or vanish completely, as forests whither and thin out, the planet's increasingly palpable failure to hold itself in some kind of equilibrium is going to creep into your very spine, shake your dreams. Don't believe it? Just wait. Winter will soon come and finally put out all the fires, to be replaced by (if all predictions are to be believed), savage El Niño flooding, pounding the bone-dry, unprepared ground, which in turn will be replaced by yet another scorching summer. Did you know we're pumping more C02 into the atmosphere than ever before in history? Did you know we've wiped out half the planet's wildlife in just the past 40 years (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/08/17/say-goodbye-to-all-the-wild-animals)? Up in Idaho, when the smoke was so thick it turned the sky a pallid urine color, I noticed something else: the birds. They stopped chirping. The air often fell dead still. No bees, no bugs, no osprey, no eagles; the smoke appeared to choke off all normal, life-affirming activity. I heard reports of herds of parched, exhausted, soot-covered elk and deer crossing local highways, seeking water and relief from the fire. That same afternoon, I noticed a huge swarms of dead flies — not the usual lake gnats, the no-see-ums and such — but large, black flies, by the tens of thousands — covering the surface of lake near our cabin. I skipped my swim. This is what we have yet to realize: it's not just about preparing for more severe weather. It's far more about what's about to happen to the experience of life itself, how we navigate our terrifically spoiled, entitled daily lives and with what newfound combination of panic and kindness — all amplified, to a rather terrifying degree, by the realization that the more we refuse to change our gluttonous ways, the more nature is going to step in and change them for us. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/08/24/everything-is-on-fire-and-no-one-cares (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/08/24/everything-is-on-fire-and-no-one-cares) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on September 13, 2015, 07:05:45 pm ..hope the global warming gets here soon..its freezing...it will do wonders for tourism..wonder if we'll be able to grow mango's :P
looks like kj and Mark "the moron" Morgford are shitting themselves...how many people in NZ has it killed so far ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2015, 11:57:08 pm Watch out for El Niño....it's coming and global-warming/climate-change is going to make it considerably worse than it was in 1997-1998. So, if you live in Northland, Auckland, Waikato, King Country, the 'Naki, Rangatikei, Manawatu or on the West Coast of the South Island, you'll gonna get dumped on big-time and be in for a wet, miserable summer (listening to the JAFAs whinging about their terrible summer should be highly entertaining). However, if you live down the East Coast of either island, you're gonna fry 'cause you're heading for a HUGE drought. That should get the cockies (the Nats' mates) squealing like stuck pigs, eh? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/04_Disappear.gif) Meanwhile, across the other side of the Pacific pond… (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) The coming flood: 10 ways to prepare for El Niño By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 3:10PM PDT - Wednesday, September 09, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909a_FloodedRoad_zpsczb2ntx6.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/flooded-road.jpg) Hard to imagine this scenario, when it's 100 degrees and scorching dry. But this isn't far off. You ready? SURE, you're hot and dry now. Just you wait. It's been so long since it rained here in California — I mean really, truly rained, more than a couple days' worth, more than “Hey maybe I should buy an umbrella oh wait never mind” — you probably can't remember what it's like when it rains more or less steadily, more or less torrentially, for days, weeks, even months straight, in true El Niño style. But hear this now: Danger approacheth. The signs are coming fast and hard from nature (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/10-signs-that-El-Nino-may-be-coming-6485530.php) and science alike that there's a new, far larger, far more intense “Godzilla” El Niño brewing out in the very unhappy ocean, and if most models are to be believed, this winter (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/08/18/winter_weather_preview_thanks_to_el_nino_we_know_what_s_coming.html) is going to make the '08 downpour look like a dash through a lawn sprinkler. (Alert! All these so-called El Niño “experts” are the same sketchy, liberal science-types who claim climate change is real and man-made. All GOP/Trump/Fox News fans are encouraged to ignore all storm warnings and safety precautions. Nature loves your livid ignorance. It's what Jesus would have wanted). So then: Are you prepared for El Niño 2.0? Might as well start gathering the goods now; the storms will start rolling soon, and who knows if Amazon's delivery drones can survive the rain. A few suggestions: 1. World-class umbrella (http://mashable.com/2014/04/21/innovative-umbrellas) Ever been to Seattle? Great city. Utterly abysmal fashion sense, a miserable parade of fleece, baggy Gore-Tex and clumpy hiking boots at the office. Seattle fashion, largely due to all that rain, is even worse than San Francisco. Terrifying. When the rains come, don't go “full Seattle.” Skip the Gore-Tex and invest right now in a few large, unbreakable, professional-grade umbrellas. They're sophisticated, functional and cheap enough that you won't freak out when you forget them in various Ubers, and you can wear almost anything you like underneath. What are you, a 5-year-old at Boy Scout camp? Do you see the French walking around in shapeless lime green REI raingear? Have some self respect. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909wu_WeirdUmbrella_zpsei9mhorm.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/weird-umbrella.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909j_GiantUmbrella_zpsa3gxchb9.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/giant-umbrella.jpg) LEFT: Only if you enjoy general mocking and never want to have sex. | RIGHT: Go big or go home. 2. Waterproof camera (http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-waterproof-camera) I have the Olympus Tough TG-3. They just released the TG-4. Terrific little beast, fast and easy and damn near indestructible (there are other choices too). Mine's been through three Burning Mans and multiple ocean dips, hot tubs and pools and naughty showers galore, and still going strong. Why a dedicated all-weather camera? Because waterproof iPhone cases are pain-in-the-ass bulky, and you want to be ready to take awesome snaps as the frogs rain down, yes? 3. Inflatable canoe (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=inflatable+canoe&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Ainflatable+canoe) I confess I know nothing about the blowup watercraft industry. But apparently it's a thing, and in space-strapped San Francisco, where garages are almost non-existent, inflatables store much more easily and just might be perfect for cruising around the flood-ravaged streets, rescuing hopeless tech bros and baffled hipsters from their rooftops and delivering fresh margaritas to the needy. 4. Los Angeles Mudslide Drinking Game (https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=z6oRRrx96IDI.konB3gRXDNIw&hl=en) Every winter it's the same; epic mudslides stun the hapless City of Angels, as if they never learned that lots of water and loose topsoil — and poor urban planning — don't actually create concrete. Behold, the Los Angeles Mudslide Drinking Game! Take a shot for every viral video of some multimillionaire movie producer's Frank Lloyd Wright knock-off sliding down Laurel Canyon or Malibu Canyon, and turning into a very expensive mudstick sculpture. Bonus shot if it belongs to Michael Bay. 5. Waterproof tent (http://www.rei.com/product/827807/rei-kingdom-6-tent) Not for outside, silly. For the living room, when the moisture makes all the wooden framing of your ancient San Francisco Victorian swell and warp, and you suddenly don't have enough buckets to catch all the leaks. Just like camping! Except with better porn. And coffee. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909h_Tent_zps6ctgyjht.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/tent.jpg) Larger than most San Francisco studio apartments, and .oo1% the price. 6. El Niño playlist Are you thinking “Singin' in the Rain” or maybe “Rainy Days and Mondays”? What are you, 90 years old? This is El Niño 2.0. Get serious. This means Tool, Nick Cave (https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/aint-gonna-rain-anymore/id675468906?i=675468943), Leonard Cohen, Zep's “The Rain Song” (https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/the-rain-song/id580707916?i=580707918), Tom Waits, Morphine's “You Look Like Rain” (https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/you-look-like-rain/id164346651?i=164346791). Because obviously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo) 7. Yoga class pass (http://bit.ly/MarkMorford_YogaTreeClasses) What, you think I'd let this post go by without a devout plug for my other, nicely intertwined (https://markmorford.com/yoga_workshops/yoga-for-writers-daylong-immersion) career? Rainy days are designed for vigorous, spiritually supercharged sweating, indoors and partially naked. Besides, my new book isn't anywhere near done, and I still haven't given in to the downloadable-online-class thing. Yoga is much better in person, anyway. What's not to like? See you there (http://yogatreesf.com). 8. Vizio M-Series (http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-tv) Just got a 65" version of this ridiculously good, relatively affordable slab of LCD wonder, and I'm stunned at just how obscenely how fast the glass and the tech have improved since I bought my (then-ginormous, now failing) 42" Samsung seven years ago. Add the new Apple TV (http://gizmodo.com/the-new-apple-tv-is-an-app-powered-fun-machine-1729461839) and multiple wine club/bourbon subscriptions, and you're all set for endless rainy-day binge watching (Personal recs: Inside Amy Schumer, Rick and Morty (http://www.wired.com/2015/07/rick-and-morty-season-2), Orphan Black, Burning Love, Parts Unknown, Key & Peele, Inexplicable Universe (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4642162)). (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909i_Vizio_zpsycu5eoth.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/vizio.jpg) VIzio. Or whatever. 9. “This won't solve the drought” (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/07/sorry-california-el-nino-wont-save-you-drought) verbiage filter It's going to get annoying. I'll surely say it, as will countless others in the coming months: No matter how much rain comes, El Niño probably won't solve California's epic drought. It's too much water, too fast, too warm. What we need, of course, is a string of long, cold winters that dump tons of snow in the mountains. What we're about to get is a God tossing a giant water balloon on our heads, and running away cackling. Find that depressing? Best set all news filters to weed out every mention of the rain's non-effect on the drought beyond the 100th repeat. Because yay rain! At least all the terrifying wildfires (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/08/24/everything-is-on-fire-and-no-one-cares) will be out. For a moment. 10. Cool baby name book/app/site (http://www.babble.com/baby-names/exotic-names) Wasn't there a surge of births roughly nine months after the '98 El Niño? Doesn't it makes sense? Inhospitable weather = more time nesting at home = after you're done Instagramming all your artsy rain photos and binge-watching ‘Wet Hot American Summer’ and ‘Sherlock’, well, might as well get naked and knock it out. Repeatedly. After all, they don't call it El Niño (“baby boy” or “the kid”) for nothing. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909b_HouseTilt_zpsfqrbujl1.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/house-tilt.jpg) I swear I just saw this one on AirBnB. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909c_Hwy1_zpsc7tvqy60.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/hwy1.jpg) Oh right, Highway 1. Does not do well with heavy rains. Better get those scenic coastal drives in now. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909d_LaSlide_zpslefdtzws.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/la-slide.jpg) Weather does not much care for your poor urban planning. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909e_Map_zpsowsplro4.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/map.jpg) Red means go. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909f_Rockslide_zpsxluvu9za.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/rockslide.jpg) This, after just a couple DAYS of heavy downpour, last year. Imagine a few months. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909g_Slug_zpsx3a1qapj.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/slug.jpg) Nature is delivering us creatures we almost never see this far north. Because the ocean is warmer than ever, is why. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/20150909k_KidWater_zpshgwcqsad.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/get-ready-for-wet/kid-water.jpg) Rain is for ponderin'. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/09/09/the-coming-flood-10-ways-to-prepare-for-el-nino (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/09/09/the-coming-flood-10-ways-to-prepare-for-el-nino) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2015, 12:08:15 am from The Washington Post.... West Coast residents caught in a line of fire from California to Washington By DARRYL FEARS | 3:54PM - Saturday, September 12, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20150912a_WashingtonWildfiresMemorial_zps7l6txnjf.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/09/11/Health-Environment-Science/Images/APTOPIX_Washington_Wildfires_Memorial-00301.jpg) Firefighters salute as a motorcade passes before a memorial service on August 30th in Wenatchee, Washington, for three firefighters killed in a wildfire. Richard Wheeler, Andrew Zajac and Thomas Zbyszewski died on August 19th in the fire near Twisp, Washington. — Photograph: Elaine Thompson/Associated Press. WHEN the emergency sirens wailed, Christine Perry muttered, “Oh, Lord, not again,” then scampered outdoors. For a second straight year, a monster fire lurked outside her tiny town of Pateros, Washington. She strained to see whether thick smoke was rolling her way. A year ago, she barely escaped her house before it was destroyed by wildfire. After rebuilding, she feared it would happen again. “Last year they told us we were safe. The next thing I knew, I was running out of the house in my flip-flops with the fire in the back yard,” she said. The house didn't simply catch fire, she said, “it exploded. It was unreal. It's something I'll never forget.” Large wildfires are burning themselves into the memories of thousands of residents along the West Coast. In a region reeling from a historic drought, intense fires this year have raged from San Bernardino in Southern California, through Oregon, and up to Pateros near the Canadian border in northeast Washington, where Perry serves as mayor pro tem. With more than a month remaining in the Western fire season, which starts each year in June, nearly 600,000 acres have burned in California. Washington is setting a record, with 990,000 scorched acres. And Oregon is on pace to match one of its worse seasons ever, with nearly 1 million acres burned. Nationwide, more than 7 million acres have burned so far this year; the record is nearly 10 million in 2006. Fires in the Alaskan wilderness account for at least 5 million of the acres that have burned this year. Never have so many acres burned with so much time left in the wildfire season. Across the country, the season has usually run from May through October, but climate change has extended the season from March to November, according to scientists and U.S. Forest Service officials responsible for suppressing fires on federal land. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20150912b_WesternWildfires_zpspnmpjfl5.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/09/11/Health-Environment-Science/Images/Western_Wildfires-0e71a.jpg) Oregon National Guard Specialist Nicholas Hall, right, listens to an instructor during wildland fire training on August 25th in Salem, Oregon. Governor Kate Brown has activated more National Guard members to help fight destructive wildfires raging across the state. — Photograph: Ashley Smith/Statesman-Journal/Associated Press. California, Oregon and Washington are all in the throes of a severe drought. The mountain snow that normally replenishes the water in rivers and lakes was so low in the three states that it burned away early and had little effect. Wildfires are a natural part of forest ecology, serving an important role in removing grasses and brush, and paving the way for new growth. But drought and higher-than-normal temperatures have robbed the ground of moisture, creating abnormally dry conditions that spark when lightning strikes and sometimes roar into mammoth blazes. “This year there are many more fires that have threatened or are threatening communities, closing highways and freeways, impacting entire towns,” said Joe Hessel, a forester in the northeast district of the Oregon Department of Forestry. Some housing developments are controversial because they're built near the edge of forests, placing them in the path of fires that burn naturally. But some of the recent fires have threatened homes that are far from areas that normally burn. “They're burning into towns,” Hessel said. “They're not homes out in the forest.” Perry was in her house on a hill overlooking downtown Pateros in July last year — 30 miles from the forest edge — when sirens blared and emergency crews rushed in to evacuate her neighborhood. She barely had time to help rescue her 88-year-old mother, Marian, who lived next door. “We're 30 miles from the forested area,” Perry said. Thirty houses covering three blocks were wiped out by a fire called the Carlton Complex. “It felt like we were surrounded by a fire tornado.” Perry said she's one of five homeowners who rebuilt. A year later, in August, sirens announced the arrival of the Chelan Complex. “Oh, Lord,” she recalled thinking, “I do not want to do this again.” The rebuilt house “looks like a hotel,” devoid of personal touches, Perry said, because she hasn't replaced family photos lost in the fire. Her children sent digital images that she printed, but she said, “I can't bring myself to put up personal pictures. Maybe I haven't dealt with what happened.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20150912c_USAWildfires_zpsoue7bn20.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/09/11/Health-Environment-Science/Images/2015-08-31T230822Z_01_TOR906_RTRIDSP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) The TePee wildfire is seen burning on August 29th at the Manning Bridge as it crosses the Salmon River near Riggins, Idaho. — Photograph: Don Jaques/U.S. Forest Service/Reuters. It's rare that the Pacific Northwest experiences more acres destroyed by fire than California, but that's what is happening this season. California's longer drought could be its salvation, said Richard Laton, an associate professor of hydrology at California State University at Fullerton. With so little precipitation, nothing grows after previous wildfires, so there's little fuel to make fires grow. “We've had about 1,000 more fires than usual, but they're not big fires,” Laton said. “Worst-case scenario for us is a wet year that brings plants back, then we get a year of drought that makes them dry as hell.” Still, California is having its “second-busiest season in a decade,” said Stanton Florea, a spokesman for the Forest Service's Pacific Southwest Region, which manages 21 million acres of wildlands in California. Advances in firefighting is the main reason small fires aren't spreading, Florea said. The same is true in the Northwest, Hessel said. But so many fires are burning in Oregon and Washington, and farther east in Idaho and Montana, that states are competing for money needed for firefighters and equipment. Ninety-eight fires have met the “large fires” criteria of the Northwest Interagency Coordination Center, a federal agency charged with coordinating fire suppression in the Pacific Northwest. More than 1.5 million acres have burned in Oregon and Washington. A single fire, the Canyon Creek Complex, burned 110,000 acres in Oregon. A single fire in Washington, the North Star, is still going after burning more than 210,000 acres. The cost of fielding 11,500 firefighters and support personnel to fight all the fires reached more than $550 million by the end of August. “We don't have enough folks to work the entire fire perimeter,” Hessel said. So rather than fight a big fire where it's burning, Oregon firefighters are ordered to back off and build a fire-suppression line miles away to slow the flames when they eventually roar forward. But that allows fires to burn longer and possibly larger, often eating away private land that feeds livestock, produces timber and supports recreation such as hunting tourism that generates revenue that boosts the economies of small towns. “The fire gets bigger, and it's harder to put out. It takes longer,” Hessel said. “We have fires out here that are 300,000 acres.” • Darryl Fears has worked at The Washington Post for more than a decade, mostly as a reporter on the National staff. He currently covers the environment, focusing on the Chesapeake Bay and issues affecting wildlife. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • With a stunning 7.1 million acres burned so far, the U.S. wildfire season is dire (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/08/18/with-7-million-acres-burned-so-far-this-year-the-u-s-wildfire-situation-is-looking-dire) • In the dry west, housing growth puts firefighters in the path of wildfires (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/in-the-dry-west-the-us-puts-homes-and-firefighters-in-the-path-of-wildfires/2015/05/16/01705394-fb42-11e4-9ef4-1bb7ce3b3fb7_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/west-coast-residents-caught-in-a-line-of-fire-from-california-to-washington/2015/09/12/c875c8be-57c9-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/west-coast-residents-caught-in-a-line-of-fire-from-california-to-washington/2015/09/12/c875c8be-57c9-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on September 14, 2015, 07:45:02 am ..yes..different weather in different parts of the world...we should probably call it "weather change".. ;)
...just like it has for millions of years..NZ is famous for it...always has been...perhaps always will be ::) Three dead, thousands homeless after Japan floods 5:00 AM Sunday Sep 13, 2015 Floods Japan Weather Authorities are grappling with the aftermath of massive flooding that killed at least three people, as thousands of rescuers frantically searched a shattered community for almost two dozen still missing. The heaviest rain in decades pounded the country following Typhoon Etau, which left a trail of destruction in its wake. Hundreds of thousands were ordered to leave their homes and at least 22 people - including two 8-year-old children - were still unaccounted for yesterday in disaster-struck Joso city, about 60km outside Tokyo. Another person was missing in a northern prefecture. Ryosei Akazawa, a member of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's cabinet, acknowledged that emergency personnel still did not know the whereabouts of the missing, as fears grow that the death toll will rise. Parts of Joso, a community of 65,000, were destroyed on Thursday when a levee on the Kinugawa river gave way, flooding 32sq km. Jiji Press news agency reported yesterday that almost 11,000 homes had been flooded. Dramatic aerial footage showed houses being swept away by raging torrents in scenes eerily reminiscent of the devastating tsunami that crushed Japan's northeast coast four years ago. Video Desperate Joso residents waved towels from balconies trying to summon help, while military dinghies ferried dozens of people to safety, and helicopters plucked individuals from rooftops. Hundreds of people are believed to still be trapped in buildings, after more than 600 had been rescued in Ibaraki prefecture. About 5800 troops, police and firefighters have been sent to flooded areas where rescuers are working. People were seen wading through waist-high water to reach shelters. Another river in Miyagi prefecture, north of Ibaraki, burst its banks and flooded a populated area but many residents had already been evacuated, reports said. Vehicles are submerged in front of a city hall northeast of Tokyo. Photo / AP In Kanuma city, north of Joso, a 63-year-old woman was killed after being swallowed by landslides triggered by the heavy rain, and a 48-year-old woman was found dead in Miyagi. The third victim was a 25-year-old man helping to clear drains in the city of Nikko. - AAP Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 27, 2015, 11:57:33 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/TitanicSinking_zps3qf6xtpb.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/aynABv6.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 05, 2015, 04:10:13 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp3ASQVuzH8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp3ASQVuzH8) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on October 05, 2015, 05:34:39 pm aint got time right now..but please feel free to sumerise it and post your findings...cant wait ::)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 09, 2015, 03:20:22 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... China, California and Pope Francis make good news on climate change By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Thursday, October 08, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20151008dh_zpswdovztjo.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5615f2b7/turbine/la-na-tt-good-news-on-climate-20151007) THERE HAS been some very good news on the climate change front recently, but all the positive news is still far from being enough to make anyone rest easy. The biggest news is China's plan to initiate a cap-and-trade system. During his visit to the White House at the end of September, President Xi Jinping surprised the world by announcing that, by 2017, his country will be setting up a national system for limiting emissions of harmful greenhouse gases and creating a market to provide incentives to reduce those emissions among core Chinese industries, including power generation, chemicals, iron and steel, building materials and papermaking. Not only does this commit one of the world's two biggest polluters to a better path, but it also undercuts the argument against a cap-and-trade scheme in the other big polluter, the United States. When they are not denying that climate change is a global threat, Republicans in Congress are insisting the U.S. should not shackle its industries with emissions limits because it will merely give a big economic advantage to the Chinese. With China giving up that “advantage”, it is now harder to argue that Americans would be hurt by doing the right thing. By the way, to say it is an advantage to stick with our antiquated dependence on fossil fuels instead of rapidly developing the kind of alternative energy system that will drive the most successful economies in decades to come is a canard anyway. As California Governor Jerry Brown said on Wednesday, “What has been the source of our prosperity now becomes the source of our ultimate destruction, if we don't get off it.” Brown's comment came during a ceremony at Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles in which he put his signature on ambitious new goals that commit the state to use renewable sources for 50% of all energy by 2030. This is the next bit of good news. “It's monumental,” said Alex Jackson, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, speaking to the Associated Press. “For an economy the size of California to commit to getting half of its power needs from renewable energy resources, I think, is a game changer.” If California can transform its energy use that quickly and, in the process, strengthen its economy, it will have a strong ripple effect through other states as they try to catch up. The third positive story was the strong climate change message Pope Francis delivered during his recent visit to the U.S. By putting the issue at the top of his agenda, he may have raised awareness of the issue, not only among American Catholics, but also among a wide range of voters and that might tip the political balance in the direction of action on the climate. So what is the damper on these positive stories? Regarding the pope, his call for Congress to take “courageous actions” to protect nature did not seem to make a dent in the Republican wall of opposition. The oil and coal interests still rule the GOP, the climate change deniers still rule key congressional committees and a Republican member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Illinois Representative John Shimkus, dismissed the pope's influence, saying, “I don't think he moves the needle at all.” As far as Governor Brown's ambitious plan, the petroleum industry will spend a ton of money trying to convince people that clean energy means lost jobs and a wrecked economy. It's a lie, but that will not stop them from trying to confuse voters and retard the transition to a greener energy regime. And China? The government in Beijing can make declarations of intent, but corrupt local and regional officials beholden to industrialists can undermine the emissions goals, and China's weak legal system may not be up to the task of enforcement. Despite the negatives, there are reasons to think all three of these developments stand a good chance of making a difference. But not only do they need to bear fruit, they also need to be just the start of a dramatic global effort to shift consciousness and policy. We have a long way to go before humanity can escape the worst environmental calamities that are looming. To get there, we will need many more transformational leaders standing up with Xi Jinping, Jerry Brown and Pope Francis. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-good-news-on-climate-20151007-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-good-news-on-climate-20151007-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on October 10, 2015, 10:50:54 am Nothing here that anyone with a jot of intelligence didnt already know....
Quote A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month. A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science. He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly. He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought. It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says. “Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”. Dr Evans says his discovery “ought to change the world”. “But the political obstacles are massive,” he said. His discovery explains why none of the climate models used by the IPCC reflect the evidence of recorded temperatures. The models have failed to predict the pause in global warming which has been going on for 18 years and counting. “The model architecture was wrong,” he says. “Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.” There is another problem with the original climate model, which has been around since 1896. While climate scientists have been predicting since the 1990s that changes in temperature would follow changes in carbon dioxide, the records over the past half million years show that not to be the case. So, the new improved climate model shows CO2 is not the culprit in recent global warming. But what is? Dr Evans has a theory: solar activity. What he calls “albedo modulation”, the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun, is the likely cause of global warming. He predicts global temperatures, which have plateaued, will begin to cool significantly, beginning between 2017 and 2021. The cooling will be about 0.3C in the 2020s. Some scientists have even forecast a mini ice age in the 2030s. If Dr Evans is correct, then he has proven the theory on carbon dioxide wrong and blown a hole in climate alarmism. He will have explained why the doomsday predictions of climate scientists aren’t reflected in the actual temperatures. Dr David Evans, who says climate model architecture is wrong, with wife Jo Nova, Picture: australianclimatemadness.com “It took me years to figure this out, but finally there is a potential resolution between the insistence of the climate scientists that CO2 is a big problem, and the empirical evidence that it doesn’t have nearly as much effect as they say.” Dr Evans is an expert in Fourier analysis and digital signal processing, with a PhD, and two Masters degrees from Stanford University in electrical engineering, a Bachelor of Engineering (for which he won the University medal), Bachelor of Science, and Masters in Applied Maths from the University of Sydney. He has been summarising his results in a series of blog posts on his wife Jo Nova’s blog for climate sceptics. He is about half way through his series, with blog post 8, “Applying the Stefan-Boltzmann Law to Earth”, published on Friday. When it is completed his work will be published as two scientific papers. Both papers are undergoing peer review. “It’s a new paradigm,” he says. “It has several new ideas for people to get used to.” Clicky Thing (http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opinion/miranda-devine-perth-electrical-engineers-discovery-will-change-climate-change-debate/news-story/d1fe0f22a737e8d67e75a5014d0519c6?sv=c408b33cef164795b9a30e809c6cb8) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 11, 2015, 11:44:23 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202015/20151008_NotMars_zpsq8z1whfh.jpg) (https://twitter.com/Slanecartoons/status/652336180864782336/photo/1) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on October 13, 2015, 05:56:59 pm Something here reminds me of 1930's Germany......
"So!! You dont belief zat der human race iss responsible for ze sun varming up ze environment! Ve haf vays off making you change your mind! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11924776/Judges-plan-to-outlaw-climate-change-denial.html Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on October 13, 2015, 06:06:22 pm ...yup..there needs to be a United Nations agreement by all countries to reduce pollution....to be fair...
...but I guess Putin or China would just veto the proposal ::) ....so lets just get used to the fact that if a Nuclear war does not finish off life on this planet...something else will...its not a matter of if...but when.....does it really matter ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 13, 2015, 06:29:13 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20News%20Pix/latimes_2013aug22al_zps2b156cf1.jpg) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821,0,6254618.story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on October 13, 2015, 06:47:08 pm Still shitting ya pants over global warming :o
..just think of all the kiwis it killed last year ...and dont forget to look under your bed ::) ..you should be very, very scared :o Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 27, 2015, 11:12:25 am Stop being a total dork, MAGGOT. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 27, 2015, 11:12:38 am (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202015/20151027_1445900313329s_zpshsfhqy5b.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/73396987) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on October 27, 2015, 05:33:53 pm Been waiting for someone to refer to this.
What a load of absolute hogwash! There have been many times in the past where CO2 levels have dwarfed those at present and the average world temperature remained at around 20 degrees Centigrade Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on October 31, 2015, 06:36:04 am ..as usual...Putin being a team player for the common good of the team :P...but he is the only one in the team :-[
Russia thwarts plan for Antarctic ocean sanctuary, China on board Russia has again thwarted attempts to create the world's largest ocean sanctuary in Antarctica. It is the final country opposing the protection of a vast swathe of rich waters from fishing, after a revised international plan won support from China. The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) ends a 10-day meeting in Hobart, Australia on Friday without the consensus needed for a deal to conserve and manage the marine ecosystems in the Southern Ocean. While Russia blocked conservation proposals for a fifth consecutive time, delegates welcomed China's support for the revised Marine Protection Area (MPA) in the icy but fertile Ross Sea put forward by the United States and New Zealand. "China's support for a revised MPA is a major step forward in reaching the consensus required to put workable protections in place for the Ross Sea," New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully said in a statement. USdelegation leader Evan Bloom told Reuters the ongoing opposition by Russia, which had argued that such a large area closed off to fishing was unnecessary, was frustrating. "There's also a bit of optimism because now there's just one country left and we're closer than we have ever been before." The latest proposal includes a new research zone for krill and allows fishing for the tiny creatures that form the basis of the Antarctic food chain in other areas of the expanded 1.5 million square kilometre protected zone. China has expressed a desire to increase its fishing for krill, used in fish food and human nutritional supplements, throughout the Southern Ocean. Delegates said there were no immediate plans for krill fishing in the Ross Sea and little risk to the vast resource, which is protected by existing quotas and regulations. The objective of the CCAMLR, which was established by international treaty in 1982, is the conservation of Antarctic marine life "whilst providing for rational use" that takes global food security into account. The European Union and 24 nations are members of the consensus-based organisation and a further 11 countries have signed its convention. Antarctica is home to more than 10,000 species including most of the world's penguins, whales, seabirds, colossal squid and Antarctic tooth fish. "The Ross Sea is one of the last intact, fully functioning marine ecosystems on earth. It's really important to preserve it for its own intrinsic value, " Andrea Kavanagh, a delegate and director of the pro-conservation Pew Charitable Trusts said. "It's also a really important place for scientists to look at how climate change is affecting healthy ecosystems as opposed to unhealthy ecosystems." The Southern Ocean represents about 10 per cent of the Earth's surface. - Reuters Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 05, 2015, 11:07:19 am from The Washington Post.... • The Northern Hemisphere’s record-shattering tropical cyclone season, by the numbers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/04/the-northern-hemispheres-record-shattering-tropical-cyclone-season-by-the-numbers) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20150819_TyphoonAtsani_zpsyuqbpttm.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2015/08/CMzA_7SUAAAWiau.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on November 05, 2015, 04:12:24 pm ......ice age coming :o FORGET GLOBAL WARMING, HERE COMES ANOTHER ICE AGE This will stop the talk dead at Paris as the world’s biggest bunch of con-artists meet to discuss our last chance to save the planet. Of course the earth might have something to say about that…and the sun. The Earth could be headed for a ‘mini ice age’ researchers have warned. A new study claims to have cracked predicting solar cycles – and says that between 2020 and 2030 solar cycles will cancel each other out. This, they say, will lead to a phenomenon known as the ‘Maunder minimum’ – which has previously been known as a mini ice age when it hit between 1646 and 1715, even causing London’s River Thames to freeze over. The new model of the Sun’s solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun’s 11-year heartbeat. It draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone. Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the ‘mini ice age’ that began in 1645, according to the results presented by Prof Valentina Zharkova at the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno. The model predicts that the pair of waves become increasingly offset during Cycle 25, which peaks in 2022. During Cycle 26, which covers the decade from 2030-2040, the two waves will become exactly out of synch and this will cause a significant reduction in solar activity. ‘In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other – peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun,’ said Zharkova. ‘Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other. ‘We predict that this will lead to the properties of a ‘Maunder minimum” Cold kills more humans, far faster than heat ever will. The global warming industry is in for a shock and it is only 15 years away. By that time we will have all worked out what a scam global warming has been. I can’t wait for the show trials. – Daily Mail by Cameron Slater on November 5, 2015 at 11:30am Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 13, 2015, 12:34:07 pm from The Washington Post.... Scientists say Greenland just opened up a major new ‘floodgate’ of ice into the ocean By CHRIS MOONEY | 2:00PM - Thursday, November 12, 2015 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20151112a_GreenlandGlaciers_zpsswcqiosw.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/11/09/Interactivity/Images/zachariae.JPG&w=1484) Hills protruding from the fog near lower Zachariae Glacier. — Photograph: John Sonntag/NASA. AS the world prepares for the most important global climate summit yet in Paris later this month, news from Greenland could add urgency to the negotiations. For another major glacier appears to have begun a rapid retreat into a deep underwater basin, a troubling sign previously noticed at Greenland's Jakobshavn Glacier (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/08/19/one-of-the-worlds-fastest-melting-glaciers-may-have-just-lost-its-biggest-chunk-of-ice-ever) and also in the Amundsen Sea region of West Antarctica. And in all of these cases, warm (http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n10/abs/ngeo316.html) ocean waters (https://www.sciencemag.org/content/346/6214/1227?related-urls=yes&legid=sci;346/6214/1227) (NOTE: two separate hotlinks) reaching the deep bases of marine glaciers appears to be a major cause. The new fast-moving glacier is the Zachariae glacier or Zachariæ Isstrøm, located in the far northeastern part of Greenland. In a new paper in Science (http://www.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aac7111), Jeremie Mouginot of the University of California-Irvine and his colleagues find that the ocean-based glacier, which contains 0.5 meters or a foot and a half of potential sea level rise, has begun a rapid retreat, especially since 2012. The glacier has lost fully 95 percent of the ice shelf that used to help stabilize it, they say, and now sports a 75 meter high ice cliff extending above the water (the glacier also extends hundreds of additional meters below it). “This is sort of the second major floodgate from Greenland that has opened up,” says Eric Rignot of UC-Irvine and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, one of the authors of the study. The first, says Rignot, was the Jakobshavn glacier (http://www.the-cryosphere.net/8/209/2014/tc-8-209-2014.pdf), Greenland's “fastest” moving, according to a recent study, which is currently based 1,300 meters below sea level and also retreating into a deep basin. Now, at Zachariae, that seems to be happening again. In combination with its nearby neighbor, Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden glacier, the two glaciers contain a potential 1.1 meter of sea level rise (over 3 feet), so any change here is not good. “If you see Greenland as a boat, it's like we're taking water from every side now,” says Mouginot. Furthermore, Mouginot, Rignot and their colleagues note that Zachariae and Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden together form the terminus of the northeast Greenland ice stream, “the only large, dynamic feature that extends continuously deep to the ice sheet interior near Greenland's summit.” Twelve percent of the entire Greenland ice sheet, they say, therefore drains through this region. Here's a view of the glaciers from above from the USGS/NASA satellite Landsat, which Mouginot annotated: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20151112b_GreenlandGlaciers_zpsm6s0m6ih.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/11/10/Interactivity/Images/Landsat_30Aug2014.jpg&w=1484) The Zachariae glacier. — Picture: USGS/NASA Landsat taken on August, 30th 2014; LC80472412014242LGN00 (path: 047, row: 241). The entire ice sheet of Greenland contains enough ice to raise sea levels some 20 feet. It has been losing ice rapidly in recent years, through a combination of meltwater runoff on the ice sheet's surface — which reaches the sea through complex channels and fissures — and the calving of large icebergs from its glaciers. Both of these processes have elements that can be pretty spectacular. Atop the ice sheet, vast meltwater lakes can form and then suddenly vanish (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/06/03/scientists-finally-have-an-explanation-for-why-huge-lakes-atop-greenland-are-vanishing) in a matter of hours, draining rapidly as crevasses open beneath them and they spill into the ice sheet's depths. At the front ends of marine glaciers, meanwhile, detaching icebergs can tumble and slam back with such force that they knock the glacier itself backwards, and trigger magnitude 5 level earthquakes. NASA estimates that currently, through the combination of these mechanisms, the Greenland ice sheet is losing several hundred billion tons (or gigatons) per year and raising sea levels by three quarters of a millimeter annually. If so, that would be a little under a third of the total global sea level rise, which is currently 3.24 millimeters per year (http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level). (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20151112c_GreenlandGlaciers_zps7olfyyvw.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2015/08/NASA-greenland-plus-antarctica.jpg&w=1484) NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) twin satellites have measured the loss of ice mass from Earth's polar ice sheets since 2002. — Graphic: Nerem/CU-Boulder. And now, Zachariae glacier may be poised to add to that total. From 1996 through 2010, the new research finds, Zachariae glacier's grounding line — where the glacier simultaneously meets both the sea-floor and the ocean — retreated inland 3.5 kilometers. But then from 2011 through 2015, it retreated another 3.5 kilometers, a sure sign of acceleration. A key event in letting the glacier speed up seems to have been the collapse of its ice shelf, a buttressing tongue that used to extend out over the fjord in front of the glacier, creating an underwater cavity beneath it. Now, in contrast, Zachariae is basically a steep cliff. Other ways of measuring the rate of change of the glacier — its rate of thinning, for instance, or its flow speed into the sea — were also observed to be increasing in the new study. “This study does a nice job of putting together data from multiple sensors to document the ongoing speed up of this glacier. At present its contribution to sea level is relatively small, but there is certainly the potential for it to increase more over time,” says Ian Joughin, a Greenland and polar science expert at the University of Washington, in Seattle, in a comment on the new study. Joughin notes that thus far, despite the fast retreat, Zachariae is not losing as much ice each year as the Jakobshavn glacier in central western Greenland is losing. The new study reports a loss of 5 gigatons annually for the Zachariae glacier, or 5 billion metric tons, versus 25 to 35 gigatons for Jakobshavn, according to Joughin. Joughin thinks Zachariae may not catch up to the latter, since the basin into which it is retreating is not as deep. But Rignot notes that with 1.1 meters of potential sea level rise between them, the Zachariae and Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden glaciers together contain about as much ice as the very worrisome glaciers along the Amundsen Sea coast of West Antarctica. Granted, in the latter case the situation is worse because losing those coastal glaciers would then unleash (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/02/scientists-confirm-their-fears-about-west-antarctica-that-its-inherently-unstable) a bigger destabilization of West Antarctica as a whole. Still, Greenland's glaciers face a kind of double threat — not only changes in the ocean, but also rapidly rising Arctic temperatures, meaning that they can melt both from above and below. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20151112d_GreenlandGlaciers_zpsdkwcyi5t.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/11/09/Interactivity/Images/zach.JPG&w=1484) Zachariae Glacier from 31,000 feet. Note the fragments of its remnant ice shelf, clearly visible to seaward. — Photograph: John Sonntag/NASA. “A disaster is unfolding in slow motion with important sea level rise implications,” says Jason Box, a professor with the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, after reading the paper at The Washington Post's request. The researchers forecast that for the next 20 to 30 years, Zachariae glacier will retreat quickly, as it is perched on a seabed that slopes downward in elevation, exposing more and more of the glacier to warm water. At the same time, the ice front exposed to the ocean will widen from 19 kilometers across to 50 kilometers across, increasing the amount of ice that will be able to flow out at once. And most troubling of all in some ways, the glacier's “calving cliff” will grow taller, increasing from the current height of 75 meters above the water level. That's worrying because recent research (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X14007961) has suggested that once major glaciers lose their ice shelves, as Zachariae has, they can then form cliffs extending up to 100 meters above sea level which will fail continually, because ice just isn't strong enough to sustain a cliff so high. Zachariae could be moving into that realm. Finally, the study also notes that while Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden glacier has not been retreating or losing ice nearly as fast, it too could lose its stabilizing ice shelf, and after that, start to move faster. For it, too, appears to be exposed to warmer ocean water. “One can forsee [the retreat of Zachariae glacier] eventually inducing a race for biggest loser (of ice) between Zachariæ and the other glacier, Nioghalfjerdsfjorden which has a dense chain of islands (Norsk Oer Islands Barrier) blocking [its] free access to the sea,” added Jason Box by e-mail. “Nioghalfjerdsfjorden is thinning so if climate warming remains unchecked, it is just a matter of time until Nioghalfjerdsfjorden disintegrates and the upstream underwater embayment becomes a traffic jam of megabergs shuffling to get out to sea.” The key question, however — as with all studies of glacial retreats in regions with the potential to cause major sea level rise — is how much and how fast. And that's also, of course, the hardest one to answer. “The retreat of these marine-based sectors is likely to increase sea-level rise from Greenland for decades to come,” the paper concludes — but it does not specify how rapidly a full loss of the Zachariae glacier could occur. “Collapse of the entire basin is going to take a long time, it's not going to happen tomorrow,” says Mouginot. “But it's a process, when you start, it's like Jakobshavn — [you don't] see the glacier recovering from that.” • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment. __________________________________________________________________________ Photograph galleries: • How climate change is affecting Greenland (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/how-climate-change-is-affecting-greenland/2013/08/07/9274e164-ff6a-11e2-9711-3708310f6f4d_gallery.html) • Frightening, yet beautiful: Greenland's melting glaciers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/greenlands-melting-glaciers/2015/08/19/4e747112-4691-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_gallery.html) __________________________________________________________________________ Read more energy & environment stories: • Why NASA's so worried that Greenland's melting could speed up (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/08/28/why-nasas-so-worried-that-greenlands-melting-could-speed-up) • Giant earthquakes are shaking Greenland, and scientists just figured out the disturbing reason why (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/06/25/giant-earthquakes-are-shaking-greenland-and-scientists-just-figured-out-the-disturbing-reason-why) • This could be the biggest sign yet that the battery revolution is here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/09/this-could-be-the-biggest-sign-yet-that-the-battery-revolution-is-here) • Peabody Energy, the world’s largest coal company, to disclose more climate risks to investors (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/09/peabody-energy-the-worlds-largest-coal-company-to-disclose-more-climate-risks-to-investors) • These could be the first U.S. states to tax carbon — and give their residents a nice paycheck (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/10/these-could-be-the-first-u-s-states-to-tax-carbon-and-give-their-residents-a-nice-paycheck) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/12/scientists-say-greenland-just-opened-up-a-major-new-floodgate-of-ice-into-the-ocean (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/12/scientists-say-greenland-just-opened-up-a-major-new-floodgate-of-ice-into-the-ocean) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 17, 2015, 11:50:10 am from The Washington Post.... By one measure, this wicked El Niño is the strongest ever recorded: What it means By JASON SAMENOW | 2:50PM - Monday, November 16, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20151116_ElNintildeo_zpsdujkblws.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2015/11/1812v1_20151112-ENSOUpdate.png&w=1484) NOAA visualization of El Nino. THE El Niño event of 2015-2016 is making history, wreaking weather havoc around the world and forecast to unleash many weather surprises through the coming winter. As of today, the warm ocean temperatures that define El Niño have surged to a stunning three degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than normal in the central tropical Pacific, the highest level ever measured. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20151116a_ELNintildeo3_zpsnjnws7ff.jpg) (http://twitter.com/ggweather/status/666281247698583552/photo/1) Many global impacts already El Niño events, while simply descriptions of ocean temperatures in the tropical Pacific and not storms, have ripple effects on weather patterns all over the world. “Severe droughts and devastating flooding being experienced throughout the tropics and sub-tropical zones bear the hallmarks of this El Niño, which is the strongest for more than 15 years,” said World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Secretary-General Michel Jarraud in a news release (https://www.wmo.int/media/content/el-ni%C3%B1o-expected-strengthen-further-high-impacts-unprecedented-preparation). The WMO published a long list of many harmful weather impacts for which this El Niño has been implicated, including coral bleaching and the most active season for intense tropical cyclones in the Northern Hemisphere on record, both due to historically warm ocean waters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v92Iqihct98 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v92Iqihct98) According to the World Meteorological Organization, the El Niño of 2015-2016 is shaping up to be one of the strongest in this past century. Here are the types of weather we can expect around the world due to this year's El Niño. — World Meteorological Organization/ YouTube. The WMO published a long list of many harmful weather impacts for which this El Niño has been implicated, including coral bleaching and the most active season for intense tropical cyclones in the Northern Hemisphere on record, both due to historically warm ocean waters. It also linked El Niño with drought in South East, Asia which has lead to one of the worst wildfire outbreaks in Indonesia on record. Not all impacts from El Niño have been harmful. For example, it introduced wind shear in the tropical Atlantic which has depressed hurricane activity that might impact North America and may already be increasing precipitation in California, which is suffering from a historic drought. ‘Uncharted territory’ This El Niño is operating in a warmer world in which forecasters have no prior experience predicting its effects. “This event is playing out in uncharted territory,” Jarraud said. “Our planet has altered dramatically because of climate change, the general trend towards a warmer global ocean, the loss of Arctic sea ice and of over a million square kilometers of summer snow cover in the northern hemisphere.” “So this naturally occurring El Niño event and human induced climate change may interact and modify each other in ways which we have never before experienced,” he said. “Even before the onset of El Niño, global average surface temperatures had reached new records. El Niño is turning up the heat even further,” Jarraud added. While El Niño has certain characteristic effects which we have discussed at length in the past (for the D.C. area (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/12/what-the-different-weather-patterns-might-mean-for-snow-this-winter), and the U.S. and beyond (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/05/21/a-strong-el-nino-could-flourish-by-fall-five-ways-it-could-affect-our-weather)), the background warmth adds a potential element of surprise heading into the winter months. Comparing this year's El Niño vs. 1997-1998, and what it portends While today's unsurpassed ocean temperature measurement in the central tropical Pacific made history, it is too soon to know if this toasty temperature reading is just a blip or a signal. In order for this El Niño to officially pass 1997-1998's event as the strongest on record, the warm waters would need to be sustained near these level for three months. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20151116b_ELNintildeoVideo_zps9svq1kdv.jpg) (https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video/CT7ul9WUwAAwdgk.mp4) Click on image to play video. “A week of sea surface temperature-only data isn't enough to say this is a record,” said NOAA climate analyst Michelle L'Heureux in an email. Forecasters expect strong El Niño levels to persist through the winter, but it may be peaking now and about to begin a gradual decay. However, the event's recent and projected intensity may be enough for this event to surpass 1997-1998. “Judging from the trajectory of SST anomalies … it is likely that one of the late-year three-month average … sea surface temperature values in 2015 will end up upending 1997's record warmth and claim for the 2015 the title as strongest El Niño event on record,” wrote Weather Underground meteorologist Jeff Masters (http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=3186). Every El Niño has its own signature and, so far, what sets this one apart is the amount of warm water it has generated across a vast expanse of the Pacific — spanning both the eastern and central part of the ocean basin. While it hasn't been as intense in the eastern tropical Pacific as 1997-1998, its warm waters have extended farther west. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202015/20151116c_ELNintildeo_zpsqusqiokr.jpg) (https://twitter.com/wxjay/status/664576829429149696/photo/1) “So, in terms of the eastern Pacific, this event is weaker than 1997, but in terms of the central Pacific, the present event is stronger,” said Paul Roundy, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Albany. Phil Klotzbach, a tropical weather researcher from Colorado State University, says a powerful eastward push of water known as a Kelvin wave may lead to some warming in the eastern Pacific over the next few weeks. The implications of warm water covering such a vast area of the Pacific in terms of weather patterns in the U.S. are unclear. Sometimes El Niño events which have their warmest waters in the central rather than eastern Pacific favor less precipitation in California and colder conditions in the Northeast U.S. than events with warmer water to the east. But researchers aren't convinced this event will behave like a central Pacific El Niño, sometimes described as a Modoki event. “Although it has large sea surface temperature anomalies across the central basin, it is NOT a central Pacific El Niño event,” Roundy said. “The present circulation response pattern and model forecasts agree that circulation outcomes are likely to be more like strong east Pacific events, because convection is aligned well east of the dateline.” Klotzbach along with two climate researchers at NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, Jon Gottschalck and Stephen Baxter, said they agreed with Roundy's view via email. Jason Furtado, a professor of meteorology at the University of Oklahoma, said while he concurred this El Niño is not a central Pacific event, the very warm waters observed there might mean the winter bears some of its characteristics. Furtado also cautioned El Niño “is but one ingredient for our winter climate — its interactions with other processes and climate patterns will also be important to monitor.” • Jason Samenow is currently The Washington Post's weather editor. A native Washingtonian, Jason has been a weather enthusiast since age 10. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • The Northern Hemisphere’s record-shattering tropical cyclone season, by the numbers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/04/the-northern-hemispheres-record-shattering-tropical-cyclone-season-by-the-numbers) • Indonesian fires are pouring huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/10/20/fueled-by-el-nino-carbon-emissions-from-indonesian-peat-fires-are-rising-fast) • Is the near-record El Niño already chipping away at the California, western drought? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/12/is-the-near-record-el-nino-already-chipping-away-at-the-california-western-drought) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/16/by-one-measure-this-wicked-el-nino-is-the-strongest-ever-recorded-what-it-means (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/16/by-one-measure-this-wicked-el-nino-is-the-strongest-ever-recorded-what-it-means) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 19, 2015, 02:41:39 pm • Preparing New Zealand for rising seas: Certainty and Uncertainty (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/preparing-new-zealand-for-rising-seas-certainty-and-uncertainty) (a report released today by the government's Commissioner for the Environment) • Bill English rejects call to budget for the costs of sea level rises (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/74206646) Billy-boy English shows how inept he is as minister of finance by sticking his head in the sand and exposing NZ to a financial calamity. Not surprising when you think about it as Billy-boy finally managed to produce a surplus after seven years of deficits, only to sink back into a deficit again after only twenty-three days of surplus. • Government accounts dip into the red (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/289028/govt-accounts-dip-into-the-red) Talk about an incompetent idiot, eh? I suppose there will be a few morons around who will be too stupid to see Billy-boy for the inept failure he is. Who knows? There is even a possibility someone of that description may pop out of the woodwork at this group....you never know, eh? As an aside, reading through the commissioner's comprehensive report, it would appear that Napier could end up back at square one, as it was before the 1931 Hawke's Bay earthquake, when the place was a hill with two narrow spits surrounded by the sea on two sides, and by lagoon and swamp on the other sides. Oh well, those Napier folks could always move to Hastings....(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/09_ROFLMAO.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on November 19, 2015, 02:56:08 pm Yes...sea front property values will be dropping like a rock..please let me know of anyboby wanting to sell some...(in a hurry) :P
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 19, 2015, 03:47:45 pm I know of plenty of places at Haumoana (in Hawke's Bay) going for sale. I reckon you'd fit right in there....you could watch your neighbour's homes disappear in the sea before the same happened to you. And it isn't a “way in the future” event either, as a large number of homes have been taken by the sea there over the past few years. So, go on....buy a seaside Haumoana property....I dare you!! Then I can laugh as the sea takes away the money you have invested in the property. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on November 19, 2015, 03:55:26 pm kj..."I know of plenty of places at Haumoana (in Hawke's Bay) going for sale."
..mmm..only 6 properties there for sale on trademe..dont appear to any near the sea...perhaps you are mistaken..is that possible ;) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on November 26, 2015, 04:45:57 pm "Our analysis found that 483 power companies have proposed new coal-fired plants."
..makes you realise that what ever we do here will have very, very little to do with the future if climate change rates... ..just heard on one news that india plan to start a new coal fired power station every month until 2020 :o ..its going to be a race....nuclear war or climate change...that will make big changes on the planet..but we can at least be safe in the knowledge that in is all the evolutionary process doing what it always has and always will do ::) Global Coal Risk Assessment Data Analysis and Market Research by Ailun Yang and Yiyun Cui - November 2012 Coal-fired power plants are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions—one that could be increasing significantly globally. This working paper analyzes information about proposed new coal-fired plants and other market trends in order to assess potential future risks to the global climate. KEY FINDINGS According to IEA estimates, global coal consumption reached 7,238 million tonnes in 2010. China accounted for 46 percent of consumption, followed by the United States (13 percent), and India (9 percent). According to WRI’s estimates, 1,199 new coal-fired plants, with a total installed capacity of 1,401,278 megawatts (MW), are being proposed globally. These projects are spread across 59 countries. China and India together account for 76 percent of the proposed new coal power capacities. New coal-fired plants have been proposed in 10 developing countries: Cambodia, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Laos, Morocco, Namibia, Oman, Senegal, Sri Lanka, and Uzbekistan. Currently, there is limited or no capacity for domestic coal production in any of these countries. Our analysis found that 483 power companies have proposed new coal-fired plants. With 66 proposed projects, Huaneng (Chinese) has proposed the most, followed by Guodian (Chinese), and NTPC (Indian). The “Big Five” Chinese power companies (Datang, Huaneng, Guodian, Huadian, and China Power Investment) are the world’s biggest coal-fired power producers, and are among the top developers of proposed new coal-fired plants. State-owned power companies play a dominant role in proposing new coal-fired plant projects in China, Turkey, Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa, Czech Republic and many other countries. Chinese, German, and Indian power companies are notably increasingly active in transnational coal-fired project development. According to IEA estimates, the global coal trade rose by 13.4 percent in 2010, reaching 1,083 million tonnes. The demands of the global coal trade have shifted from the Atlantic market (driven by Germany, the United Kingdom, France and the United States) to the Pacific market (driven by Japan, China, South Korea, India and Taiwan). In response to this trend, many new infrastructure development projects have been proposed. Motivated by the growing Pacific market, Australia is proposing to increase new mine and new port capacity up to 900 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) — three times its current coal export capacity. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 27, 2015, 09:09:19 pm ;D
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQCcTe2WEAAtBfh.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on November 29, 2015, 09:39:13 am LOL. 40 years ago, the muppets informed us that global warming was going to raise the sea level 6 metres by the year 2000....
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 03, 2015, 08:09:39 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Bill Gates may do more to fix climate crisis than world's politicians By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM - Wednesday, December 02, 2015 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202015/latimes_20151202dha_zpsdhfdbaoa.jpg) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-565e9ab2/turbine/la-na-tt-gates-may-fix-climate-20151201) WHEN Bill Gates was a nerdy kid growing up in Seattle, he gained neighborhood notoriety at Little League baseball games by doing standing jumps into garbage cans. At the time, few would have identified that skinny kid as the guy who would one day save the world. The software industry Gates built certainly changed the universe of business and personal communication, while the fortune he has spent through the Gates Foundation has saved countless lives in developing countries. It is his latest endeavor, though, that could be the one that rescues us all. On Monday, at the United Nations climate summit in Paris that has drawn together leaders from most of the countries on Earth, Gates unveiled his plan to create a multibillion-dollar fund to pay for research on clean and renewable energy. Teaming with 19 governments and 28 billionaires from 10 nations, Gates hopes to do what the planet's politicians have failed to do up to this point: dramatically alter the global energy system to replace fossil fuels with power sources that do not contribute to climate change. The vast majority of the world’s scientists — excluding those in thrall to oil and coal companies — have determined that the increasing level of CO² in the atmosphere is the culprit in rising global temperatures. The evidence of this is becoming more and more obvious as polar ice caps melt, glaciers recede, the oceans get warmer and planetary weather patterns become more extreme. According to the scientists, if humanity continues with business as usual, the result will be calamitous: widespread drought and famine triggering massive, desperate human migrations, major cities and island nations flooded by rising seas, and the catastrophic extinction of countless terrestrial and oceanic species. Most world leaders have accepted the scientific consensus and know it is their duty to do something while they still can to avoid the worst possible outcomes. That is why they have come together this week in Paris. However, it will be no surprise if narrow national interests override the common interest — it always has before — with the result that a final summit agreement falls well short of what is needed to stop the slide toward disaster. President Obama has made climate change the signature issue of his final two years in office, but went into the Paris summit handicapped by the political opposition he faces at home. American delegates will be pushing for a climate plan that is not a formal treaty because the Obama administration knows it cannot get the two-thirds vote in the U.S. Senate needed to ratify a treaty. Anything less than a binding treaty, though, weakens any deal. Obama will also have a tough time following through with the inevitable pledge of American dollars to help pay for action on climate change. That spending would also need the approval of the Senate, as well as the House, and both houses of Congress are in the hands of a political party that pretends climate change is not real. Some Republican politicians — such as Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe, who carried a snowball onto the Senate floor to prove it was cold outside — seem to truly believe the science is wrong. Others, like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, are mainly concerned with protecting the coal and oil industries that have funded their political careers. Whether their motivations stem from ignorance or immorality, conservative Republicans have the power to slow, if not stop, progress toward cleaner energy and lowered CO² emissions. Left to politics, the climate problem is likely only to get worse — especially if Republicans get control of the presidency, as well as Congress — but technological solutions might still save the day. That is what Gates is betting on. He is proposing a detour past politics. If he and his fellow billionaires, including California billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon Chief Executive Jeff Bezos, can provide the seed money to pay for energy innovation and if forward-thinking entrepreneurs following in the footsteps of Tesla's Elon Musk can show that clean energy is not only good for the planet but good for jobs and the economy, the old fossil-fuels-based business model will falter and die. The only question is how long that process will take. Way too much time has already been wasted in denial, duplicity and demagoguery. The Gates initiative may be the prod that gets us to work building a new world energy regime before the old one takes us over a cliff. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-gates-may-fix-climate-20151201-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-gates-may-fix-climate-20151201-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 04, 2015, 04:08:25 am ...mmm... meanwhile India open a brand new coal fired power station every month until 2020...probably just 1 of those will counteract whatever we could do ::)
..whatever we do in innocent little NZ will make very, very little difference...the planet is doomed..lets just make the most of it... ..while it lasts :P Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 04, 2015, 12:01:51 pm A lot of shit is coming our way
The global warming scam and the TPP are really all about creating a soviet communist style totalitarian unelected single world government that will be controlled by the filthy rich elite, it will destroy the lives of and even kill off some of the billions of people all over the planet and create a world where the elite are lords over everyone's existence. in other words it will be the best tyrannical communist government that money can buy,for us zero freedom and we will all pay bigtime for our own enforced enslavement where we will be like the poor people in the film Hunger Games. sadly a lot of people on this planet are too stupid to do their own research so they won't understand this until its too late and the penny drops. Bill Gates: Only Socialism Can Save Us From Climate Change (http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/11/GettyImages-181741510-640x480.jpg) “Representative democracy” has failed; the private sector is “inept”; and only bigger government – led by China and the US – has the power to save the world from climate change. So says Bill Gates in a dogmatic but somewhat confused interview with The Atlantic in which he simultaneously pours scorn on green tech solutions but insists that more of them are needed – on a scale bigger than the Manhattan Project – if we are to deal successfully with a problem whose nature he admits may well have been exaggerated by environmentalists. Confused? You should be: Here are some of things we learn about the mysteries of Gates’s mind. Gates has no patience for climate change deniers – Republican politicians in particular – but is far too grand to explain why they’re wrong. He didn’t evince much patience for the argument that American politicians couldn’t agree even on whether climate change is real, much less on how to combat it. “If you’re not bringing math skills to the problem,” he said with a sort of amused asperity, “then representative democracy is a problem.” Gates made his fortune in what used to be one of the least regulated sectors of the US economy. But still he has little faith in free markets as a driving force for innovation. “Yes, the government will be somewhat inept,” he said brusquely, swatting aside one objection as a trivial statement of the obvious. “But the private sector is in general inept. How many companies do venture capitalists invest in that go poorly? By far most of them.” He thinks the forthcoming UN climate talks in Paris are largely a waste of space because they’re just not going to be radical enough. It’s good to have people making commitments. It’s really good. But if you really look at those commitments—which are not binding, but even if you say they will all be achieved—they fall dramatically short of the reductions required to reduce CO2 emissions enough to prevent a scenario where global temperatures rise 2 degrees Celsius. I mean, these commitments won’t even be a third of what you need. Yes, you read that correctly. On the basis of no evidence he is prepared to venture in the interview, Bill Gates is agitating for the near total decarbonization of the world economy. To head off a rise in average global temperatures of 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels—the goal set by international agreement—Gates believes that by 2050, wealthy nations like China and the United States, the most prodigious belchers of greenhouse gases, must be adding no more carbon to the skies. Private enterprise cannot achieve this because there is no financial incentive to do so. (It appears not to have occurred to Gates that the reason there is no financial incentive because there is no genuine need and therefore no demand. If there had maybe he would have been a green tech billionaire rather than a software billionaire). Well, there’s no fortune to be made. Bill Gates is not totally stupid. He knows electric cars suck. People think, Oh, well, I’ll just get an electric car. There are places where if you buy an electric car, you’re actually increasing CO2 emissions, because the electricity infrastructure is emitting more CO2 than you would have if you’d had a gasoline-powered car. But he does, sort of, believe that government has access to a magic money tree and that it does something called ‘investment’ – which isn’t at all the same, oh no, as splurging taxpayers’ dollars on pointless crap like Solyndra. Realistically, we may not get more than a doubling in government funding of energy R&D—but I would love to see a tripling, to $18 billion a year from the U.S. government to fund basic research alone. Now, as a percentage of the government budget, that’s not gigantic. Bill Gates thinks that heavily-subsidized green tech like wind and solar has worked really well. Then he goes onto admit in virtually the same breath that, no actually, it hasn’t worked well at all. Go figure. Wind has grown super-fast, on a very subsidized basis. Solar, off a smaller base, has been growing even faster—again on a highly subsidized basis. But it’s absolutely fair to say that even the modest R&D that’s been done, and the various deployment incentives that are there, have worked well. Now, unfortunately, solar photovoltaic is still not economical, but the biggest problem of all is this intermittency. That is, we need energy 24 hours a day. So, putting aside hydro—which unfortunately can’t grow much—the primary new zero-CO2 sources are intermittent. Now, nuclear is a non-CO2 source, but it’s had its own problems in terms of costs, big safety problems, making sure you can deal with the waste, making sure the plutonium isn’t used to make weapons. So my view is that the biggest problem for the two lead candidates is that storage looks to be so difficult. It’s kind of ironic: Germany, by installing so much rooftop solar, has it that both their coal plants and their rooftop solar are available in the summer, and the price of power during the day actually goes negative—they pay people to take it. Then at night the only source is the coal, and because the energy companies have to recover their capital costs, they either raise the price because they’re not getting any return for the day, or they slowly go bankrupt. In fact, Bill Gates thinks that all those greenies bigging up solar are a bunch of liars. They have this statement that the cost of solar photovoltaic is the same as hydrocarbon’s. And that’s one of those misleadingly meaningless statements. What they mean is that at noon in Arizona, the cost of that kilowatt-hour is the same as a hydrocarbon kilowatt-hour. But it doesn’t come at night, it doesn’t come after the sun hasn’t shone, so the fact that in that one moment you reach parity, so what? The reading public, when they see things like that, they underestimate how hard this thing is. Bill Gates – did he make this clear? – thinks green tech is a crappy sector to invest in. That’s why he thinks it’s so important that Government steps in to force the private sector to invest in it. Because otherwise, obviously, it wouldn’t. Free markets: so totally overrated, aren’t they? I think dozens and dozens of approaches should be funded at the R&D level, and then people like myself, who can afford to take big risks with start-up companies, should—because of climate change—be willing to put some number of billions into the spin-offs that will come out of that government-funded activity.You can’t expect that it will be like a digital thing. So you do have to bring a more patient investor, and even a lower return threshold, to this than to other things. Bill Gates thinks the environmentalists could be talking nonsense The heating levels have not tracked the climate models exactly, and the skeptics have had a heyday with that. It’s all within the error-bar range. To me, it’s pretty clear that there’s nothing that relieves this as a big problem. But when people act like we have this great certainty, they somewhat undermine the credibility. There’s a lot of uncertainty in this, but on both the good and the bad side. By overclaiming, or even trying to ascribe current things more to climate change than to other effects, environmentalists lend weight to the skeptics. But it’s certainly not going to stop Bill Gates talking nonsense, no sirree, about the necessity of taking radical steps to deal with this potentially non-existent problem. That’s why….we need innovation that gives us energy that’s cheaper than today’s hydrocarbon energy, that has zero CO2 emissions, and that’s as reliable as today’s overall energy system. And when you put all those requirements together, we need an energy miracle. That may make it seem too daunting to people, but in science, miracles are happening all the time. Bill Gates: wouldn’t have been so much better for all of us if he’d just bought up some remote island in the Pacific, hollowed out some volcano to build his secret base, and just worked on something relatively innocuous like plotting a war between China and the US guaranteed to result in mutual nuclear annihilation? This climate change nonsense of his is so much more dangerous… http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/02/bill-gates-socialism-can-save-us-climate-change/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2015, 05:42:25 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202015/20151201_GreenhouseEmissions_zpsaef5uxmi.jpg) (https://twitter.com/bryce_edwards/status/671784409066954752) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on December 08, 2015, 07:26:44 am The Beatles mention the real reason.
clicky thing (https://youtu.be/n6j4TGqVl5g) Good luck with cutting its emissions............... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 08, 2015, 11:40:22 am http://www.nipccreport.org/
The Coming Revelation Of The 'Global Warming' Fraud Resembles The Obamacare Lie The second shoe is preparing to drop to shatter the world view of so-called Progressives. Coming, global revelations will demonstrate the fraud behind the theory of man-caused, catastrophic, global warming, just like the real world has shattered the falsehoods behind Obamacare. That is because the underlying reason for both frauds was the same: to expand government power. Enablers went along with the fraud in both cases for the same underlying reason – political correctness. In both cases, going along with the cause for the assumed public good without raising questions was considered the politically correct thing to do for all “good” people. Soon the enablers in both cases will have to pay the price for participating in and perpetuating the fraud. This past weekend, Peggy Noonan summarized the Obamacare fraud in the Wall Street Journal, writing, “They said if you liked your insurance you could keep your insurance—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said if you liked your doctor you could keep your doctor—but that’s not true. It was never true! They said they would cover everyone who needed it, and instead people who had coverage are losing it—millions of them! They said they would make insurance less expensive—but it’s more expensive! Premium shock, deductible shock. They said don’t worry, your health information will be secure, but instead the whole setup looks like a hacker’s holiday. Bad guys are apparently already going for your private information.” That could have been drawn precisely from my commentary in this space last week. The fact that Obamacare was always about power and not people is perfectly illustrated by the case of California resident Edie Littlefield Sundby. Since her gall bladder cancer was discovered 7 years ago, her private insurance company, United Healthcare, has spent $1.2 million to save her life. Edie explains that the insurance company, “has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers.”But Obamacare is driving United Health Care out of business altogether in California. So Edie is one of millions who have recently received an insurance cancellation letter, effective December 31. Just go to the Covered California Obamacare Exchange, which is working just as intended Obama has said, and get your Obamacare, “progressive” Obama apologists say. But there is no insurance on the highly touted Covered California Obamacare Exchange that includes coverage for the team of doctors that have kept her alive for a period with just a 2% probability, who range from her hometown of San Diego, to Stanford University in northern California, to Houston. Even though United Healthcare did, for an affordable price, before Obamacare. But the response from the Obama White House has not been “progressive” concern for Edie. Instead, White House operatives have disparaged her. Now that the federal government has raised spending, taxes, and regulatory burdens by trillions to take over health care, the “progressives” are not worried about Edie.Similarly, the theory of man-caused, catastrophic, global warming is embraced not because of any “science,” (that sham is for the “useful idiots,”), but because it is a justification for a government takeover of the energy industry, with massive increases in regulation, taxes and government spending. The United Nations loves it because it inspires fantasies of the UN growing up to be a world government, with real government powers of global taxation, spending and regulation, all “to save the planet.” Scientists who go along with the cause are rewarded not only with praise for their worthy social conscience, but also with altogether billions in hard, cold cash (government and environmental grants), for their cooperation in helping to play the “useful idiots.” Moreover, many academic scientists are “progressives” themselves, and so favor sharp increases in government spending, taxes and regulation, because they are certain they know how to run your life better than you do. That is what the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is all about. On September 27, the IPCC issued the final version of the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) for its fifth comprehensive Assessment Report (AR-5) since 1992 on the supposed science of anthropogenic, catastrophic, global warming. But the IPCC has intellectual competition now. A peer group of independent, private sector scientists has organized the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Earlier in September, the NIPCC issued its own comprehensive, voluminous report on the science of climate change, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science, published by the Heartland Institute. If you are a true believer in anthropogenic, catastrophic, global warming, you don’t know what you are talking about unless you also have at least looked through the hundreds of pages of calm, dispassionate science in Climate Change Reconsidered II, which also reviews the peer-reviewed literature on climate change. Go ahead, I dare you. What are you afraid of? Now 4 lead contributing authors of Climate Change Reconsidered II, Drs. Craig Idso, Robert Carter, S. Fred Singer, and Willie Soon, have issued a Scientific Critique of IPCC’s 2013 “Summary for Policymakers.” They find that “the new SPM reveals the IPCC has retreated from at least 11 alarmist claims promulgated in its previous reports or by scientists prominently associated with the IPCC. The SPM also contains at least 13 misleading or untrue statements, and 11 further statements that are phrased in such a way that they mislead readers or misrepresent important aspects of the science.” For example, the authors report, “The IPCC concedes for the first time that a 15 year long period of no significant warming occurred since 1998 despite a 7% rise in carbon dioxide (CO2).” The authors explain, “The statement represents a significant revision in the IPCC thinking, because their concern about dangerous warming rests upon the assumption that temperature increases will proceed in parallel fashion with CO2 increases.” Climate Change Reconsidered II documents that the same official temperature records used by the IPCC going back over 100 years, and proxy temperature records going back deep into the geologic time scale, show that temperatures have not changed in parallel with CO2 levels. Central to the IPCC’s argument for anthropogenic, catastrophic global warming is its dozens of global climate models and their projections of growing global temperatures over time. But the SPM now concedes that these models have failed to project the now admitted lack of warming over the last 15 years. The draft of the SPM circulated in June stated quite accurately that the “Models do not generally reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10 to 15 years.” The final draft released in September covers the same by saying, “There are…differences between simulated and observed trends over periods as short as 10 to 15 years (e.g., 1998 to 2012).” Nevertheless, despite this failure of the underlying climate models, the SPM states, “It is extremely likely that human influence on climate caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951–2010.” The prior Assessment Report issued in 2007 had said that this human contribution to global warming was only “very likely.” So as the IPCC climate models admittedly diverge from reality, the IPCC conclusion is that the human contribution to global warming (which it admits has not been happening for quite a while now) is only all the more likely. Indeed, the models have not been validated by past recorded temperatures, and, therefore, cannot be a sound basis for costly regulation to counter global warming, as President Obama’s EPA is now pursuing. As the NIPCC’s recent report states, “We conclude the current generation of global climate models are unable to make accurate projections of climate even 10 years ahead, let alone the 100 year period that has been adopted by policy planners. The output of such models should therefore not be used to guide public policy formulation until they have been validated and shown to have predictive value.” The SPM also concedes that the Antarctic ice cap “increased…(by) 1.2%–1.8% per decade between 1979 and 2012.” So even the UN’s IPCC now concedes that the South Pole’s ice cap has been increasing all along, rather than melting. The increase in Antarctic sea ice now totals about 1 million square kilometers. In fact, the extent of Antarctic sea ice is now the greatest ever measured. Arctic sea ice has historically fluctuated in regular cycles. While it did decline during the 1978 to 1998 period, that decline has now reversed, falsifying alarmist predictions that the North Pole would be free of ice by 2013. Globally, some glaciers have been melting and receding. Others have been growing and expanding. Overall, the total extent of global sea ice has not been declining at any enhanced rate since the end of the Little Ice Age around 150 years ago. But the SPM misleads as to concerns over rising sea levels, stating, “It is very likely that there is a substantial anthropogenic contribution to the global mean sea level rise since the 1970s.” No, actually, it is not likely at all. The NIPCC authors state, “sea level rise has been occurring since long before the human era, and at rates higher than those observed in human history.” Indeed, during that human era, “sea level rise over the past several centuries has averaged about 7 inches, and continues to rise at that rate with no evidence of acceleration,” as Larry Bell reported for Forbes on October 15. The SPM also misleads when it states, “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s many of the observed changes are unprecedented.” The NIPCC authors explain, “Though the IPCC’s favored temperature record (HadCRUT) depicts a rise of 0.4 deg. C since 1950, other temperature records show little or no warming at all in the second half of the twentieth century.” These include the US GISS land surface record, sea surface temperature records, including Hadley NMAT, atmosphere temperature records, such as Hadley radiosonde and satellite MSU, and land surface temperature proxies. The NIPCC authors conclude in response to the SPM, “It is likely that the HadCRUT temperature record underestimates the impact of urban heat islands [in falsely exaggerating] surface temperature records….[Moreover,] the post-1950 warming shown by the Hadley record is of about the same magnitude and rate as the known natural warming between 1910 and 1940, and is therefore not unprecedented.” Bell added in his October 15 commentary, “In reality, the earth has been warming ever since it began thawing out from the Little Ice Age around 1850, and temperatures are still cooler than those that have prevailed about 90% of the time over the past 10,000 years.” Among Climate Change Reconsidered II’s conclusions, “neither the rate nor the magnitude of the reported late twentieth century surface warming (1979-2000) lay outside natural variability, nor was it in any way unusual compared to earlier episodes in Earth’s climate history. Furthermore, solar forcings of temperature change are likely more important than is currently recognized, and evidence is lacking that a 2 degree C increase in temperature (of whatever cause) would be globally harmful.” Indeed, the only demonstrated impact of increased atmospheric concentrations of CO2 so far have been positive for human life, if not all life on the planet. In particular, that includes increased agricultural output, valued at $3.2 trillion over the period 1961 to 2011, and probable slight resulting increases in global temperatures.Richard Lindzen is Professor of Atmospheric Sciences emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. There is no climate scientist in the world with a better professional pedigree than Lindzen. It was his apparent understanding of the quality of the climate science peddled by the IPCC and its cohorts that led him to write his recent article, “Science in the Public Square: Global Climate Alarmism and Historical Precedents.” Lindzen writes, “Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly. It also has been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions. How can one escape from the Iron Triangle (ambiguous statements from scientists translated into alarmism by advocates and the media, with politicians responding by feeding the scientists taxpayer money) when it produces flawed science that is enormously influential and is forcing catastrophic public policy. There are past examples. In the U.S. in the early 20th century, the eugenics movement had coopted the science of human genetics and was driving a political agenda. The movement achieved the Immigration Restriction Act of 1923, as well as forced sterilization laws in several states. The movement became discredited by Nazi atrocities, but the American consequences survived well into the 1960s. In the Soviet Union, Trofim Denisovich Lysenko (1898-1976) promoted the Lamarckian view of the inheritance of acquired characteristics. It fit with Stalin’s megalomaniacal insistence on the ability of society to remold nature….However, opposition within the Soviet Union remained strong, despite ruthless attempts to suppress dissenters…. Global warming differs from the previous two affairs. Global warming has become a religion. A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint. There may be a growing realization that this may not add that much meaning to one’s life, but outside the pages of the Wall Street Journal, this has not been widely promulgated, and people with no other source of meaning will defend their religion with jihadist zeal. In contrast to Lysenkoism, Global Warming has a global constituency, and has successfully coopted almost all of institutional science. However, the cracks in the scientific claims for catastrophic warming are, I think, becoming much harder for the supporters to defend.” Lindzen concludes that the previous examples of the eugenics movement and Lysenkoism lasted 20 to 30 years, which is about equal to the run of the global warming movement since its American rollout in 1988. He suggests that the global warming movement may be just about spent as well. Coming revelations concerning the scientific fraud behind global warming will confirm Lindzen’s estimation. The first of these relate to the growing, ultimately yawning disparity between the temperature projections of the IPCC’s 73 global climate models, and the observed temperatures in the real world, over the past 30 years, as shown in the graph below. The actual atmospheric temperatures as recorded by U.S. weather satellites and weather balloons are shown by the two lines at the bottom of the graph, connecting the squares or the circles. The average of the temperature models is the solid line going through the spaghetti of lines representing the projections of each of the models, well above the real world temperatures, with the divergence growing and growing. The source of that graph is Dr. Roy Spencer, award winning NASA scientist monitoring the global atmospheric temperatures as measured by U.S. satellites, and a contributor to Climate Change Reconsidered, as produced for testimony before the Environment and Public Works Committee of the United States Senate. Spencer, R.W. 2013. Statement to the Environment and Public Works Committee, 19 July 2013, Washington, DC. This divergence is already approaching a full degree Celsius, which already demonstrates that the models are more fairy tale than science. But in the coming years that divergence will only grow and grow, ultimately not only discrediting but falsifying the theory of anthropogenic, catastrophic global warming. The second relates to the growing specter of global cooling. Lawrence Solomon reports in the Financial Post in an article published on October 31, “Global Cooling Consensus”: “‘Real Risk of a Maunder Minimum ‘Little Ice Age’ announced the BBC this week, in reporting startling findings by Professor Mike Lockwood of Reading University. ‘Professor Lockwood believes solar activity is now falling more rapidly than at any time in the last 10,000 years [raising the risk of a new Little Ice Age]…, explained Paul Hudson, the BBC’s climate correspondent. If Earth is spared a new Little Ice Age, a severe cooling as ‘occurred in the early 1800s, which also had its fair share of cold winters and cold summers is, according to him, ‘more likely than not to happen.” Solomon adds, “During the Little Ice Age, the Sun became eerily quiet, as measured by a near disappearance of the sunspots typically present. Solar scientists around the world today see similar conditions, giving impetus to the widespread view that cold times lie ahead. ‘When we have had periods where the Sun has been quieter than usual we tend to get these much harsher winters’ echoed climatologist Dennis Wheeler from Sunderland University, in a Daily Express article entitled ‘Now get ready for an ‘Ice Age’ as experts warn of Siberian winter ahead.’” Solomon cites further authorities, continuing, “In a paper published this month by the American Meteorological Society, the authors demolish the claims by IPCC scientists that the Sun could not be responsible for major shifts in climate. In a post on her website this month, Judith Curry, Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, all but mocked the IPCC assertions that solar variations don’t matter. Among the many studies and authorities she cited: the National Research Council’s recent report, ‘The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth’s Climate,’ and NASA, former home of global warming guru James Hansen.” Solomon reported that in a January press release, “To bolster the argument that solar activity could explain the Little Ice Age as well as lesser changes, NASA listed some dozen authorities, including Dan Lubin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, whose research on other sun-like stars in the Milky Way suggest that ‘the Sun’s influence could be overpowering.’” Solomon further reports, “In the last two years, the scientific community’s openness to examining the role of the Sun in climate change – as opposed to the role of man – has exploded.” That includes “scientists at the Russian Academy of Science’s Pulkovo Observatory, whose predictions in the last decade that global cooling would start in this decade are looking especially prescient.” It also includes George Kukla of Columbia University, who explained in 2007, “None of us expected uninterrupted continuation of the [cooling] trend [of the 1960s and 1970s]. Solomon concludes, “Global warming always precedes an ice age, Kukla explained. The warming we saw in the 1980s and 1990s, in other words, was expected all along, much as the calm before the storm.” In other words, global warming is starting to sound a lot like Obama promising that under Obamacare if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance, or if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, or that Obamacare would cause the cost of health insurance to go down, or provide for universal coverage. The bottom line is that America dodged a bullet in the 2000 Florida recount. Because in an October 29 Wall Street Journal commentary, Al Gore sounds like he has gone mad with his grand delusions as personal global savior. Gore tries to warn investors about a coming subprime carbon asset bubble, where fossil fuel investments will be dangerously overpriced, because most investors are overlooking the risk of global warming to investments in fossil fuel assets. He cites a “Carbon Budget” calculated by the “International Energy Agency,” which supposedly means that “at least two-thirds of fossil fuel reserves will not be monetized…, creating ‘stranded carbon assets.” He warns investors to look out for “sociopolitical pressures (e.g., fossil-fuel divestment campaigns, environmental advocacy, grass roots protests and changing public opinion) [which] could create an environment in which carbon-intensive businesses could lose their ‘license to operate,’ thereby stranding assets.” All of which spells opportunity to me. By all means, investors, look out for those fossil fuel divestment campaigns and grass roots protests, which would signal that fossil fuel investments had become artificially undervalued. In other words, take such developments as buy signals. And if any of you want to divest yourselves of the social burden of fossil fuel investments, just send title to those investments to me, care of Forbes magazine.http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/11/12/the-coming-revelation-of-the-global-warming-fraud-resembles-the-obamacare-lie/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 08, 2015, 11:55:07 am Thankyou..
..have they cancelled global warming due to lack of interest? ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 13, 2015, 02:07:23 pm Global warming agreement signed by 195 countries last night in Paris..
..seemed cooler this morning😜 ...but seriously....India start up a new coal fired power station every month until 2020 :o Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 13, 2015, 05:00:48 pm "Mr Shaw said the agreement was not perfect "but it's frankly an incredible achievement".
..wow...even the greens like it...must be be good :P Government hail historic climate deal 1:19 PM Sunday Dec 13, 2015 The New Zealand Government has hailed a historic deal on climate change, saying it is "the first truly global agreement on climate change". Climate Change Minister Tim Groser described the agreement as a huge and historic step forward because all countries had agreed to take ambitious action on cutting greenhouse gas emissions. United Nations officials and delegations from around the world concluded the deal in Paris this morning after two weeks of negotiations. The Paris Agreement, which includes the biggest emitters the United States and China, set out a path to reducing emissions and limiting global temperature rise to 2C this century. Low-lying Pacific countries which were worst-affected by climate change had argued for a 1.5C target, and this was included as an aspirational goal in the agreement. Mr Groser said the significance of 185 countries making emissions reduction pledges over the course of the year could not be understated. "The Paris Agreement banks these," he said. "While they collectively won't solve global warming in one hit, the new agreement sets up a process for regular, five-yearly updates. "This sets the world on a clear pathway to a lower-carbon future." Mr Groser said incredible diplomatic efforts by France had allowed countries to bridge seemingly impossible divides. Labour and Greens MPs were part of the New Zealand delegation in Paris. Labour's climate change spokeswoman Megan Woods said the agreement provided a strong framework for the world to take greater action in addressing climate change. "The language in the text is a triumph of French diplomacy and contains some deliberate ambiguous language needed to reach agreement," she said. Ms Woods said the goal of limiting temperature rise to 2C, or possibly 1.5C, was more ambitious than many people were expecting when talks kicked off two weeks ago. "New Zealand is going to have to think about how it can contribute to the higher ambition achieved in Paris." Green Party co-leader James Shaw also welcomed the Paris deal, and said New Zealand must now honour its commitments. Mr Shaw said the agreement was not perfect "but it's frankly an incredible achievement". It would force the National-led Government to change tack on its domestic policies, he said, because plans for oil-drilling, coal use and new motorways were incompatible with the deal. Labour and Greens wanted the Government to set a more ambitious target of a 40 per cent reduction in emissions from 1990 levels by 2030. New Zealand's current target amounts to an 11 per cent reduction on 1990 levels. Mr Groser said this was a strong contribution to global efforts to combat climate change. The Government also pledged at the Paris conference to provide $200 million in climate-related support to Pacific Island countries over the next four years. - NZ Herald Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 14, 2015, 04:57:09 am thanks the climate change scam for China those left wing commies they are allowed to keep on burning as much coal as they want even though people in China can't hardly breath already.
also i heard that China will be allowed to monitor the world with satellites to keep an eye on other countries to make sure they aren't using too much fossil fuels and then report on them to the climate world government org they are expecting to rake in 3 x trillion dollars with this scam. i wonder where all this money will come from and then i wonder who will get all this money,then who gets to live and who gets to die But don't worry ktj's lefty Chinese buddies will be on the pigs back well the ones in charge will :o Enron, Al Gore,Clinton, the Rothschilds and the Royals are going to be taking us back to the dark ages with them getting rich and us getting poor wow what a great scam to make up for the broken money system where they just print as much money as they want lol ;D If you really want to know whats going on the just follow the money ;) China’s coal bubble: 155 coal-fired power plants in the pipeline despite overcapacity http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2015/11/11/chinas-coal-bubble-155-new-overcapacity/ Enron’s Global Warming Scam Survived It’s Bankruptcy By reasonmclucus Remember Enron, the corrupt firm whose failure should have disproved the myth “too big to fail”, but didn’t? At the time it was the seventh largest corporation. It’s bankruptcy was the largest in history until Lehman Brothers failed. Incidentally, Lehman Brothers was also involved in carbon trading. Enron owed part of its early success to emissions trading. Basically emissions trading was established as a way for some companies to profit from pollution while allowing some companies to continue to produce the chemicals that can cause acid rain. Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Energy Probe and Urban Renaissance Institute, is reporting that Enron played a major role in pushing the global warming scam, including establishing the Kyoto Protocals. [Solomon's article in the National Post is apparently no longer posted on the web.] Enron had already profited from trading sulfur dioxide credits and saw the potential for even greater profits from trading what would become known as “carbon credits“. The article is the first in a series of articles about those who seek to profit from what Weather Channel founder John Coleman calls “the greatest scam in history.” Solomon states, ” The climate-change industry — the scientists, lawyers, consultants, lobbyists and, most importantly, the multinationals that work behind the scenes to cash in on the riches at stake — has emerged as the world’s largest industry. Virtually every resident in the developed world feels the bite of this industry…” which increases the costs of various goods and services. Enron was an early player beginning early in the administration of Bill Clinton to push for a carbon dioxide trading system. Enron also sought support from environmental groups. “Between 1994 and 1996, the Enron Foundation donated $1-million to the Nature Conservancy and its Climate Change Project, a leading force for global warming reform, while [Chairman Kenneth] Lay and other individuals associated with Enron donated $1.5-million to environmental groups seeking international controls on carbon dioxide.” According to Solomon, “Political contributions and Enron-funded analyses flowed freely, all geared to demonstrating a looming global catastrophe if carbon dioxide emissions weren’t curbed. An Enron-funded study that dismissed the notion that calamity could come of global warming, meanwhile, was quietly buried.” Enron advised the Clinton administration what to do at the Kyoto Japan Conference in 1997. To improve its chances for success Enron hired former Environmental Protection Agency regulator John Palmisano to become the company’s lead lobbyist as senior director for Environmental Policy and Compliance. Palismano wrote a memo describing the historic corporate achievement that was Kyoto. “If implemented this agreement will do more to promote Enron’s business than will almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring of the energy and natural-gas industries in Europe and the United States,” Polisano began. “The potential to add incremental gas sales, and additional demand for renewable technology is enormous.” The memo, entitled “Implications of the Climate Change Agreement in Kyoto & What Transpired,” summarized the achievements that Enron had accomplished. “I do not think it is possible to overestimate the importance of this year in shaping every aspect of this agreement,” he wrote. He cited three issues of specific importance to Enron in the climate-change debate: the rules governing emissions trading, the rules governing transfers of emission reduction rights between countries, and the rules governing a gargantuan clean energy fund. Polisano’s memo expressed satisfaction bordering on amazement at Enron’s successes. The rules governing transfers of emission rights “is exactly what I have been lobbying for and it seems like we won. The clean development fund will be a mechanism for funding renewable projects. Again we won …. The endorsement of emissions trading was another victory for us.” “Enron now has excellent credentials with many ‘green’ interests including Greenpeace, WWF [World Wildlife Fund], NRDC [Natural Resources Defense Council], German Watch, the U.S. Climate Action Network, the European Climate Action Network, Ozone Action, WRI [World Resources Institute] and Worldwatch. This position should be increasingly cultivated and capitalized on (monetized),” Polisano explained. Those who believe in Global Warming like to claim that they are opposed by corporate interests in the form of the energy companies. They neglect to mention that the battle isn’t against corporations, it is between different groups of corporations. The energy companies are attempting to continue providing energy to consumers. Companies on the other side are merely attempting to create a financial opportunity for themselves as financial parasites who provide nothing to anyone and get rich in return. Democrats often criticize Republicans for being too close to business. Democrats are just as close to business. They simply favor different businesses. As William O’Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, puts it: “The American people have had enough of convoluted, indecipherable financial schemes and the opportunists who exploit them. The public is understandably angry about Wall Street’s exploitation of Main Street, and yet our political leaders are setting the stage for another complex trading market, ripe for corruption. The future Enrons and Bernie Madoffs of the world would like nothing better than to see the U.S. impose a new market for carbon emission trading.” http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclucus/reasonmclucus/15835722/enrons-global-warming-scam-survived-its-bankruptcy/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 14, 2015, 05:08:32 am The Great American Bubble Machine
From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression -- and they're about to do it again Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405#ixzz3uE2l6MW8 Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 14, 2015, 06:34:11 am ...excellent, finally a world wide climate deal...that'll be $100 thanks...wasn't that bad was it? ::)
Paris climate change deal will cost NZ households $100 a year - John Key Prime Minister John Key says Treasury officials were pushing for a less ambitious emissions target than the one New Zealand took to Paris. Kiwi households will pay about $100 extra a year as part of New Zealand efforts to meet an ambitious new climate change target, Prime Minister John Key says. The Paris agreement, reached after two weeks of negotiations, is the first to require all countries to tackle climate change and cut greenhouse gas emissions in a bid to limit global temperature rises to two degrees Celsius this century. It also includes an aspirational goal of limiting rises to 1.5C, following lobbying from Pacific countries most likely to be hard-hit by rising temperatures and climate change. Politicians and scientists have said New Zealand will have to "up its game" on climate change and make bigger emissions reductions if it is to meet the new goals. Key told Radio NZ that increased use of renewable energy and the development of scientific solutions for agricultural emissions would both be important for New Zealand's efforts. "We're 80 per cent at the moment in terms of electricity production, we want to get to 90 per cent by 2025 so we will have to do more. "You will see a push towards electric cars, I think you are going to have to see, from New Zealand's point of view, a scientific solution to our agricultural emissions and frankly more happening in the commercial sector. "There's a lot of changes there - they're all doable but we'll have to work on those." Treasury advice was that each New Zealand household would pay an extra $1350 over 15 years, or just under $100 a year, in increased petrol, electricity and energy costs to help the country meet its target. However, Key did not believe New Zealand needed to stop issuing oil exploration permits, saying production levels were low compared to the rest of the world and developing countries would still need fossil fuels for some time. "New Zealand could of course just stop producing oil and gas and coal, but realistically if we did that I don't believe it would stop it being consumed - I think the rest of the world would just fill the very small gap we would leave." While New Zealand has been criticised for some for an unambitious target on emissions reductions, Treasury officials and others had pushed for a "far less ambitious target" due to the relative expense of reducing our carbon footprint compared to other countries. "Our view was OK, that's fine but that's not going to stack up in terms of credibility and I think New Zealanders will support either some changes or some costs." - Stuff Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 14, 2015, 08:19:18 am think its a good thing
then you're out of your mind it's an agenda that is controlled by the ultra elite and equates to the loss of our sovereignty to a bureaucratic world body of totalitarian globalist inbred scum. Beam me up Scotty no sign of any intelligent life here ::) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 14, 2015, 03:27:49 pm "think its a good thing
then you're out of your mind " ..not really sure...but with the earths rapidly increasing population...pollution is and will be an ever increasing problem in the future... ..so the fact that most countries have signed up (about 190 countries I believe) is a positive sign that we are all in this together .. ..thing is ...on a per person basis...we in NZ are probably causing alot more pollution than people in developing countries...so the developed countries like us are going to have alot more expense....that's just fact...thats why I say...$100 seems to cheap..I thought it would be alot more...... ...India is going to be starting a new coal fired power station every month until 2020...and China probably more... ...seems that whatever we reduce pollution by will be used up in a few weeks by those countries causing extra pollution on behalf of their population...which they are quite entitled to do to catch up to us... ...does it become a question of ..by what means will life on this planet cease to exist...pollution or war..or disease..or..whatever.. ..but we can be assured that how ever it ends..it has all been in the name of evolution..which is the only reason why we are here in the first place ::) ..sounds like this agreement does not come into force until 2020...and then it's voluntary...makes you wonder how equitable it will be ::) ....where is god when ya really need him ;) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on December 14, 2015, 04:49:24 pm ..and we thought our problems were bad ::)
Paris climate targets a tough ask for Australia without dramatic policy changes on coal DECEMBER 14, 20156:41AM Global climate deal struck in Paris KARA VICKERYNews Corp Australia Network THE CLIMATE Institute has welcomed the Paris climate change agreement, but warns without drastic action on coal fired power stations, Australia will fail to meet emissions targets prescribed by the deal. It comes as the business community pledges to “step up to the plate” to help government achieve its targets — described by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop as ambitious. The Climate Institute chief executive John Connor said while outcomes of the Paris summit were better than expected, coal fired power stations remained the “elephant in the room”. “The Government and indeed the Australian Labor Party need to be more explicit about how we are going to replace our ageing and inefficient coal fired power stations with clean energy,” he said. To meet targets mandated by the Paris agreement, Mr Connor said Australia would need to cut emissions by 60 per cent by 2030, instead of the 26 to 28 per cent target announced by the Abbott Government in August. He said this would also require the phasing out of brown coal fired power stations much faster than was currently planned. In what’s been described as an “historic” agreement, world leaders signed a binding accord at the end of the two-week Paris climate change summit yesterday. The agreement vows to limit global warming to below 2C and requires parties to submit and review plans to slash emissions every five years in an attempt to meet an aspirational goal of constraining global warming to 1.5C. Ms Bishop told reporters the targets were “ambitious” and would require hard work by Australia to achieve, but said it would not come at the expense of the economy. Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Kate Carnell said industry would happily “step up to the plate” to help government meet the challenging targets, as long as any policy changes didn’t hurt competitiveness. “The great dilemma about Kyoto (summit) was that many countries made commitments and then didn’t really deliver on them,” Ms Carnell said. “We’re pleased that these will be, hopefully, binding.” Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox agreed addressing the competitiveness challenge was crucial. “Previous climate negotiations have produced agreements that were either weak or had very few participants,” Mr Willox said in a statement. “The Paris agreement is a strong start on a new approach — one that requires buy-in from every nation and asks them all to keep coming back to review progress and raise their ambition.” Coal was the major fuel source for electricity generation in Australia in 2013—14, accounting for 61 per cent of the fuel mix, according to an Office of the Chief Economist report published last month. news.com Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 01, 2016, 06:23:30 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/LA%20Times%20Pix%202015/latimes_20151231dh_zpszwqftxyf.jpg) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hope-on-climate-20151230-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 21, 2016, 02:43:53 pm from The Washington Post.... It's official: 2015 ‘smashed’ 2014's global temperature record. It wasn't even close. By CHRIS MOONEY and JOBY WARRICK | 3:00PM - Wednesday, January 20, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160120noaa_LandOceanTemperaturePercentiles_zpsdx7esws8.jpg) (https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/01/201501-201512.gif&op=noop) LAST YEAR shattered 2014's record to become the hottest year since reliable record-keeping began, two U.S. government science agencies announced on Wednesday (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info/global/201512) in yet another sign that the planet is heating up. 2015's sharp spike in temperatures was aided by a strong El Niño weather pattern late in the year that caused ocean waters in the central Pacific to heat up. But the unusual warming started early and steadily gained strength in a year in which 10 of 12 months set records, scientists said. The new figures, based on separate sets of records kept by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, could fuel debate over climate change in an election year in which the two main political parties remain divided over what to do about global warming and, indeed, whether it exists. “2015 was by far the record year in all of the temperature datasets that are based on the instrumental and surface data,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at NASA, which made the announcement jointly with NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “It really underlines the fact that the planet really is still warming, there is no change in the long term global warming rate, and we know why that is,” he said. NASA reported that 2015 was officially 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit (0.13 degrees Celsius) hotter than 2014, the prior record year, a sharp increase for a global temperature record in which annual variation is normally measured in the hundredths of a degree. NOAA's figures showed slightly greater warming, of about 0.29 degrees Fahrenheit (0.16 degrees Celcius) hotter than 2014. “A lot of times, you actually look at these numbers, when you break a record, you break it by a few hundredths of a degree,” said Thomas Karl, director of NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information. “But this record, we literally smashed. It was over a quarter of a degree Fahrenheit, and that's a lot for the global temperature.” Overall, NOAA said, 2015 was 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) above the 20th century average. NASA and NOAA both keep independent global surface temperature datasets, measuring temperatures over both the land and the oceans using thermometers, ocean buoys and ship readings. The datasets do not always agree perfectly, but they showed relatively little disagreement this year, Schmidt said. The latest record means that 2014 — the previous record year — only officially held (https://www.nasa.gov/press/2015/january/nasa-determines-2014-warmest-year-in-modern-record) that title for one year. 2014 came by its record by a relatively narrow margin — for instance, NASA gave 2014 (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/briefings/201501.pdf) a 38 percent chance of having been the warmest year on record, still reserving a nontrivial chance that the real warmest year had been 2010 or 2005. (NOAA gave a 48 percent chance that 2014 had, at the time, been the warmest year.) This year, in contrast, there is little need for citing percentages or a statistical photo finish. Buoyed by a powerful El Niño event, 2015 shattered the 2014 record. NASA's Schmidt suggests there is only a 5 percent possibility that any other year on record was actually warmer. Fifteen of the 16 hottest years on record have now occurred in this century, according to NASA. U.S. officials stressed that the El Niño pattern alone does not account of the year's record warmth. “The interesting thing is that 2015 did not start with an El Niño,” Schmidt said. “It was warm right from the beginning.” Because a strong El Niño still is in place, “2016 is expected to be an exceptionally warm year, and perhaps even another record,” Schmidt said. The release of the 2015 temperature data prompted statements from leading Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Clinton, in a Twitter posting, said, “Climate change is real. It's hurting our planet and our people. We can't afford a president who ignores the science.” The Sanders campaign also tweeted a response, saying. “Climate change is real and caused by human activity. This planet and its people are in trouble.” There was no immediate comments from the major GOP contenders, several of whom have been openly skeptical of the mainstream scientific view that human activity is causing the planet to warm. Front-runner Donald Trump has dismissed climate change as a hoax. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160120noaa_SeaSurfaceTemperatures_zps4unqq1lf.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/11/16/Foreign/Images/Was8982440.jpg&w=1484) This image obtained on November 16th, 2015, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows the satellite sea surface temperature departure for the month of October 2015, where orange-red colors are above normal temperatures and are indicative of El Niño. — Picture: NOAA/AFP. According to the NOAA analaysis on Wednesday, every month in 2015 broke previous temperature records except for two: January and April. NOAA also announced Wednesday that for December, the “temperature departure from average was also the highest departure among all months in the historical record and the first time a monthly departure has reached 2°F.” From a climate policy perspective, the warmth of 2015 is also highly significant. Global leaders in Paris agreed in December that the planet should not be allowed to warm 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures — and ideally, warming should be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius if possible. Based on 2015's temperature record, though, we're already half way to 2 degrees. “This is the first year where the record is clearly above 1 degree Celsius above the 19th century,” said NASA’s Schmidt. NOAA's data also show that the planet is now more than 1 degree Celsius warmer than the average temperature between 1880 and 1899, said the agency's Karl. 2015's El Niño enhanced heat was accompanied by dramatic weather events across the globe, including a record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/04/the-northern-hemispheres-record-shattering-tropical-cyclone-season-by-the-numbers) for the number of Category 3 or greater tropical cyclones in the Northern Hemisphere. That tally includes Hurricane Patricia (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/10/22/extremely-dangerous-category-4-hurricane-patricia-to-slam-west-coast-of-mexico-friday), the most intense hurricane ever recorded by the National Hurricane Center. In some ways most ominously of all, 2015 was the year that scientists announced that an entirely new sector of Greenland (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/12/scientists-say-greenland-just-opened-up-a-major-new-floodgate-of-ice-into-the-ocean) — one containing over three feet of potential sea level rise — appeared to have been destabilized. The region is centered on the Zachariae and Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden glaciers of northeast Greenland, which together comprise the endpoint of the northeast Greenland ice stream, which drains 12 percent of the vast ice sheet. 2015's record warmth also included a major anomaly — very cold temperatures in the North Atlantic Ocean to the south of Greenland. Monthly NOAA temperature maps repeatedly showed a blue colored “blob” of cold in this region, a development that is sparking increasing scientific interest, because of the suspicion that it could represent a sign of a change in the overturning circulation of the ocean. “In the northern North Atlantic, temperatures were colder than normal, and that was really pretty much the only part of the world that had a sizeable area with below average temperatures,” Karl said. It certainly isn't the case that the 2015 temperature record can be entirely attributed to the warming of the globe by human greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change has never meant that every successive year will be warmer than the next, and the powerful 2015 El Niño unlocked immense heat from the Pacific Ocean that drove up the global temperature. But at the same time, 2015 was also considerably hotter than 1998, another major El Niño year that was, at the time, the hottest year on record. Now, in contrast, it's fifth or sixth on the list, depending on which agency you consult. And that, say experts, is how the warming of the planet makes itself felt. “It's breaking the record because we also have this unusually strong El Niño, but at the same time we know the ocean is now absorbing two times more heat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/18/this-is-where-90-percent-of-global-warming-is-going) than around the last time we had a big El Niño, which is quite a while ago,” said Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University. There has been some talk in scientific circles that 2016 could be even hotter overall than 2015 — which would lead to three record years in a row. The reasoning here is that there is usually a significant lag (http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/papers/2000JD000298.pdf) between when El Niño peaks and when the warming of the globe does in its wake. Thus, 1998 was the hottest year of the 1997-1998 El Niño event. Britain's Met Office recently forecast (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2015/global-temperature) that 2016 could be “at least as warm, if not warmer” than 2015, in the words of research fellow Chris Folland. “In previous El Niño years, they peak in the wintertime … [and] the warmest temperatures are in the subsequent year,” said NOAA's Karl. “If 2016 continues like we've seen in the past, that would suggest 2016 is going to be very close to a record or even a new record.” However, not all scientists agree. “My guess is that 2016 may not be warmer than 2015,” said Kevin Trenberth, a climate change and El Niño expert at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. He thinks the current El Niño may already have begun to peak (or have peaked) and thus that the second half of 2016 may cool down again somewhat. In 2015, record warm temperatures and a growing focus on addressing global warming seemed in curious sync. It was the year that Pope Francis released his historic encyclical on the environment, Laudato Si, and the year in which the United States moved to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the generation of electricity, their largest single source. Most significant, as heat records over the year accumulated, nations of the world assembled in Paris to forge a global climate agreement that will serve as the template for locking in cuts to greenhouse gas emissions in coming decades. It's hard to say that 2015's warmth directly contributed to these human decisions, and yet it's also hard to entirely separate the two. The stark warming of the globe in 2015 clearly imparted a newfound sense of policy urgency. “NASA has been talking about the existence of global warming in public since 1988,” said Schmidt. “1988 was also a record warm year for the time. Just so that people understand, it is now 23rd in the rankings.” • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment. • Joby Warrick joined The Washington Post's national staff in 1996. He has covered national security, intelligence and the Middle East, and currently writes about the environment. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on environment issues: • New study finds ‘no substantive evidence’ of a global warming pause (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/24/yet-another-study-debunks-the-global-warming-pause) • Sorry, skeptics: NASA and NOAA were right about the 2014 temperature record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/23/sorry-skeptics-nasa-and-noaa-were-right-about-the-2014-temperature-record) • The Northern Hemisphere's record shattering tropical cyclone season by the numbers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/11/04/the-northern-hemispheres-record-shattering-tropical-cyclone-season-by-the-numbers) • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Striking photos of extreme weather around the planet (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/striking-photos-of-extreme-weather-around-the-planet/2015/07/21/327d87fa-2fc6-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_gallery.html) • Why some scientists are worried about a surprisingly cold ‘blob’ in the North Atlantic Ocean (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/09/24/why-some-scientists-are-worried-about-a-cold-blob-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean) • Scientists say human greenhouse gas emissions have canceled the next ice age (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/13/scientists-say-humans-have-basically-canceled-the-next-ice-age) • Why clean energy is now expanding even when fossil fuels are cheap (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/14/why-clean-energy-is-now-expanding-even-when-fossil-fuels-are-cheap) • Why we've been hugely underestimating the overfishing of the oceans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/19/why-weve-been-hugely-underestimating-the-overfishing-of-the-oceans) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/20/its-official-2015-smashed-2014s-global-temperature-record-it-wasnt-even-close (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/20/its-official-2015-smashed-2014s-global-temperature-record-it-wasnt-even-close) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on January 21, 2016, 02:53:51 pm ...if my calculations are correct..in about 6 years..I will be able to grow mango's and pineapples in Northland, something to look forward to :P
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Crusader on January 21, 2016, 03:52:55 pm I may not need such a thick wetsuit when I go diving soon. Having to get into a 7.5mm merino wool lined wetsuit in the middle of Feb is pretty uncomfortable until you hit the water.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 24, 2016, 09:53:23 pm Yet another example of global warming causing extreme weather events, as predicted by a majority of the world's climate scientists.... from The Washington Post… • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Deadly winter storm pounds the nation’s capital (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/light-snowfall-cripples-dc-regions-commute/2016/01/21/8ab1b1b8-c039-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_gallery.html) Saturday, January 23, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160123ssa_SnowStorm_zpsvcuohvyl.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/01/23/Local/Images/snow0651453580950.jpg) A person walks up a street during the snowstorm in Washington, D.C. — Photograph: Matt McClain/The Washington Post. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160123ssb_SnowStorm_zpsrcn5zuko.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/01/23/Local/Images/2016-01-23T171908Z_01_TOR903_RTRIDSP_3_USA-WEATHER.jpg) The winter storm affecting the East Coast is seen in a picture taken from the International Space Station. — Photograph: NASA/Reuters. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160123ssc_SnowStorm_zps0eae1wxa.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/01/23/Local/Images/jj1453579570.jpg) A Secret Service officer endures the blizzard while standing outside the White House. — Photograph: Linda Davidson/The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ • One of the biggest storms in region's history brings Washington to standstill (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/double-digit-snowfall-blankets-the-dc-region-with-more-to-come/2016/01/23/30b7a46e-c1bb-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html) • D.C.'s corridor of power yields to a blizzard's force (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/washingtons-corridor-of-power-yields-to-a-blizzards-force/2016/01/23/1064d83e-c1fd-11e5-9443-7074c3645405_story.html) • Fatal storm wreaks havoc up and down East Coast (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/beyond-washington-snow-causes-havoc-up-and-down-the-east-coast/2016/01/23/dbc2df66-c1f4-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html) • More than 10,000 flights canceled as storm shuts down subways, buses and roads (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/01/23/more-than-8700-flights-canceled-highways-transit-affected-throughout-east-coast) • Even the U.S. military and White House defeated by this blizzard (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/01/23/even-the-u-s-military-and-white-house-defeated-by-this-blizzard) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 25, 2016, 09:53:49 am Association sounds a bit weak there, old son!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 26, 2016, 09:49:49 am Sun's Shifts May Cause Global Warming
Physicist says carbon dioxide's no big deal. By Marion Long|Monday, June 25, 2007 Most leading climate experts don’t agree with Henrik Svensmark, the 49-year-old director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen. In fact, he has taken a lot of blows for proposing that solar activity and cosmic rays are instrumental in determining the warming (and cooling) of Earth. His studies show that cosmic rays trigger cloud formation, suggesting that a high level of solar activity—which suppresses the flow of cosmic rays striking the atmosphere—could result in fewer clouds and a warmer planet. This, Svensmark contends, could account for most of the warming during the last century. Does this mean that carbon dioxide is less important than we’ve been led to believe? Yes, he says, but how much less is impossible to know because climate models are so limited. There is probably no greater scientific heresy today than questioning the warming role of CO2, especially in the wake of the report issued by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That report warned that nations must cut back on greenhouse gas emissions, and insisted that “unless drastic action is taken . . . millions of poor people will suffer from hunger, thirst, floods, and disease.” As astrophysicist ?Eugene Parker, the discoverer of solar wind, writes in the foreword to Svensmark’s new book, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, “Global warming has become a political issue both in government and in the scientific community. The scientific lines have been drawn by ‘eminent’ scientists, and an important new idea is an unwelcome intruder. It upsets the established orthodoxy.” We talked with the unexpectedly modest and soft-spoken Henrik Svensmark about his work, the criticism it has received, and truth versus hype in climate science. Was there something in the Danish weather when you were growing up that inspired you to study clouds and climate? I remember being fascinated by clouds when I was young, but I never suspected that I would one day be working on these problems, trying to solve the puzzle of how clouds are actually formed. My background is in physics, not in atmospheric science. At the time when I left school and began working, it was almost impossible to get any permanent work whatsoever in science. That was why, after doing a lot of physics on short-term things at various places, I took a job at the Meteorological Society. And once I was there I thought, “Well, I had better start doing something.” So I started thinking about problems that were relevant in that field, and that was how I started thinking about the sun and how it might affect Earth. It was a purely scientific impulse. With my background in theoretical physics, I had no—well, certainly not very much—knowledge about global warming. I simply thought that if there is a connection to the sun, that would be very interesting, and I certainly had no idea it would be viewed as so controversial. In 1996, when you reported that changes in the sun’s activity could explain most or all of the recent rise in Earth’s temperature, the chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel called your announcement “extremely naive and irresponsible.” How did you react? I was just stunned. I remember being shocked by how many thought what I was doing was terrible. I couldn’t understand it because when you are a physicist, you are trained that when you find something that cannot be explained, something that doesn’t fit, that is what you are excited about. If there is a possibility that you might have an explanation, that is something that everybody thinks is what you should pursue. Here was exactly the opposite reaction. It was as though people were saying to me, “This is something that you should not have done.” That was very strange for me, and it has been more or less like that ever since. So it’s difficult to do climate research without being suspected of having a hidden agenda? Yes, it is frustrating. People can use this however they want, and I can’t stop them. Some are accusing me of doing it for political reasons; some are saying I’m doing it for the oil companies. This is just ridiculous. I think there’s a huge interest in discrediting what I’m doing, but I’ve sort of gotten used to this. I’ve convinced myself the only thing I can do is just to continue doing good science. And I think time will show that we are on the right track.Do you ever worry that people will take your findings and use them to support unwarranted or even harmful conclusions? I would be happy to kill the project if I could find out that there was something that didn’t fit or that I no longer believed in it. When we started, it was just a simple hypothesis based on a correlation, and correlations are, of course, something that could be quite dubious, and they could go away if you get better data. But this work has only strengthened itself over the years. What first made you suspect that changes in the sun are having a significant impact on global warming? I began my investigations by studying work done in 1991 by Eigil Fiin-Christensen and Knud Lassen Fiin-Christensen. They had looked at solar activity over the last 100 years and found a remarkable correlation to temperatures. I knew that many people dismissed that result, but I thought the correlation was so good that I could not help but start speculating—what could be the relation? Then I heard a suggestion that it might be cosmic rays, changing the chemistry high up in the atmosphere. I immediately thought, “Well, if that is going to work, it has to be through the clouds.” That was the initial idea. Then I remembered seeing a science experiment at my high school in Elsinore, in which our teacher showed us what is called a cloud chamber, and seeing tracks of radioactive particles, which look like small droplets. So I thought to myself, “That would be the way to do it.” I started to obtain data from satellites, which actually was quite a detective work at that time, but I did start to find data, and to my surprise there seems to be a correlation between changes in cosmic rays and changes in clouds. And I think in early January 1996, I finally got a curve, which was very impressive with respect to the correlation. It was only over a short period of time, because the data were covering just seven years or something like that. So it was almost nothing, but it was a nice correlation. How exactly does the mechanism work, linking changes in the sun with climate change on Earth? The basic idea is that solar activity can turn the cloudiness up and down, which has an effect on the warming or cooling of Earth’s surface temperature. The key agents in this are cosmic rays, which are energetic particles coming from the interstellar media—they come from remnants of supernova explosions mainly. These energetic particles have to enter into what we call the heliosphere, which is the large volume of space that is dominated by our sun, through the solar wind, which is a plasma of electrons, atomic nuclei, and associated magnetic fields that are streaming nonstop from the sun. Cosmic-ray particles have to penetrate the sun’s magnetic field. And if the sun and the solar wind are very active—as they are right now—they will not allow so many cosmic rays to reach Earth. Fewer cosmic rays mean fewer clouds will be formed, and so there will be a warmer Earth. If the sun and the solar wind are not so active, then more cosmic rays can come in. That means more clouds [reflecting away more sunlight] and a cooler Earth. Now it’s well known that solar activity can turn up and down the amount of cosmic rays that come to Earth. But the next question was a complete unknown: Why should cosmic rays affect clouds? Because at that time, when we began this work, there was no mechanism that could explain this. Meteorologists denied that cosmic rays could be involved in cloud formation. You and a half-dozen colleagues carried out a landmark study of cosmic rays and clouds while working in the basement of the Danish National Space Center. How did you do it? We spent five or six years building an experiment here in Copenhagen, to see if we could find a connection. We named the experiment SKY, which means “cloud” in Danish. Natural cosmic rays came through the ceiling, and ultraviolet lamps played the part of the sun. We had a huge chamber, with about eight cubic meters of air, and the whole idea was to have air that is as clean as you have over the Pacific, and then of course, to be able to control what’s in the chamber. So we had minute trace gases as you have in the real atmosphere, of sulfur dioxide and ozone and water vapor, and then by keeping these things constant and just changing the ionization [the abundance of electrically charged atoms] in the chamber a little bit, we could see that we could produce these small aerosols, which are the basic building blocks for cloud condensation nuclei. So the idea is that in the atmosphere, the ionization is helping produce cloud condensation nuclei, and that changes the amount and type of clouds. If you change the clouds, of course, you change the amount of energy that reaches Earth’s surface. So it’s a very effective way, with almost no energy input, to change the energy balance of Earth and therefore the temperature. There, and we had to find new techniques in order to do them. Once we had the results, it was necessary to understand completely what was going on. So it was a very intense period of work, almost hypnotic. Now there are other experiments, like the CLOUD project, also designed to investigate the effects of cosmic rays. How will this build on your work? CLOUD is an international collaboration [sponsored by the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN] that is taking place in Geneva, but it’s going to take a while before any results come out of that. It was approved last year, and building the machine will take at least three years. That’s a problem with science: You have to have a lot of patience because results are very slow to come. If the scientists at CLOUD are able to prove that cosmic rays can change Earth’s cloud cover, would that force climate scientists to reevaluate their ideas about global warming? Definitely, because in the standard view of climate change, you think of clouds as a result of the climate that you have. Our idea reverses that, turns things completely upside down, saying that the climate is a result of how the clouds are. How do you see your work fitting into the grand debates about the causes of global warming and the considerations of what ought to be done about it? I think—no, I believe—that the sun has had an influence in the past and is changing climate at the present, and it most certainly will do so in the future. We live in a unique time in history, because this period has the highest solar activity we have had in 1,000 years, and maybe even in 8,000 years. And we know that changes in solar activity have made significant changes in climate. For instance, we had the little ice age about 300 years ago. You had very few sunspots [markings on the face of the sun that indicate heightened solar activity] between 1650 and 1715, and for example, in Sweden in 1696, it caused the harvest to go wrong. People were starving—100,000 people died—and it was very desperate times, all coinciding with this very low solar activity. The last time we had high solar activity was during the medieval warming, which was when all of the cathedrals were built in Europe. And if you go 1,000 years back, you also had high solar activity, and that was when Rome was at its height. So I think there’s good evidence that these are significant changes that are happening naturally. If we are talking about the next century, there might be a human effect on climate change on top of that, but the natural effect from solar effect will be important. This should be recognized in the models and calculations that are being used to make predictions. Why is there such resistance to doing that? Is the science that conflicted or confusing? Or is politics intervening? I think it’s the latter, and I think it’s both. And I think there’s a fear that it will turn out, or that it would be suggested, that the man-made contribution is smaller than what you would expect if you look at CO2 alone. Have you had a hard time getting funding? For an eternity, I would say. But there are no oil companies funding my work, not at all. It sounds funny, but the Danish Carlsberg Foundation—you know, the one who makes beer—they have been of real support to me. They have a big foundation; in Denmark it’s one of the biggest resources for science. It’s because the founder of Carlsberg wanted to use scientific methods to make the best beer. It’s probably the best beer in the world, because of science. If cosmic radiation is in fact the principal cause of global warming, is that good or bad news for human beings? That’s a good question because you would have to say that we cannot predict the sun. And, of course, that would mean that we couldn’t do anything about it. But if humans, through carbon dioxide emissions, are affecting climate less than we think, would that mean we may have more time to reduce the harmful effects? Yes, that could of course be a consequence. But I don’t know how to get to such a conclusion because right now everything is set up that CO2 is a major disaster in society. Do you agree that carbon dioxide is having at least some impact on Earth’s current warming? Yes, but you have to give the sun a role. If you include the sun in the right way, the effect of CO2 must be smaller. The question is, how much smaller? All we know about the effect of CO2 is really based on climate models that predict how climate should be in 50 to 100 years, and these climate models cannot actually model clouds at all, so they are really poor. When you look at them, the models are off by many hundreds percent. It’s a well-known fact that clouds are the major uncertainty in any climate model. So the tools that we are using to make these predictions are not actually very good. What do you hope to do next in pursuit of your theory? I’m extremely excited about our next experiment, which will happen in the next couple months. We are planning to go one kilometer below Earth’s surface because when we do an experiment in the basement we cannot get rid of the radiation. Cosmic rays are so penetrating that there’s always ionization in our chamber and we cannot get to zero ionization. I think it will be the first time that people are attempting an experiment where there is no ionization present. I think it will be quite fascinating because it will tell us something about the details in the mechanism. Do you think then that individuals and societies as a whole need to try to conserve energy? Do you use compact fluorescent lightbulbs, for instance? Yes, yes, we use those. And I ride a bicycle. There are good reasons to conserve our resources and find a more economical way of using energy, but the argumentation is not linked necessarily to climate. At this stage in your work, how confident are you that your basic theories are correct? I think it is almost certain that cosmic rays are responsible for changes in climate. I think now I have very good evidence, and I think I’ve come up with some very good evidence that it is clouds. Of course, we cannot discuss the exact mechanism, but I think we have some very important fragments of these ideas. One extrapolation we could make, for instance: Would this mechanism work in an ancient atmosphere? Would these processes still happen? That is something I don’t know. You discuss your work as part of an emerging field that you call “cosmoclimatology.” What is that? It is the idea that processes in space and what is happening here on Earth are connected. It is this idea that when Earth is in a certain spiral arm of the Milky Way, you can associate that with a certain geological period. Previously, the idea was of Earth as a sort of isolated system on which processes evolved. Now all of a sudden it seems as if our position in the galaxy is important for what has happened and is happening here on Earth. It is this connection between Earth and space that’s exciting and why I have given it this name. Most of this research has taken place just within the last 10 years, and it is truly multidisciplinary, ranging from solar physics and atmospheric chemistry to geology and meteorology—even high-particle physicists are involved. The people who are doing space-related observations are very happy that there could be a connection from space to Earth because it makes a good argumentation for understanding processes out there. These connections, which combine such a variety of disciplines and create opportunities for many lines of work, are surprising and wonderful. It has been a real challenge for me, though, because I have to look at so many different fields in order to work. You’ve faced more than a few hard knocks in pursuing your scientific career. What keeps you going? From the beginning, I have found this to be a really interesting problem, and now, I think, it is the potential of it that draws me on. It is something which started as a simple idea and seems to be continually extending, or expanding. That has really been the most important thing. I mean, for instance, I would never have thought that we would find these correlations between the cosmic rays and the evolution of the Milky Way and life on Earth. I never expected that all of these things are connected in a beautiful way. http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jul/the-discover-interview-henrik-svensmark/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on January 26, 2016, 01:11:55 pm (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/Ash01/Gifs/suspect.gif) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Ash01/media/Gifs/suspect.gif.html)
Not sure about some of his theory - As far as I am aware our sun has been in the same spiral arm since it first kicked into gear... However, I agree, it has now been established beyond all doubt that climate change is driven by the sun. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 29, 2016, 11:42:56 am Meanwhile, at Franz Josef Glacier… (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202016/20160128_RetreatingDenialists_zps1huulyzz.jpg) (http://www.listener.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/LS0616_13_LIS_retreating-denialists.jpg) Some reading for flat-earthers/anti-warmalists: • New Zealand's changing glaciers (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,7911.0.html) • The science for climate change only feeds the denial: how do you beat that? (http://theconversation.com/the-science-for-climate-change-only-feeds-the-denial-how-do-you-beat-that-52813) (ie…heads in the sand stupidity cannot be changed) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: reality on January 29, 2016, 12:22:42 pm ...mmmm..looks like some prime real estate development potential there...do you have his phone number?
...good to see more land being made available for residential housing needs :P Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 29, 2016, 01:29:07 pm Only a total dumbarse....(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/19_HammerHead.gif)....would be silly enough to want to build houses in a valley where regular flash floods roll huge boulders (both rocks and ice) bigger than houses down the valley, as often occurs in the Franz Josef Glacier valley! (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/idiot2.gif) (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/uglystupid2.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 09, 2016, 07:33:33 pm from The Washington Post.... What the Earth will be like in 10,000 years, according to scientists By CHRIST MOONEY | 11:49AM EST - Monday, February 08, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160208tisa_ThwaitesIceShelfAntarctica_zps77hlfxvn.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/09/22/Interactivity/Images/thwaits_icebrige_2012_lrg.jpg&w=1484) An edge of the Thwaites Ice Shelf in West Antarctica. — Photograph: Jim Yungel/NASA. A LARGE GROUP of climate scientists has made a bracing statement in the journal Nature Climate Change (http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nclimate2923), arguing that we are mistaken if we think global warming is only a matter of the next 100 years or so — in fact, they say, we are locking in changes that will play out over as many as 10,000 years. “The next few decades offer a brief window of opportunity to minimize large-scale and potentially catastrophic climate change that will extend longer than the entire history of human civilization thus far,” write the 22 climate researchers, led by Peter Clark, from Oregon State University. The author names include not only a number of very influential climate scientists in general but several key leaders behind major reports from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, including MIT's Susan Solomon and Thomas Stocker of the University of Bern in Switzerland. The researchers' key contention is that we have been thinking about climate change far too narrowly by only projecting outward to the year 2100, which the research says “was originally driven by past computational capabilities.” Rather, we should consider that the long-term consequences of human emissions for global temperatures and sea level will play out over many millennia. “It's a statement of worry,” said Raymond Pierrehumbert, a geoscientist at Oxford University and one of the study’s authors. “And actually, most of us who have worked both on paleoclimate and the future have been terrified by the idea of doubling or quadrupling CO² right from the get-go.” “In hundreds of years from now, people will look back and say, ‘yeah, the sea level is rising, it will continue to rise, we live with a constant rise of sea level because of these people 200 years ago that used coal, and oil, and gas’,” said Anders Levermann, a sea-level-rise expert at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and one of the paper's authors. “If you just look at this, it's stunning that we can make such a long-lasting impact that has the same magnitude as the ice ages.” The key reason for this is that carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for a very long time before being slowly removed again by natural processes. “A considerable fraction of the carbon emitted to date and in the next 100 years will remain in the atmosphere for tens to hundreds of thousands of years,” the study noted. Meanwhile, the planet's sea levels adjust gradually to its rising temperature over thousands of years. So what will the world look like in 10,000 years, thanks to us? That really depends on what we do in the next few hundred years with the fossil fuels to which we have relatively easy access. It also depends on whether or not we develop technologies that are capable of pulling carbon dioxide out of the air on a massive scale, comparable to the amount that we're currently emitting. But assuming that we don't develop such technologies, here are the key factors to consider — as laid out in the new paper — about how we are shaping the planet's very distant future. From 1750 to the present, human activities put about 580 billion metric tons, or gigatons, of carbon into the atmosphere — which converts into more than 2,000 gigatons of carbon dioxide (which has a larger molecular weight). We're currently emitting about 10 gigatons of carbon per year (http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/15/hl-full.htm) — a number that is still expected to rise further in the future. The study therefore considers whether we will emit somewhere around another 700 gigatons in this century (which, with 70 years at 10 gigatons per year, could happen easily), reaching a total cumulative emissions of 1,280 gigatons — or whether we will go much further than that, reaching total cumulative levels as high as 5,120 gigatons. (It also considered scenarios in between.) In 10,000 years, if we totally let it rip, the planet could ultimately be an astonishing 7 degrees Celsius warmer on average and feature seas 52 meters (170 feet) higher than they are now, the paper suggests. There would be almost no mountain glaciers left in temperate latitudes, Greenland would give up all of its ice and Antarctica would give up almost 45 meters worth of sea level rise, the study suggests. Still, anyone observing the world's recent mobilization to address climate change in Paris in late 2015 would reasonably question whether humanity will indeed emit this much carbon. With the efforts now afoot to constrain emissions and develop clean energy worldwide, it stands to reason that we won't go so far. “With Paris, it does get us off the exponential growth, and we might level off at 2,000, 3,000 gigatons,” says Pierrehumbert. Still, what's striking is that when the paper outlines a much more modest 1,280-gigaton scenario — one that does not seem unreasonable, and that would only push the globe a little bit of the way beyond a rise of 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial temperature levels — the impacts over 10,000 years are still projected to be fairly dramatic. In this scenario, we only lose 70 percent of glaciers outside of Greenland and Antarctica. Greenland gives up as much as four meters of sea level rise (out of a potential seven), while Antarctica could give up up to 24. Combined with thermal expansion of the oceans, this scenario could mean seas rise an estimated 25 meters (or 82 feet) higher in 10,000 years. There is, to be sure, “a big uncertainty range on that prediction,” Pierrehumbert said by email. Once again, a key factor that could mitigate this dire forecast is the potential development of technologies that could remove carbon dioxide from the air and thus cool down the planet much faster than the Earth on its own can through natural processes. “If we want to have some backstop technology to avoid this, we really ought to be putting a lot more money into carbon dioxide removal,” Pierrehumbert said. Pierrehumbert said he believes that we will manage to develop such a technology in coming centuries, so long as human societies remain wealthy enough — but he added that we don't know yet about how affordable it will be. The new study fits into a growing body of scientific analysis suggesting that human alteration of the planet has truly brought on a new geological epoch (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/07/scientists-say-humans-have-now-brought-on-an-entirely-new-geologic-epoch), which has been dubbed the “anthropocene”. Taking a 10,000-year perspective certainly reinforces the geological scale of what's currently happening. The ability to carry an analysis out so far into the future, Levermann said, is really the result in recent years of several key scientific developments. One is that “we are now in a better position to model the ice sheets, really,” he said. At the same time, scientists have also recently begun to calculate so-called carbon budgets that describe how much we can emit and still hold the planet to a variety of temperature thresholds. All of this coming together means that a conversation about increasingly long-range forecasts, and about the millennial scale consequences of today's greenhouse gas emissions, is growing within the scientific world. The question remains whether a similar conversation will finally take hold in the public and political one. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • Scientists just uncovered yet another troubling fact about Antarctica's ice (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/08/scientists-just-found-yet-another-reason-to-worry-about-antarcticas-ice) • This could be the biggest example yet of climate change shaping human history (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/08/this-could-be-the-biggest-example-yet-of-climate-shaping-human-history) • Why so many economists back Obama's idea of a tax on oil (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/08/why-many-economists-support-obamas-idea-of-a-tax-on-oil) • Why climate change is really, really unfair (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/05/why-climate-change-is-really-really-unfair) • It's not just Flint: Poor communities across the U.S. live with ‘extreme’ polluters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/27/its-not-just-flint-poor-communities-across-the-country-live-with-extreme-polluters) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/08/what-the-earth-will-be-like-in-10000-years-according-to-scientists (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/08/what-the-earth-will-be-like-in-10000-years-according-to-scientists) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on February 10, 2016, 05:04:26 am (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Would these be the same scientists that 40 years ago were prophesising 100foot sea rises by the year 2000? At least they have learned one thing out of it - make sure all the people round when the prediction is made, are dead when the specified time rolls round Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 20, 2016, 05:34:06 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160220_1455949039290sr_zps1ixp3zjl.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/south-pacific/77096084) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 22, 2016, 06:24:56 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-0TEJMJOhk
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 23, 2016, 12:15:54 pm from The Washington Post.... Seas are now rising faster than they have in 2,800 years, scientists say By CHRIS MOONEY | 3:11PM EST - Monday, February 22, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160222ee_ElbeEstuary_zpsedqgytla.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/10/28/Production/Daily/A-Section/Images/03928089.jpg&w=1484) Waves driven by a cyclone appear in the Elbe estuary near the North Sea close to northern Germany. — Photograph: Christian Charisius/European Pressphoto Agency. A GROUP OF SCIENTISTS says it has now reconstructed the history of the planet’s sea levels arcing back over some 3,000 years — leading it to conclude that the rate of increase experienced in the 20th century was “extremely likely” to have been faster than during nearly the entire period. “We can say with 95 percent probability that the 20th-century rise was faster than any of the previous 27 centuries,” said Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University who led the research with nine colleagues from several U.S. and global universities. Kopp said it's not that seas rose faster before that — they probably didn't — but merely that the ability to say as much with the same level confidence declines. The study was published (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1517056113) on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Seas rose about 14 centimeters (5.5 inches) from 1900 to 2000, the new study suggests, for a rate of 1.4 millimeters per year. The current rate, according to NASA (https://sealevel.nasa.gov), is 3.4 millimeters per year, suggesting that sea level rise is still accelerating. Unsurprisingly, the study blames the anomalous 20th-century rise on global warming — and not just that. It also calculates that, had humans not been warming the planet, there's very little chance that seas would have risen so much during the century, finding that instead of a 14 centimeter rise, we would have seen somewhere between a 3 centimeter fall and a 7 centimeter rise. The new work is particularly significant because, in effect, the sea level analysis produces a so-called “hockey stick” graph — showing a long and relatively flat sea level “handle” for thousands of years, followed by a “blade” that turns sharply upwards in very recent times. The discovery of such patterns itself has a long history, going back to a 1998 study (http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/mbh98.pdf) by climate researcher Michael Mann of Penn State University and two colleagues — who found a “hockey stick” graph for the planet's temperature, rather than for its sea level. Since then the “hockey stick”, in its various incarnations, has come in for voluminous criticism from skeptics and doubters of human-caused climate change — even as multiple scientists have continued to affirm the conclusion that the last 100 years or so are way out of whack with what the planet has seen in the past thousand or more. The new research also forecasts that no matter how much carbon dioxide we emit, 21st-century sea level rise will still greatly outstrip what was seen in the 1900s. Nonetheless, choices made today could have a big impact. For a low emissions scenario, it finds that seas might only rise between 24 and 61 centimeters. In contrast, for a high emissions scenario — one that the recent Paris climate accord pledged the world to avert — they could rise as much as 52 to 131 centimeters, or, at the very high end, 4.29 feet. However, Kopp notes that the methods used to project these totals may not fully capture what happens over the course of this century. “We have a model that's calibrated against a period when a certain set of processes, largely thermal expansion and glaciers, were dominant,” he says, “and we're looking forward to a period when other factors will be dominant.” As Kopp's words acknowledge, the major contributors to sea level rise in the 20th century were the melting of mountain glaciers around the globe and the natural expansion of ocean water as it warms. However, in the 21st century, researchers think that the truly major players in potential sea level rise, the huge ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica, will come to play a larger role. (Just how large remains unclear.) The current study was based on combining a variety of so-called “reconstructions” of past rates of sea level from 24 locations around the world with more recent measurements from 66 global tide gauges. That's necessary because you can't just measure sea level change in a single place and get a global picture — over long time periods, factors ranging from whether land is rising or sinking to changes in ocean currents and the gravitational pull of the planet's ice sheets mean that different regions can see different amounts of sea level rise (or fall). One of the sites where past sea levels were reconstructed by scientists is pictured below: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160222cwnc_CoastalWetlandNewfoundlandCanada_zpsxbmoehxv.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/02/15-17056_figure1large.jpg&w=1484) Coastal wetland in Newfoundland, Canada, that harbors a record of sea level for the past 2,000 years. — Photograph: Ben Horton. The new study follows in the footsteps of a 2011 study (http://www.pnas.org/content/108/27/11017.abstract) that looked at the ocean and climate records contained in salt marshes in North Carolina to infer the history of sea level rise over the past 2,100 years — research that had many of the same authors. That study, too, found that the recent sea level rise is unprecedented over that time period. Mann of Penn State, one originator of the “hockey stick” reference and a co-author on the 2011 study (but not the current one), said by email that he thinks the current work is an “incremental advance” on that prior study, albeit one he agreed with in broad outline. Mann continued by email: The study nonetheless reiterates the conclusion we reached [in 2011] that the acceleration in sea level rise over the past century is unprecedented over at least the past millennium, and that this acceleration is directly related to the spike in surface temperature over the past century (i.e. the “hockey stick”). The new paper emerges even as another study (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1500515113), also published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, produced very similar 21st-century projections of sea level rise. That paper, led by Matthias Mengel of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, also calculated that with unconstrained emissions, the Earth could see a maximum of some four feet of sea level rise by 2100. But it too acknowledged that the approach “cannot cover processes” like the possible collapse of the oceanfront glaciers of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which, it said, “is hypothesized to be already underway.” Such calculations are roughly in line with the 2013 projections of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for expected sea level rise by 2100, although they rely on a different, more simple type of model than that body used. However, Princeton climate scientist Michael Oppenheimer, who was not involved in the current work but collaborates with Kopp and was his postdoctoral adviser, says that this agreement between approaches still “begs the question of just how much disintegration of the polar ice sheets will contribute to sea level during the 21st century since neither type of model is adequate for capturing this growing and potentially disastrous contribution — and that is ultimately the most important unknown, both with regard to sea level and potentially with respect to the whole field of climate change.” Capping a major day for sea level rise news, Kopp also released a report (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-human-fingerprints-on-coastal-floods-20050) on Monday along with Benjamin Strauss of Climate Central and two other researchers, using the current study's approach to determine that thousands of coastal “nuisance” floods in the United States over the 20th century would not have happened without human-caused global warming. Based on just four inches of sea level rise attributed to humans in the 20th century, and another two inches so far in the 21st, Strauss said he “was really surprised to see that there are human fingerprints on thousands of coastal floods that we've already had in the United States.” The reason is that such nuisance floods — King Tide flooding in Miami would be a good example — represent what Strauss calls a “threshold” phenomenon, which is caused after sea level rise reaches a certain level. “I think these studies really put the human fingerprint on Miami Beach's hundred-million-dollar saltwater flooding problem, and really a lot of what's going on in South Florida,” Strauss said. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • We may have just seen a truly ominous new weather record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/11/we-may-have-just-seen-a-truly-ominous-new-weather-record) • Why the U.S. East Coast could be a major ‘hotspot’ for rising seas (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/01/why-the-u-s-east-coast-could-be-a-major-hotspot-for-sea-level-rise) • Why the planet's ancient past holds a worrying lesson about Antarctica (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/22/antarctica-could-be-more-vulnerable-to-major-melting-than-we-thought) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/22/seas-are-now-rising-faster-than-they-have-in-2800-years-scientists-say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/22/seas-are-now-rising-faster-than-they-have-in-2800-years-scientists-say) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 23, 2016, 05:17:19 pm evolve grow some gills or die
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: ssweetpea on February 23, 2016, 07:44:50 pm Evolving some protection against acid would be helpful as well.
As the CO2 increases the oceans become more acidic - not much but enough to dissolve shells and coral. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 03, 2016, 02:11:18 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) The horrible no good very bad February weather everyone loved By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 4:21PM PST - Tuesday, March 01, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160301a_DesNataraj_zpspn1hvbon.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/february-of-love-february-of-doom/des-nataraj.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160301e_Sunset_zpsy3lvmogk.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/february-of-love-february-of-doom/sunset.jpg) LEFT: Ocean Beach, February 2016. So calm, so still, so warm, so lacking in normal amounts of ice-cold rain and wind, you can't help but dance at low tide. RIGHT: Ocean Beach at sunset, February 2016. When even the iPhone’s meek little camera can make Ocean Beach look this warm and peaceful in February, you know something is seriously amiss. MAN, those long walks I took with my girl down at Ocean Beach a couple weeks ago? Right smack in the middle of San Francisco's normally dreary, rainy, bitterly refrigerated February? At sunset? Barefoot and laughing, gasping at the color of the sky and the balmy softness of the air and the grandly ridiculous, all-encompassing beauty? Astonishing. And of course, very, very disturbing. See, February is, historically, the wettest month around here, and the least friendly to any kind of outdoor excursion. Instead, for what amounted to nearly the entire month, San Francisco was sort of stupefyingly gorgeous. And romantic. And kind of perfect. And deeply unsettling. It's not supposed to be like this, you see. It's supposed to be the way it's been for the past, oh, 10,000 years or so, since around the dawn of the geologic record, those broad, deep sets of planetary data that tell us that things like rainless Februaries, ice ages and major species explosions or die-offs (http://www.ipbes.net/article/press-release-pollinators-vital-our-food-supply-under-threat) usually happen over vast stretches of time, such as millennia and epochs. In other words, nothing, really, to worry about. Sort of like an astronomer telling you that the sun is absolutely going to annihilate all life on Earth in a hot, unimaginably violent explosion. When? Oh, in about two billion years. That was cute. That was then. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160301b_OceanPlanet_zpsglkdfzqt.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/february-of-love-february-of-doom/ocean-planet.jpg) (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160301c_SfFebruary_zpsdwcpsldr.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/february-of-love-february-of-doom/sf-february.jpg) LEFT: Hot, and getting hotter. | RIGHT: February 2016 in San Francisco. Notice the complete lack of rainfall. And about 5-10 degrees above normal. Things are different now. Geological time has accelerated, leapt forward, contracted into a seething fireball of We Are So Fṳcked. Remember when “moving at a glacial pace” meant “really, really slow?” Now it means “wholly goddamn terrifying.” Someone call the OED. This February, in case I failed to mention it, was officially the hottest February ever recorded by man, worldwide. It handily “obliterated the all-time global temperature record set just last month,” sayeth Slate's in-house meteorologist Eric Holthaus over in his always-exceptional climate column (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_global_warming_temperature_record.html). “Global warming is going into overdrive,” he added, going on to list out all manner of insane weather data that makes you cringe and feel exasperatingly helpless and pour more bourbon. (Query: What's the causal relationship matrix between bleak climate change news and overall alcohol consumption? Someone should investigate. #climatechangecocktails) In other words, it's not just San Francisco (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-recorded-its-hottest-february-on-record-20160229-story.html). Everywhere on earth, temperatures and weather patterns are doing really horrible, unseemly things to the common definition of “normal”, to the degree that scientists, animals and plant life alike are all caught in a perpetual, deeply anxious state of WTF. “The old assumptions about what was normal are being tossed out the window … The old normal is gone,” Holthaus quotes the Pacific Institute's Peter Gleick, another noted climate scientist, as sighing heavily into his coffee. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160301d_Planet_zpstqmzspmo.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/february-of-love-february-of-doom/planet.jpg) More blood red than cool blue, all year long. Not a good thing. I know what you're thinking: It's tougher than ever to read these articles, to scan through all the distressing data — barely a hint of which bodes well for humanity as a whole — to notice the fire-red charts, the downward-pointing arrows, the horrible rainfall totals, the insane snow-melt speeds, the starving polar bears, the sea life decimations and the imminent extinction of that one class of insect we need more than any other: the pollinators (http://grist.org/food/mass-extinction-threatens-the-worlds-pollinators-and-its-crops), and still know how to respond with anything other than abject fatalism. All we can point to are hints that global CO² emissions might be leveling off for the first time in decades (though overall concentrations are higher, and more dangerous, than ever before). All we have is this odd notion that, while humans are lousy at 10,000 things, we're shockingly good at adapting, at making do, at scrambling for survival by inventing technologies that, if not capable of completely solving the most urgent problems (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-point-of-no-return-climate-change-nightmares-are-already-here-20150805) (too late for that), they can at least maybe stave off the inevitable for another handful of years. And isn't that about all we can ask for, really? Isn't that essentially what we’ve been doing since we arrived, grunting and dumb and hairy, on this pale blue dot in the first place? What else have we done except invent all manner of ingenious, self-aggrandizing tools — war, God, chainsaws, the internal combustion engine, Bluetooth frying pans, $7 coffee drinks — to whistle past the planet's graveyard and postpone our own increasingly self-imposed annihilation? We've always been blissfully, unequivocally doomed. We've just become more skillful at ignoring it. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2016/03/01/the-horrible-no-good-very-bad-february-everyone-loved (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2016/03/01/the-horrible-no-good-very-bad-february-everyone-loved) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 16, 2016, 11:15:43 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202016/20160316_ClimateChange_zpsi6betfas.jpg) (https://twitter.com/RichardMcLellan/status/709745623235362816) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 22, 2016, 08:28:16 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20News%20Pix/sfgate_morfordbanner2.jpg) (http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford) New iPads are here! If you live long enough, that is. By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist (mmorford@sfgate.com) | 2:36PM PDT - Monday, March 21, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160321a_iPhonesNew_zpshjbhcrev.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/shiny-things-tarnished-planet/iphones-new.jpg) Technology! Expertly designed to deflect the sad, sickening feeling that we're not long for this world, thanks in no small part to our technology. I ADORE JUXTAPOSITION. I love it when, thanks to the cataleptic cruelties of the Interwebs, you can now read all manner of surreal, inspiring, devastating and/or intellectually insulting headline all at once, all screaming for your attention and all piled atop one another like a pack of feral dogs fighting over a (supremely jaded) bone. Examples? Everywhere. Such as: Much flurry in techtopia over the announcement of a new iPad, and a new iPhone model from Apple (http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Apple-announces-revamped-4-inch-iPhone-9-7-inch-6926514.php) — news which, in my feed anyway, slammed right up against a fine, inspiring tale about how CO² emissions haven't been this high since the last dinosaur extinction (http://gizmodo.com/carbon-emissions-havent-been-this-high-since-dinosaurs-1765747068) — that's about 66 million years, give or take, when an asteroid crashed into the planet and blotted out the sun for awhile — and lo, what hell we humans hath wrought to have hit that ignoble mark. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160321b_EmissionsChina_zps4rrcdagc.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/shiny-things-tarnished-planet/emissions-china.jpg) China! So much fun, you almost forget we're wiping ourselves out. Boom. Simultaneously fascinating and jarring, that narrative interplay, that wild n' heartbreaking juxtaposition of elements. Don't you think? It's straightforward enough: It says that our extraordinary technologies continue on apace, offering magnificent amounts of everyday magic and unprecedented connectivity, even as the planet appears to be racing in the exact opposite direction, offering increasing amounts of dissolution and cataclysm, and thereby instantly negating, on a massive scale, everything our shiny tech is so desperately trying to pretend isn’t really happening. Deny the correlation, the direct and undeniable cause/effect at your peril. The truth is unstoppable: The harder and more ruthlessly we keep pushing in one direction, the more violently the planet keeps recoiling in the other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYshVbcEmUc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYshVbcEmUc) Of course, this isn't just about Apple, per se. It could have been nearly any story of a similar ilk, from tech to global profiteering to Trump's sickening rise; they all underscore exactly how our mad lust for progress, profit and ideological megalomania keeps slamming against the moral and environmental cost we're paying for it all — which is, essentially, ourselves. It all dovetails fabulously with the recent news that science, that bastion of lies and liberal conspiracy, is now suggesting that the planet has transformed and upheaved so much during humanity's short stay, we've actually ushered in an entirely new geologic epoch (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/01/07/scientists-say-humans-have-now-brought-on-an-entirely-new-geologic-epoch). It's true. Geoscientists now say that we've “decisively” exited the Holocene era, a roughly 12,000-year epoch that was defined by a very slow, natural warming period (a response to the previous cooling epoch), and are currently aswim in the roiling, people-fueled magma of the so-called Anthropocene (http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/150125) — AKA, the Age of Humans. AKA the age of OMG WTF Have We Done? (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160321c_iPads_zpsfsu1m6ki.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/shiny-things-tarnished-planet/ipads.jpg) iPads! Because iPads! It's flattering only in the worst possible way. It means humankind has altered the planet's core conditions and ecosystems, at a deep structural level, quite likely irreversibly, and quite likely forever. It means there is no longer any doubt — just look at the polar ice cores and deep ocean sediments, they say — that our feral obsessions with technology, population growth and unchecked resource abuse have had unimaginable, largely deleterious effects on our home planet. Is there still a case to be made for optimism when it comes to climate change? Sure there is (http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change). But the overall point is undeniable: Mother Nature is no longer in charge of earth's overall trajectory. She's now merely bashing against and reacting to our overwhelming abuse of her — and her reactions are, shall we say, not at all pleased. Don't believe it? That’s OK. There's an iPad app (http://mashable.com/2015/12/04/climate-change-apps) for that. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160321d_EarthNight_zpsiqs6ur9k.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/shiny-things-tarnished-planet/earth-night.jpg) Light her up, and destroy her quickly. NASA image acquired April 18th to October 23rd, 2012, mainly to blow. Your. Little. Mind. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/SFGate%20Pix%202016/20160321e_TrafficCrazy_zps6li7ivnx.jpg) (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/wp-content/blogs.dir/2467/files/shiny-things-tarnished-planet/trraffic-crazy.jpg) Mmm, traffic. It's like rat poison for the soul. • Email: Mark Morford (etc@markmorford.com) • Mark Morford (http://www.markmorford.com) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/markmorford) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/markmorfordyes). http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2016/03/21/new-ipads-are-here-if-you-live-long-enough (http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2016/03/21/new-ipads-are-here-if-you-live-long-enough) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 22, 2016, 09:29:20 pm if only this mark moron guy who seems like a depressed white trash goon would commit suicide to help save the planet from his anti human diatribe rhetoric the world might be a better place
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 31, 2016, 04:38:40 pm from The Washington Post.... Scientists nearly double sea level rise projections for 2100, because of Antarctica By BRADY DENNIS and CHRIS MOONEY | 1:44PM - Wednesday, March 30, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160330tga_ThwaitesGlacier_zpsietq1czm.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/03/thwaites.jpg&w=1484) Landsat 8 natural-color mosaic of the ice cliff at the terminus of Thwaites Glacier, West Antarctica on January 9th. — Photograph: Knut Christianson/USGS. SEA LEVELS could rise nearly twice as much as previously predicted by the end of this century if carbon dioxide emissions continue unabated, an outcome that could devastate coastal communities around the globe, according to new research published on Wednesday (http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature17145). The main reason? Antarctica. Scientists behind a new study published in the journal Nature used sophisticated computer models to decipher a longstanding riddle about how the massive, mostly uninhabited continent surrendered so much ice during previous warm periods on Earth. They found that similar conditions in the future could lead to monumental and irreversible increases in sea levels. If high levels of greenhouse gas emissions continue, they concluded, oceans could rise by close to two meters in total (more than six feet) by the end of the century. The melting of ice on Antarctica alone could cause seas to rise more than 15 meters (49 feet) by 2500. The startling findings paint a far grimmer picture than current consensus predictions, which have suggested that seas could rise by just under a meter at most by the year 2100. Those estimates relied on the notion that expanding ocean waters and the melting of relatively small glaciers would fuel the majority of sea level rise, rather than the massive ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. The projection “nearly doubles” prior estimates of sea level rise, which had relied on a “minimal contribution from Antarctica,” said Rob DeConto of University of Massachusetts, Amherst, who authored the study with David Pollard of Penn State University. The research already has created a buzz in the community of scientists studying Antarctica, and experts largely praised the new model as thorough and impressive, while noting its remaining uncertainties. “People should not look at this as a futuristic scenario of things that may or may not happen. They should look at it as the tragic story we are following right now,” said Eric Rignot, an expert on Antarctica's ice sheet and an earth sciences professor at the University of California, Irvine, who was not involved in Wednesday's study. “We are not there yet … [But] with the current rate of emissions, we are heading that way.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160330tgb_ThwaitesGlacier_zpsywl8sydy.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/09/21/Interactivity/Images/thwaits_icebrige_2012_lrg1442878511.jpg&w=1484) An edge of the Thwaites ice shelf: The blue, visible areas are denser ice. Over time, the weight of polar glaciers and ice sheets compresses and squeezes out gases and air. — Photograph: Jim Yungel/NASA. Should the new research prove correct, it could trigger a “tectonic shift” in expectations for the speed and severity of the sea level problem, said Ben Strauss, director of the program on sea level rise at Climate Central, an independent organization of scientists based in New Jersey. He said that while the study's findings represent potentially grave problems for many coastal areas in the decades ahead, the century beginning in 2100 could see truly catastrophic shifts, unless societies make sharp cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. “Under the high emissions scenario, the 22nd century would be the century of hell,” Strauss said. “There would really be an unthinkable level of sea rise. It would erase many major cities and some nations from the map…. That century would become the century of exodus from the coast.” Places as far flung as South Florida, Bangladesh, Shanghai, Hampton Roads in Virginia and parts of Washington, D.C., could be engulfed by rising waters, Strauss said. Even by 2100, Miami Beach and the Florida Keys could begin to vanish. New Orleans essentially could become an island guarded by levies. Floods that pushed as far inland as the surge from Hurricane Sandy could ravage parts of the East Coast with far greater frequency. The researchers behind Wednesday's study make clear that their model has limitations and that human behavior can alter the possible outcomes. For instance, the worst-case scenario — of seas rising nearly 4 feet due to Antarctic ice loss alone by 2100 — assumes that very high emissions continue for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. In Paris late last year, world leaders forged an historic agreement (https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf) to begin scaling back such emissions in coming years. They embraced the goal of holding global warming “well below” 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, but at the same time, it has been widely noted that current country-level commitments to cut emissions fall far short of this target. But even under a more moderate emissions scenario, Wednesday's study found that the Antarctic contribution to sea level rise still could reach about two feet by 2100, and much more by 2500. Only if countries sharply reduce emissions does the model show that it’s possible to preserve Antarctica in roughly its current state. “This research highlights the importance of doing even much better than the Paris agreement if we're going to save our coastal cities,” Strauss said. DeConto and Pollard arrived at their projections about future sea level rise by first turning to the past. Their study is based on an improved understanding of two past warm eras in Earth's history that featured much higher seas, known as the Pliocene and the Eemian. The Pliocene was a warm period about 3 million years ago, when atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are believed to have been about what they are now — 400 parts per million. Sea levels are believed to have been significantly higher than now — perhaps 30 feet or more. The Eemian period, between 130,000 and 115,000 years ago, also featured sea levels 6 to 9 meters above current levels, with global temperatures not much warmer than our current era. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160330tgc_ThwaitesGlacier_zpsiof9xrll.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/03/AntarcticaMelting_11.jpg&w=1484) Sea level rise on the scale seen in those eras likely required a loss of ice not just from Greenland, but also from Antarctica. But previous computer models of Antarctica have failed to accurately reproduce such scenarios. Scientists had spent “years of struggling to be able to simulate tens of meters of sea level rise in the Pliocene,” DeConto said. “This has been a longstanding problem for us. And we had known for years that we're probably missing some important underlying physics.” Scientists already knew that key parts of Antarctica, and especially West Antarctica, feature a condition called “marine ice sheet instability”. That is, vast glaciers are already rooted below sea level and lie on downward sloping seabeds. Warm water can not only melt them from below, but as the glaciers retreat, more and more ice will be exposed to melting. The new study factors in not only this process, but two new ice processes that have scientists already have seen destabilize several glaciers in Greenland: “hydrofracture”, in which water formed by the melting of snow and ice atop a glacier's stabilizing ice shelf causes it to break up; and “cliff collapse”, in which a sheer ice cliff 100 meters or more above sea level becomes unstable and crashes repeatedly into the ocean below. Both phenomena can speed up the pace of ice loss from glaciers and cause sea level rise. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160330tgd_ThwaitesGlacier_zpsa1zfdu3y.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/03/AntarcticaMelting_22.jpg&w=1484) “Build a little sand castle and it is fine; too high and it may break,” said Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Penn State University who has published previously with DeConto and Pollard, describing the revelations regarding ice cliff collapse. Knut Christianson, a glaciologist at the University of Washington in Seattle, said the new work will spur additional research to determine precisely what happens at glaciers where cliff collapses and so-called “calving” occur. “It's a more comprehensive analysis than before, and it certainly indicates that we should look more closely to see whether or not the way they treat these processes in the model is accurate in the real world,” he said. The research further undermines a string of sea level projections from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have been faulted for being too conservative. In 2013, the body projected (https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf) that for the same high-end emissions scenario used in the current study, sea level rise by the year 2100 would be between 0.52 and 0.98 meters (1.7 and 3.22 feet), relatively little of which would come from the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. It noted that beyond this likely range, only Antarctica's marine-based regions could conceivably contribute a lot more, but the panel found that “there is medium confidence that this additional contribution would not exceed several tenths of a meter.” The new study challenges that reasoning. It also emerges as mounting research has pointed at one region of Antarctica in particular — the Amundsen Sea sector of remote West Antarctica, centered on the enormous, marine-based Thwaites glacier (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/09/29/scientists-declare-an-urgent-mission-study-west-antarctica-and-fast) — as particularly vulnerable. If the projections in Wednesday's study prove correct, they could present especially bad news for U.S. coasts. The reason is gravity: Antarctica's enormous mass pulls the ocean toward it, and when it loses significant mass, seas would surge back toward the opposite end of the world. “Sea level rise is not going to be felt evenly over the surface of the Earth. It's really bad for New York, Boston. We are sort of in the bullseye,” DeConto said. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on food and drug issues. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ • The alarming science driving much higher sea level projections for this century (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/30/the-alarming-science-behind-projections-of-much-higher-seas-in-this-century) • Scientists say Antarctic melting could double sea level rise. Here's what that looks like. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/03/30/what-6-feet-of-sea-level-rise-looks-like-for-our-vulnerable-coastal-cities) • Why some Antarctic glaciers are disappearing faster then we thought (http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/why-some-antarctic-glaciers-are-disappearing-faster-than-we-thought/2002/??tid==sm_pg) • The U.S. has caused more global warming than any other country. Here's how the Earth will get its revenge. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/22/the-u-s-has-contributed-more-to-global-warming-than-any-other-country-heres-how-the-earth-will-get-its-revenge) • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: In North Carolina, a battle over climate change (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-north-carolina-a-battle-over-climate-change/2014/06/20/92d90250-f89a-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_gallery.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/30/antarctic-loss-could-double-expected-sea-level-rise-by-2100-scientists-say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/30/antarctic-loss-could-double-expected-sea-level-rise-by-2100-scientists-say) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 31, 2016, 05:07:30 pm thank god for that i miss not living by the beach ;D
Here's me in 2100 i hope the salt water wont make me rust (http://www.dailydesigninspiration.com/diverse/3d/highlydet3dchars/800/Cyborg_Head_01_by_mmarti.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 31, 2016, 06:09:55 pm from Fairfax NZ.... Houses will be ‘red-zoned’ due to climate change — Environment Commissioner Report warns of “big social issues”, with 44,000 New Zealand homes at risk if high tide rises reach 150cm. By ROSANNA PRICE | 4:03PM - Thursday, 31 March 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160331_1459393385557sa_zpsumpwbwl6.jpg) (http://) Dr Jan Wright's report presented to local government and the environment select committee warns of “big social issues” as a result of climate change. CLIMATE CHANGE is coming, and with it communities may have to be abandoned or left to deal with major financial costs. Environment Commissioner Jan Wright (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/about-us/the-commissioner) said the country would face some “big social issues” because of climate change, identified in a report presented to the local government and environment select committee. She urged central and local government to improve their planning and have national guidelines. The report identified 44,000 homes would be affected by flooding when the high-tide rise reached 150 centimetres. An additional 24,000 buildings would also be affected. It would cost $20 billion to replace them — and the figure did not include any infrastructure or telecommunications. When considering a 50cm high-tide rise, 9,000 homes would be affected with an additional 4,000 buildings. This would equate to a $3b cost for replacement. Wright had been in talks with insurance companies and banks about the effects. “If a particular property is subject to this kind of risk, then insurance companies will start to look at whether they insure it or not,” she said. “So you might see premiums go up, you might see the co-payments go up. Eventually a house would become uninsurable — probably a lot before it became uninhabitable.” She said insurance companies “would take themselves quietly out of the picture”. There could be mortgage holders in the “sad” situation of dealing with negative equity, where their mortgage would be bigger than the value of the house. “It's kind of like a slowly unfolding red-zone in Christchurch.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160331_1459393385557sb_zpsudegufl2.jpg) (http://) The report claims that 44,000 homes would be affected by flooding when sea level rises reached 150 centimetres. — Photograph: Asleigh Stewart/Fairfax NZ. The cost of sea-level rise of 50cm would be affect a similar number of houses in Christchurch's evacuated red-zone within the next couple of decades, she said. Climate Change Minister Paula Bennett said every time you learn a bit more about the science “it is a little more frightening”. “I worry about future insurance costs for every day households if they're having to deal with those sorts of flooding events,” she said. “I do think we can put more into the kinds of technology and adaptation that would make a difference.” However, the advice she had received about Kiwis locked into negative equity was that it would not be the case in the “near future”, but was still an “unknown” in decades to come. Bennett was confident she could pull together a longer term plan that was not just Government-run, but led across communities. Finance Minister Bill English said the Government would not budget for the costs of rising sea levels (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/74206646) when the report was released in November. The report includes maps by region of risk areas for flooding, erosion and groundwater issues. Those are available online (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/regional-land-elevation-maps). The UN's climate body had predicted up to a one-metre rise by the year 2100. However, it may be a two-metre rise at the current rate of carbon emissions, according to a study in the journal Nature which took into account Antarctic ice sheets that are melting faster than previously thought. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic.... • Preparing New Zealand for rising seas: Certainty and Uncertainty (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/preparing-new-zealand-for-rising-seas-certainty-and-uncertainty) http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78407260 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78407260) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on March 31, 2016, 06:10:28 pm 30 years back. the warmalists were adamant that the sea level would be a hundred feet higher at this point in time.
I've kind've lost faith in their prophesising skills......... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 31, 2016, 06:32:05 pm Yak
their crystal ball is broken their scientist and their green goblins need a new leader lol (http://dreamlandmagic.soniacjensen.com/halloween/puzzle/crystal_ball.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on March 31, 2016, 06:36:55 pm LOL
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 31, 2016, 06:53:24 pm The insurance companies will force the issue when they decide the risk is too great to insure properties close to the coast. I guess a lot of people who haven't listened are going to take a huge financial bath when their insurance companies pull the rug out from beneath them. Then the banks will foreclose on mortgaged properties that suddenly don't have insurance, and as nobody will want to purchase uninsurable properties, the banks will be bankrupting a shitload of people. Oh well, if people choose to ignore the warnings and purchase coastal properties, they will have done it to themselves, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 31, 2016, 08:04:54 pm (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/59/79/29/597929ce4f68bd79d82ba4fa6e310116.jpg) so you're starting to worry about some other people might lose their money ktj ? if you're lucky they might all be right wing white trash racist then you won't need to give a rats arse Lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph6IpYBc_JA Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 31, 2016, 08:36:57 pm The town you live in will be in deep shit when increasing global warming causes yet more epic storms to close the Manawatu Gorge. No matter where you hide, you cannot escape from it. It will be your kids and your grandkids who will bear the brunt of nature's fury because of the selfish generations who trashed the planet. How do you feel about that? Or don't you even care what happens to your grandchildren and great-grandchildren? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 31, 2016, 09:21:11 pm although i do love my children and grandchildren even if the witches are right about sea level rise and global warming by then you and me will be long dead and forgotten and the earths children will either adapt or die but don't worry the earth will survive
i don't believe death is the end of life but even if i am wrong one day you and i will find out the truth i'm betting this life is a dream and we are on a ride until the ride stops when we die lol then we are pure energy and evolve into a life form made of light so no worries boy lol stop whining and get ready for the next big adventure lmao Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on April 01, 2016, 06:21:30 am New Zealand, amongst other countries round the world, has had areas rising and falling for eons.
As one tectonic plate rolls under another, [as happens directly under New Zealand for those who live in happy ignorance] the surface alters. Since the warmalists scented money in the offing a few decades ago - a bit like sharks scent blood in the water - these natural rises and falls have miraculously converted into "the results of Human Induced Global Warming!" [snort] Do I believe in "Global Warming?" Of course I do. The warming/cooling cycle has been happening since the Earth was formed and the sun shone. Its not going to stop now! Do I believe we can do something to help our planet? Too right! Invest in arms/munitions and supply all the worlds trouble spots impartially. All countries to decline to give foreign aid and also refuse UN mandated immigration. Lower the Earths population by billions - contraception by force if necessary. Its going to become necessary sooner or later and the sooner it happens the better off the Earth will be.. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 01, 2016, 09:17:15 am Quote Do I believe we can do something to help our planet? Too right! .Invest in arms and supply all the trouble spots impartially. Countries decline to give foreign aid and also refuse immigration. Lower the Earths population by billions - by force if necessary. Its going to become necessary sooner or later and the sooner it happens the better off the Earth will be. i think a lot of that stuff is already in the works Yak lol so much for globalism, immigration and political correctness it's all useless lol but what bothers me is who gets to pick who lives and who dies? advances in mass killing technology will in a very short time end up in the hands of terrorists with a death wish for all of humanity maybe we deserve that for being so soft and wimpy. i think some of the major countries in the world if they want could target whole countries with spaced based microwave weapons and could either target single a person,groups or anyone on the planet deemed unnecessary to slow cook or fast cook using their cell phones to target or track them down and analyze if they should live or die according to their natural habits data which is already now being stored up on 5th gen computers maybe it's already 6 or seven gen quantum supercomputers with AI that will one day even turn on their masters lol. i see a great future for AI terminator robot killing machines sexypants 2.0 lmao (http://www.dailydesigninspiration.com/diverse/3d/highlydet3dchars/800/Cyborg_Head_01_by_mmarti.jpg) Yak you might now get called a hitler or a bigoted racist by ktj Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 01, 2016, 09:58:39 am So this is where hitler's idea's came from
(http://protestantedigital.com/upload/imagenes/41041_N_13-03-11-5-17-33.jpeg) (http://shootingparrots.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/F11.png) Francis Galton statistician, progressive, polymath, sociologist, psychologist, anthropologist, eugenicist, tropical explorer, geographer, inventor, meteorologist, proto-geneticist and psychometrician. Born: February 16, 1822, Birmingham, United Kingdom Died: January 17, 1911, Haslemere, United Kingdom Notable student: Karl Pearson Parents: Frances Anne Violetta Darwin, Samuel Tertius Galton Education: King's College London, Trinity College, Cambridge, University of Cam The return of eugenics – but they're running ahead with the idea, and Britain is at the forefront Researchers don’t like the word (http://cdn.spectator.co.uk/content/uploads/2016/04/cover_020416_landscape.jpg) The only way of cutting off the constant stream of idiots and imbeciles and feeble-minded persons who help to fill our prisons and workhouses, reformatories, and asylums is to prevent those who are known to be mentally defective from producing offspring. Undoubtedly the best way of doing this is to place these defectives under control. Even if this were a hardship to the individual it would be necessary for the sake of protecting the race. — The Spectator, 25 May 1912 It’s comforting now to think of eugenics as an evil that sprang from the blackness of Nazi hearts. We’re familiar with the argument: some men are born great, some as weaklings, and both pass the traits on to their children. So to improve society, the logic goes, we must encourage the best to breed and do what we can to stop the stupid, sick and malign from passing on their defective genes. This was taken to a genocidal extreme by Hitler, but the intellectual foundations were laid in England. And the idea is now making a startling comeback. A hundred years ago the eugenic mission involved a handful of crude tools: bribing the ‘right’ people to have larger families, sterilising the weakest. Now stunning advances in science are creating options early eugenicists could only dream about. Today’s IVF technology already allows us to screen embryos for inherited diseases such as cystic fibrosis. But soon parents will be able to check for all manner of traits, from hair colour to character, and choose their ‘perfect’ child. The era of designer babies, long portrayed by dystopian novelists and screenwriters, is fast arriving. According to Hank Greely, a Stanford professor in law and biosciences, the next couple of generations may be the last to accept pot luck with procreation. Doing so, he adds, may soon be seen as downright irresponsible. In his forthcoming book The End of Sex, he explains a brave new world in which mothers will be given a menu with various biological options. But even he shies away from the word that sums all this up. For Professor Greely, and almost all of those in the new bioscience, eugenics is never mentioned, as if to avoid admitting that history has swung full circle. The word ‘eugenics’ was coined in 1883 by Francis Galton, a polymath who invented fingerprinting and many of the techniques of modern statistical research. He started with a hunch: that so many great men come from the same families because genius is hereditary. Fascinated by the evolutionary arguments of his cousin Charles Darwin, he wondered whether advances in health care and welfare had sullied the national gene pool because they allowed more of the sick and disabled not just to survive but to lead normal family lives. He went off to collect data, and came back with his theory of eugenics. This was hailed not as a theory but as a discovery — a new science of human life, with laws as immutable as Newton’s. A race of gifted men could be created, he said, ‘as surely as we can propagate idiots by mating cretins’ Some of the most revered names in British history lapped this up. As Home Secretary, Churchill wrote to the Prime Minister urging him to do more to stop the “multiplication of the unfit”. Darwin himself would come to fear that “if the prudent avoid marriage whilst the reckless marry, inferior members tend to supplant the better members of society”. By 1908, a Royal Commission conveyed the grave news that there were 150,000 ‘feeble-minded’ people in Britain. So what was to be done with them? As one reformer put it: “They must be acknowledged dependents of the State…but with complete and permanent loss of all civil rights – including not only the franchise but civil freedom and fatherhood”. This was William Beveridge, founder of the welfare state. A report in The Times conveyed, matter-of-factly, the substance of a lecture given to the Eugenics Society following survey of the people of Devon by a Dr Grunby. As to imbeciles, he said there was only one thing to do with them: exterminate them as they arose. He put forward the suggestion on purely humanitarian grounds. Eugenics came to stand for modernity: to believe in it was to declare one’s belief in science and rationalism, to be liberated from religious qualms. Some of the most revered names in English history lapped all of this up. The Bishop of Birmingham called for sterilisation. Bertrand Russell looked forward to a eugenic era driven by science, not religion. ‘We may perhaps assume that, if people grow less superstitious, government will acquire the right to sterilise those who are not considered desirable as parents,’ he argued in 1924. When a Sterilisation Bill was brought before Parliament in 1931 it had the backing of social workers, dozens of local authorities and the medical and scientific establishment. It was defeated, but the agenda continued. The Nuremberg Trials established that the Nazis (latecomers to all this) carried out some 400,000 compulsory sterilisations — a figure so horrific it has eclipsed the 60,000 in Sweden and a similar number in the United States. The idea of a biological divide between the fit and the unfit was no Nazi invention. It was the conventional wisdom of the developed world. And this is the problem. Because we forget how badly Britain fell for eugenics, we fail to recognise the basic arguments of eugenics when they reappear — which they are now doing with remarkable regularity. Consider Adam Perkins, a lecturer at King’s College London, who has published a study echoing the Royal Commission’s attempt to quantify the feeble-minded. The group he aims to study are the ‘employment-resistant’: those disposed to a life on welfare as a result of genetic predispositions and having grown up in workless homes. With Galtonesque precision, he estimates some 98,040 ‘extra’ people were ‘created by the welfare state’ over 15 years due to a rise in welfare spending. They represent an ‘ever-greater burden on the more functional citizens’. In 1938, Germans were shown a poster of a cripple and invited to be angry about the costs of caring for him (60,000 Reichmarks). Dr Perkins tries a softer version of this general idea, calculating the £12,000-a-head annual cost of the new British untermensch — not just in welfare, but the crimes they will probably commit. His remedy? That Cameron’s government restricts welfare, so that claimants have fewer children. A perfect eugenic solution. There is nothing monstrous about Dr Perkins, himself a former welfare claimant, nor anything very original about his book. He simply joins the dots of recent academic research and spells out what others won’t. His footnotes show the growing academic pedigree of the new eugenics: work has been done to identify genes relating to alcoholism, criminality, sporting success, even premature ejaculation. Extrapolations are now made about how far the quality of human stock worldwide has been eroded by health care and welfare. In academia, the word ‘eugenics’ may be controversial but the idea is not. To Professor Julian Savulescu, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Medical Ethics, the ability to apply ‘rational design’ to humanity, through gene editing, offers a chance to improve the human stock — one baby at a time. ‘When it comes to screening out personality flaws such as potential alcoholism, psychopathy and disposition to violence,’ he said a while ago, ‘you could argue that people have a moral obligation to select ethically better children’. Meanwhile, the scientific pursuit of ‘ethically better children’ is advancing rapidly. Since Louise Brown was conceived in a laboratory 38 years ago — the world’s first IVF baby — the treatment has become mainstream, sought by 100 women a day in Britain. Developments in IVF mean that, today, several embryos can be fertilised and screened for diseases, with the winner implanted in the uterus. The next step was taken last year, when Chinese scientists succeeded in modifying the genes of a fertilised embryo. It was rather messy: they attempted to treat 86 non-viable embryos, and failed in most cases. So they abandoned the experiment, saying a 100 per cent success rate is needed when dealing in human life. This — the genetic modification of human embryos — is what causes the concern. But here, and at each point in the new eugenics, you can argue: where is the moral problem? There are no deaths, no sterilisations, no abortions: just a scientifically guided conception. The potential avoidance of disease, to the betterment of humanity. So who could complain? One answer came four months ago, when 150 scientists and academics called for a complete shutdown of human gene editing. In a letter released before a summit in Washington DC, they argued that the technology would ‘open the door to an era of high-tech consumer eugenics’, with affluent parents choosing the best qualities and creating a new form of genetically modified human. To these scientists, the complex issue boils down to a simple point: ‘We must not engineer the genes we pass on to our descendants.’ Such concerns cannot be heard from the British government, which recently helped to build the Francis Crick Institute, a new nerve centre for biomedical research. A few weeks ago, the institute was given authorisation to begin a new, controversial gene-editing technique known as CRISPR-Cas9. To supporters, this is proof of Britain’s position at the cutting edge of research. To critics, it is proof that Britain (one of the few countries that does not ban the use of fertilised human embryos in experiments) is again rushing headlong into eugenic science with minimal debate. On the rare occasions the matter is raised in Parliament, ministers say that they do not support eugenics. But, as Chris Patten has pointed out in the Lords, that is a meaningless statement if there is no attempt to define the term. To David Galton, who has written more about the subject than any British academic, the definition is simple. If you use science to make the best of genes handed down to the next generation, that’s eugenics: ‘Sweeping the word under the carpet or sanitising it with another name merely conceals the appalling abuses that have occurred in the past and may lull people into a false sense of security.’ The idea of consumer eugenics is no futurist fantasy. Already, sperm banks boast about screening for everything from autism to red hair. £12,000 buys you the chance to choose which embryo to implant. And £400 buys sperm-sorting, the better to conceive a boy (or a girl). And even in the slums of India, women desperate for a boy will pay for ante-natal screening to identify — and abort — girls. It doesn’t take government to pursue eugenics: parents will do it themselves. The Francis Crick Institute says its gene-editing research has nothing to do with eugenics; even British law prohibits pregnancies from gene-edited embryos, and its researchers plan to destroy them after seven days. Instead, it aims to learn about the role of genes in miscarriage. But if its research improves gene-editing technology, less scrupulous scientists can make use of that. This is why scholars like Robert Pollack, a professor at Columbia University, want a moratorium on the whole process of modifying human genes. ‘Imagine that, many years hence, there are two sorts of people: those who carry the messy inheritance of their ancestors, and those whose ancestors had the resources to clean up their germ cells before IVF.’ So you end up with two types of humans: the genetically tidy rich and everyone else. The experiments being carried out in London are worrying, he says, precisely because the British have such a good success rate. ‘It is not failure, but success, that concerns me,’ says Professor Pollack. ‘And for that concern, there are few venues more troubling than the Crick Institute — it is as likely as any place in the world to do this without making any distracting, avoidable mistakes.’ So some 130 years after Britain gave the world the idea of perfecting humanity, we are once again at the cutting edge of this troubled science. For good or ill, eugenics is back. http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/the-return-of-eugenics/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on April 01, 2016, 11:42:16 am Yeah - I clarified a point or two in my post - And you are correct in your concern over who decides.
I don't know the answer to that yet, but sooner or later something will be done about it, or our planet will be swamped by the masses. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 01, 2016, 12:30:05 pm it didn't get too hot here in woodville this year
overpopulation, wars and global warming? i am still unsure about warming but what do i know? natural disasters and the culling of 90% of the world's population to save the world's resources lol i am not sure about that either,even still part of me wants to destroy some unruly humans for the common good all but not sure of the ethic's of this idea i think we have been at this point before on the earth many times then been destroyed by natural events or wars i believe this by looking at the mega structures all over the planet that seem to show they were built by an advanced civilisation way back and not with copper tools either but more likely by humans with advanced technology i think in the past the earth may have experienced many catastrophic extinction events and we are the survivors. its hard to measure what is intelligence and its hard to trust scientist with agendas who already believe they have solved the puzzle then make a picture that proves them correct by fudging things to make the bits fit all for their pride and grants so they can continue to do their work when in fact they could be deluding themselves and others Yak i thought this was interesting in the comment sec below the story Let us try to understand what exactly Fraser discusses. There are two separate and unrelated problems: 1. How to clean a population of genetic defects (like pathologically low IQ)? 2. How to improve the genetics of a population, that is to find a way to steadily change whatever chosen parameter (like IQ or the penis size). It is quite clear for anyone who studied thermodynamics within the limits of school textbook that any attempt to solve the second problem by dedicated selection (which is the main point of eugenics) is thoroughly idiotic. The first problem has nothing to with genetics. It is a matter of social regulation. In a reasonable society, people must be encouraged to do what they do best, and discouraged to do anything bad for the society. The latter can be of two kinds: (a) an idiot is promoted to a position of decision making or (b) a smart but evil-minded person gets an opportunity to inflict damage to other people, like all sorts of thieves and swindlers. The best way of solving the second problem is a system of meritocracy which existed in China since 2500 years ago. Smart people were promoted to higher positions using a system of examinations, regardless of the applicant's origin. Stupid people did farming. People with criminal and violent minds were conscripted to the military service, and they had plenty of opportunity to exercise their violent character in the battlefield. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 01, 2016, 04:48:38 pm from The Washington Post.... EDITORIAL: Shocking new study foresees a swamped planet as the GOP revels in illogic By the EDITORIAL BOARD | 2:02PM EDT - Thursday, March 31, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160331jif_JuneauIceField_MendenhallGlacier_zps0pqo3shi.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/03/31/Editorial-Opinion/Images/Juneau_Ice_Field-230cd.jpg) Ice from Mendenhall Glacier spills alongside sediment and rocks in Juneau, Alaska, on February 15th. — Photograph: Becky Bohrer/Associated Press. “I JUST think we have much bigger risks,” Donald Trump told us last week (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/a-transcript-of-donald-trumps-meeting-with-the-washington-post-editorial-board). We had asked the Republican presidential candidate about human-caused climate change, a phenomenon in which he said he is “not a big believer”. Don't good business leaders hedge against risks, spending something now to avoid potentially negative outcomes later? “I think our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons,” he responded. Mr. Trump is not alone among Republicans in citing other scary problems to illogically ignore the danger of a warming world. Senator Ted Cruz (Texas) and Ohio Governor John Kasich both mention terrorism (http://www.npr.org/2015/12/01/458087304/republican-candidates-slam-obamas-focus-on-climate-change) — “the real problem that faces us today,” Mr. Kasich said — when criticizing President Obama's efforts to slow climate change. Meanwhile, in the world of facts, evidence and science, the dangers of climate change look ever more frightening. The latest news comes courtesy of a shocking paper in the journal Nature (http://www.nature.com/articles/nature17145.epdf) about how Antarctic ice sheets might respond to warmer air and ocean temperatures. Scientists from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and Pennsylvania State University examined previous eras in which the planet was only a bit warmer yet seas were much higher. Previous modeling did not match these foreboding historical phenomena, so the scientists used insights into the physics of how the continent's massive ice formations melt to improve the models. The result is downright scary: “Antarctica has the potential to contribute more than a metre of sea-level rise by 2100 and more than 15 metres by 2500, if emissions continue unabated.” With that additional melting from Antarctica, seas could rise some 6 feet by 2100 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/03/30/what-6-feet-of-sea-level-rise-looks-like-for-our-vulnerable-coastal-cities). This would result in humanitarian catastrophe (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/30/antarctic-loss-could-double-expected-sea-level-rise-by-2100-scientists-say), swamping coastal cities all over the world and forcing massive inland migrations. In separate research, highlighted last week (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/23/the-arctic-is-thawing-much-faster-than-expected-scientists-warn) by The Washington Post's Chris Mooney, scientists found strong evidence (http://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2674.epdf) that a layer of permafrost across the frozen north is thawing, which could lead to massive stocks of organic matter breaking down, which would release more planet-warming greenhouse emissions. This feedback loop could significantly worsen global warming over time. Perhaps warmer Arctic temperatures will also lead to large-scale plant growth, canceling out some of the greenhouse gases emitted during the thaw? A group of researchers asked 98 experts on the Arctic about this possibility, and the results were not encouraging (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034014). Models predicting large offsetting effects, for example, failed to account for changes in the region's water resources. All in all, the chance that the Arctic will become an increasingly large source of greenhouse emissions this century appears to be significant, if humanity does not act to arrest warming. The interlocking effects of the Earth's various systems remain complex and difficult to predict. What is beyond question is that we face significant risk. The prudent response would be to mitigate the threat, instead of waiting to discover that scientists' warnings were on target — or even understated — after the damage has been done. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • The Washington Post's View: 2015 … A year of progress and buffoonery on climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2015-a-year-of-progress-and-buffoonery-on-climate-change/2016/01/02/9ad6955c-af33-11e5-9ab0-884d1cc4b33e_story.html) • Jason Samenow: Global warming in 2015 made weather more extreme, and it's likely to get worse (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/weather-in-2015-was-warmer-and-more-extreme-than-ever-and-its-likely-getting-worse/2016/01/20/8d698620-be2b-11e5-9443-7074c3645405_story.html) • Fred Hiatt: Even ExxonMobil says climate change is real. So why won't the GOP? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/even-exxonmobil-says-climate-change-is-real-so-why-wont-the-gop/2015/12/06/913e4b12-9aa6-11e5-b499-76cbec161973_story.html) • Michael Gerson: We need a miracle on climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-need-a-miracle-on-climate-change/2015/08/13/fd44a7b0-41d8-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/shocking-new-study-foresees-swamped-planet-as-the-gop-revels-in-illogic/2016/03/31/a3d449b0-f2c7-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/shocking-new-study-foresees-swamped-planet-as-the-gop-revels-in-illogic/2016/03/31/a3d449b0-f2c7-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 02, 2016, 12:06:51 pm Donald Trump when he makes america great again is going to build cities under the sea and make king neptune pay for it lol
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 04, 2016, 02:52:29 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Cartoons%202016/20160404_AucklandStadium_zpstmkiwqp5.jpg) (https://twitter.com/GuyKeverneBody/status/716711683847229440) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 12, 2016, 01:52:48 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160412_1460421937813s_zpsflsmdbv9.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/destinations/nz/78797516) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on April 12, 2016, 05:34:20 pm I'm puzzled.
What has this continual erosion -especially of our western coastline - got to do with this thread? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on April 14, 2016, 09:34:47 am I'm puzzled. What has this continual erosion -especially of our western coastline - got to do with this thread? Seems to me that coastal erosion is/could be a result of Climate change - especially the erosion caused by extremes of weather systems as are occurring in both hemispheres recently. If you read the 'related' in the story you'd find the problem is not occurring only on the West coast in NZ FYI http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/74172819/Large-parts-of-Napier-are-vulnerable-to-sea-level-rise-according-to-report http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/business/residential-property/78670742/couple-heartbroken-after-storms-leave-155000-wairarapa-bach-worth-2500 http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/kapiti/9854214/Residents-win-hazard-lines-challenge http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/72286165/Wairarapa-school-workers-and-trampers-cut-off-as-roads-flooded-damaged I have been watching my own area's erosion and changing seasons happening for yonks. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on April 14, 2016, 10:04:31 am Its not for nothing that the old time sailors called the latitudes NZ spans, The Roaring Forties.
Apart from Napier, the links you provide are western coast, which face some of the most violent seas in the world. [I once spoke with a pommy worker who got swept off the Maui Platform - he told me that he had worked on rigs all over the world but didn't know what rough water was till he came to NZ] Our coastlines have been carved away for eons, this just hasn't suddenly appeared overnight! (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Punakaiki itself, demonstrates this by the erosion that caused the blowholes and pinnacles! As far as Napier goes, the height above sea-level for much of it can be measured in inches rather than feet. It was raised [ against the historical trend] in the big quake and will probably return to sinking again in any major subsequent quake, if its not already doing so by increment. I lived in the suburb of Onekawa for a while and whenever I dug anywhere, the water-table under my section seemed to lie at about 18 inches. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on April 14, 2016, 03:46:41 pm here's a short film about some underwater cities they have found from way back in the past
if you are interested you can look them up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dowtnPEU-DU Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on April 20, 2016, 02:36:03 am NZ gets another climate change warning NZ Newswire on April 19, 2016, 10:19 New Zealand can expect more "one-in-100-year" storms, flooding, fires, weather extremes and climate change refugees, warn scientists looking at the effects of climate change. The Royal Society has released a report, Climate Change Implications for New Zealand, which outlines a drastically different country if urgent greenhouse gas action isn't taken. "All New Zealanders will be affected and must be involved in the discussion. We hope this report can act as a basis for a wider national conversation," said society president Professor Richard Bedford. The report says with a 30cm rise in sea level, the current one-in-100-year extreme sea event would be expected to occur once every year or so. "Many New Zealanders live on the coast and two-thirds of us live in flood-prone areas so we are vulnerable to these projected changes," said Professor James Renwick, chair of the panel which wrote the report. There may also be more climate change refugees. "Think about Syria and the Mediterranean today," Prof Renwick told TV3's Paul Henry programme. "That could be a picture of the future in a lot of parts of the world if we don't get on top of the problem. A lot of people may want to come here, whether we want them to come or not." However, the report says not all of the issues were negative, and some were already delivering gains to New Zealand. "Increasing global commodity prices due to negative effects of climate change on food production globally could benefit New Zealand farmers, but making use of such price rises also relies on New Zealand's ability to trade in global markets." Last year, Parliamentary Commissioner Jan Wright produced a report outlining what sea level rise would do to houses near the coast, but Finance Minister Bill English dismissed it as "pretty speculative". SIX CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM AREAS FOR NZ: * New Zealanders live mainly near coasts * Many live on floodplains * Increased freshwater demand, less rain in some areas, more in others * Ocean temperature and chemistry changes will affect fishing * The country's unique biology will be affected * New Zealand will be affected by other countries' response to climate change. NZN http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=224934 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 04, 2016, 03:21:19 pm from The Washington Post.... World Bank: The way climate change is really going to hurt us is through water By CHRIS MOONEY | 4:25PM EDT - Tuesday, May 03, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160503gr_GangesRiver_zpsaxninlyi.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2016-05-03/AP/India_Heat_Wave-9ad6c.jpg&w=1484) The dried-up riverbank of the Ganges is seen from a bridge in Allahabad, India, on May 3rd. Much of India is reeling from a heat wave and severe drought conditions that have decimated crops, killed livestock and left at least 330 million Indians without enough water for their daily needs. — Photograph: Rajesh Kumar Singh/Associated Press. AS India, the world's second-most populous country, reels from an intense drought (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/02/armed-guards-at-indias-dams-as-drought-grips-country), the World Bank has released a new report (http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water/publication/high-and-dry-climate-change-water-and-the-economy?CID=WAT_TT_Water_EN_EXT) finding that perhaps the most severe impact of a changing climate could be the effect on water supplies. The most startling finding? The report suggests that by 2050, an inadequate supply of water could knock down economic growth in some parts of the world a figure as high as 6 percent of GDP, “sending them into sustained negative growth.” Regions facing this risk — which can at least partly be averted by better water management, the document notes — include not only much of Africa but also India, China and the Middle East. “When we look at any of the major impacts of climate change, they one way or another come through water,” said Richard Damania (http://blogs.worldbank.org/team/richard-damania), a lead economist at the bank and the lead author of the report, on a call with reporters on Tuesday. “So it will be no exaggeration to claim that climate change is really in fact about hydrological change.” Climate change hits water supplies in multiple ways. Warm temperatures can cause more evaporation of water from landscapes, while changes in precipitation can lead to both more intense individual downpours but also swings into drought conditions. The threat from all this is not just to what people drink but what they eat: The human activity that consumes the most water is agriculture (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/12/the-world-has-even-bigger-water-problems-than-we-thought). And then, there's sea-level rise: It can push into coastal aquifers, as is happening today (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/27/this-unprecedented-event-has-now-happened-twice-massive-seagrass-die-off-hits-florida-bay) in the state of Florida, and thus threaten to make them more saline and less usable for human needs. So it isn't only surface waters that may be depleted by climate swings, but also groundwater. The World Bank report says that 1.6 billion people on Earth already live in nations that are subject to water scarcity. Depending on the precise definition of the concept, other research has put that number even higher (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/12/the-world-has-even-bigger-water-problems-than-we-thought), finding that 4 billion live in regions that face conditions of “severe” water scarcity during at least some part of the year. Using its own definition, the World Bank fears the number of people living with potential water threats will double over the next two decades. The problem will be exacerbated by greater populations overall, and more demand for water due to increased needs in the electricity generation and agricultural sectors. But the impacts, the study found, will also be very uneven, with little projected economic harm to North America or Europe from water supply changes. “Growing populations, rising incomes, and expanding cities will converge upon a world where the demand for water rises exponentially, while supply becomes more erratic and uncertain,” the report says. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Washington%20Post%20Pix%202016/20160503as_AralSea_zpsfwuwunlr.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/02/aral-sea-NASA.jpg&w=1484) The Aral Sea in 2015. The body of water has shrunken in size dramatically in recent years because of water withdrawals from rivers that feed it. — Photograph: NASA Earth Observatory. It's not the case that the world as a whole will have inadequate fresh water — it's that some places will be fine but others won't have enough, and there's not much means of mass water redistribution over long distances. Rather, grapping with these looming water scarcity problems has to occur in specific regions, where it will be important to address water waste, mis-alloaction, and efficiency in water use — in other words, using the same amount of water for more diverse purposes or needs. That's a crucial task, the report finds, due to staggering projected increases in fresh water demand. The report finds that in the next 30 years, “the global food system will require between 40 to 50 percent more water; municipal and industrial water demand will increase by 50 to 70 percent; the energy sector will see water demand increase by 85 percent; and the environment, already the residual claimant, may receive even less.” And when water shortages happen, the poor will inevitably be hit the hardest — when it comes to both food and drinking water, because they may not be able to purchase supplies from elsewhere to get them through hard times. What's most new about the report, perhaps, is tying the problem of potential future water scarcity — which has been already much discussed in the past — to particularly dire economic impacts. “We will have expanding water deficits. When you do the analysis, it turns out that economic growth is a thirsty business,” Damania said. The report finds that water, or the lack thereof, can damage economies in multiple ways — ranging from cutting down business efficiencies, to harming the health of citizens, to spurring natural disasters. And the problem won't be steady or chronic — there are likely to be sudden crises spurred by droughts or extreme weather events, such as floods. These, again, will hit unstable regions the hardest — and take a major economic toll. “When we have poverty, when we have division, when we have polarization, you add to that a water shock, something like a drought, this becomes a threat multiplier,” Damania said. If there's good news, it's that the report does find that resilience measures, such as low-hanging-fruit improvements to water infrastructure, can reduce the risks in many regions. “Some cities, even in arid areas, lose more water through leaking pipes than they deliver to households,” the report notes. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • Why we're still so incredibly confused about methane’s role in global warming (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/05/02/why-were-still-so-incredibly-confused-about-methanes-role-in-global-warming) • Dominoes fall: Vanishing Arctic ice shifts jet stream, which melts Greenland’s glaciers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/05/02/dominoes-fall-vanishing-arctic-ice-shifts-jet-stream-melts-greenland-glaciers) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/05/03/world-bank-the-way-climate-change-is-really-going-to-hurt-us-is-through-water (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/05/03/world-bank-the-way-climate-change-is-really-going-to-hurt-us-is-through-water) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 06, 2016, 11:59:22 am quote from one of the news stories sums it all up
I think it’s safe to say that big things are afoot in this global technocratic power grab. German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale (http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/11/James-Hansen-Getty-640x480.png) A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records. Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming. According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings: From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed. Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend: Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000. But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen (pictured above), later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods. The most commonly used ones were: • Reducing the annual mean in the early phase. • Reducing the high values in the first warming phase. • Increasing individual values during the second warming phase. • Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995. • Shortening the early decades of the datasets. • With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened. Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect. Britain’s Paul Homewood is also on NASA GISS’s case. Here he shows the shocking extent of the adjustments they have made to a temperature record in Brazil which has been altered so that a cooling trend becomes a warming trend. (http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/11/station_thumb8.gif) Unadjusted temperature record: shows cooling trend. (http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/11/station_thumb9.gif) http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ Top Scientist Resigns Admitting Global Warming Is A Big Scam Submitted by IWB, on September 30th, 2015 (http://cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/global-warming-scientist-resigns-scam-900x350.jpg) Top US scientist Hal Lewis resigned from his post at the University of California after admitting that global warming was a big scam, in a shocking resignation letter. From the Telegraph The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emeritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society 6 October 2010 Dear Curt: When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence – it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be? How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society. It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist. So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it… I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. http://investmentwatchblog.com/top-scientist-resigns-admitting-global-warming-is-a-big-scam/ Judicial Watch Sues for Documents Withheld From Congress in New Climate Data Scandal (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit on December 2, 2015, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking records of communications from National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officials regarding methodology for collecting and interpreting data used in climate models (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Commerce (No 1:15-cv-02088)). The lawsuit sought the same documents unsuccessfully subpoenaed by a House committee. Less than week after Judicial Watch served its lawsuit on NOAA, the agency finally turned over the targeted documents to Congress. Judicial Watch sued the Department of Commerce after the agency failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted on October 30, 2015 – NOAA is a component of the Department of Commerce. The timeframe for the requested records is October 30, 2014, through October 30, 2015, and requests all documents and records of communications between NOAA officials, employees, and contractors regarding: The methodology and utilization of night marine air temperatures to adjust ship and buoy temperature data; The use of other global temperature datasets for both NOAA’s in-house dataset improvements and monthly press releases conveying information to the public about global temperatures; The utilization and consideration of satellite bulk atmospheric temperature readings for use in global temperature datasets; and A subpoena issued for the aforementioned information by Congressman Lamar Smith on October 13, 2015. Judicial Watch is investigating how NOAA collects and disseminates climate data that is used in determining global climate change. NOAA collects data in thousands of ways – from temperature gauges on land and buoys at sea, to satellites orbiting Earth. Considered the “environmental intelligence agency,” NOAA is the nation’s leading collector of climate data. In July, Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) asked NOAA for both data and internal communications related to a controversial climate change study. After the agency refused to comply with the document request, Smith’s committee issued a subpoena on October 13. According to the Science, Space, and Technology Committee: In June, NOAA widely publicized a study as refuting the nearly two-decade pause in climate change. After three letters requesting all communications from the agency surrounding the role of political appointees in the agency’s scientific process, Chairman Smith issued a subpoena for the information. Smith subsequently sent a letter on December 1st offering to accept documents and communications from NOAA political, policy and non-scientific staff as a first step in satisfying the subpoena requirements. Information provided to the Committee by whistleblowers appears to show that the study was rushed to publication despite the concerns and objections of a number of NOAA employees. Judicial Watch sued the agency on December 2 and served the complaint on the agency on December 8. Less than a week later, on Tuesday, December 15, NOAA finally began to turn over documents to the House committee. That same day, NOAA called and told Judicial Watch that it would begin searching for documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request. On November 26, Smith published an opinion editorial in The Washington Times, which accused NOAA of tampering with data to help promote global warming alarmism: NOAA often fails to consider all available data in its determinations and climate change reports to the public. A recent study by NOAA, published in the journal Science, made “adjustments” to historical temperature records and NOAA trumpeted the findings as refuting the nearly two-decade pause in global warming. The study’s authors claimed these adjustments were supposedly based on new data and new methodology. But the study failed to include satellite data. “We have little doubt that our lawsuit helped to pry these scandalous climate change report documents from the Obama administration. The Obama administration seems to care not one whit for a congressional subpoena but knows from prior experience that a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit cannot be ignored,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Given the lawless refusal to comply with our FOIA request and a congressional subpoena, we have little doubt that the documents will show the Obama administration put politics before science to advance global warming alarmism.” Judicial Watch previously investigated alleged data manipulation by global warming advocates in the Obama administration. In 2010, Judicial Watch obtained internal documents from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) related to a controversy that erupted in 2007 when Canadian blogger Stephen McIntyre exposed an error in NASA’s handling of raw temperature data from 2000-2006 that exaggerated the reported rise in temperature readings in the United States. According to multiple press reports, when NASA corrected the error, the new data apparently caused a reshuffling of NASA’s rankings for the hottest years on record in the United States, with 1934 replacing 1998 at the top of the list. In late 2014, Judicial Watch litigation forced out documents withheld in response to another congressional subpoena – one issued in the Fast and Furious scandal. Thanks to the Judicial Watch lawsuit, Congress finally obtained the information it had sought for years on Obama’s gun-running scandal. http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-sues-for-documents-withheld-from-congress-in-new-climate-data-scandal/ NASA Admits Antarctica Gaining Land Ice (But good news is bad news to climate alarmists) (https://www.corbettreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/sea-ice-expanding-in-antarctica.jpg) by James Corbett TheInternationalForecaster.com November 3, 2015 Do you spend sleepless nights worrying about the sea level rise caused by the melting of the Antarctic ice sheet? Well enjoy your slumbers, my friend, NASA has just given you reason to sleep easier. A new study–entitled “Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses” and published in the Journal of Glaciology–overturns previous assessments (including that relayed in the latest IPCC report) that Antarctica is losing land ice and thus contributing to sea level rise. As NASA states in a press release, previous assessments had falsely assumed that increasing surface height of the ice sheets was due to snow accumulation, but the new study shows that the rise in elevation is in fact due to ice gain. The upshot is that previous assessments, including the IPCC’s, got the Antarctic contribution to sea level rise–previously pegged at 0.27 millimeters per year–precisely wrong. “The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away.” Well, they were only off by 185%, I suppose, and got the change in the wrong direction. It could be worse…I mean better. But don’t worry, things are still bad. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.” You see, the same researchers who can’t even accurately say whether the Antarctic ice sheets are gaining or losing mass (let alone how much mass) are able to determine global sea level rise to within hundredths of a millimeter. No accuracy issues there, of course. So you can continue worrying, I suppose. (Except for that pesky little Stanford study from September showing that previous models vastly overestimated future sea level rise.) If this seems like deja vu all over again, then congratulations; you’re paying attention. Remember when “NASA satellites detect[ed] unexpected ice loss in East Antarctica” in 2009? The results were “unexpected” because East Antarctica was previously considered stable, with the continent’s ice loss (well, net gain) supposedly taking place in West Antarctica. It took a science-hating-denier-skeptic-heathenbeast to point out that the numbers were derived from gravity measurements which were picking up on isostatic adjustment, i.e. changes taking place beneath the surface of the ice, not changes in the ice levels themselves. And lo and behold a few months later a team led by another NASA JPL researcher found that the gravity measurements had in fact been measuring…wait for it…isostatic adjustment. But somehow “Unexpected ice loss in East Antarctica” generated more headlines than “Ooops, Sorry About That, We Were Measuring Something Else Entirely.” Go figure. This is not an isolated phenomenon, of course. Do you remember when NASA released this dramatic image of the temperature trends in Antarctica showing a clear positive warming trend of between 0.05C and 0.1C throughout most of the continent? (https://www.corbettreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/antarctica_avhrr_81-07.jpg) And yes, this is the same Club of Rome whose members include the Al Gores and Mikhail Gorbachevs and Tim Wirths and Paul Ehrlichs of the world with the means, motive and opportunity to indeed ‘make humanity the enemy.’ And now we’re on the verge of the latest United Nations climate conference, the COP21 summit scheduled to take place in Paris from November 30 – December 11. Just like in Copenhagen in 2009, this conference is threatening a slate of new global governmental institutions, regulations and mechanisms to combat the (non-existent) climate change threat. On the table in the draft text of the new climate treaty: a new UN Tribunal to adjudicate on non-compliance with climate commitments. Given the fact that eugenecist Bilderberger Bill Gates is now piling on UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres’ admission earlier this year that the conference will intentionally “change the economic development model” of the world by admitting that only big government can save the world from global warming, coupled with China being drawn into the global warming fold as part of its five year plan bid to become more involved in international institutions and tripled with Obama threatening to do an end run around the Senate to get the treaty passed, I think it’s safe to say that big things are afoot in this global technocratic power grab. https://www.corbettreport.com/nasa-admits-antarctica-gaining-land-ice-but-good-news-is-bad-news-to-climate-alarmists/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 06, 2016, 12:27:55 pm and ktj the fear mongering about water is a joke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_oys-AQ_3E This Tower Pulls Drinking Water Out of Thin Air Designer Arturo Vittori says his invention can provide remote villages with more than 25 gallons of clean drinking water per day (http://thumbs.media.smithsonianmag.com//filer/07/a0/07a0f6be-b0b5-4a4b-97c0-c0a5e9e2b846/warka_water.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg) Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/this-tower-pulls-drinking-water-out-of-thin-air-180950399/#hqwXi1Q2EDG36SjP.99 How to get fresh water out of thin air Fog-harvesting system developed by MIT and Chilean researchers could provide potable water for the world’s driest regions. http://news.mit.edu/2013/how-to-get-fresh-water-out-of-thin-air-0830 Creating Water from Thin Air http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/manufacture-water1.htm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiwGMhDFrRo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys4kRjY4Qdk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL3Ps86N2nM Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 08, 2016, 02:24:45 pm from the International Business Times.... Climate Change: Five Reef Islands In The Pacific Have Now Been Lost To Sea-Level Rise By AVANEESH PANDEY | 6:18AM - Saturday, May 05, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/ibt_20160507_KennedyIsland_zps4r9vanim.jpg) (http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/lg/public/2016/05/07/gettyimages-2486894.jpg) Kennedy Island (front) sits atop its own reef in the remote Western Province of the Solomon Islands on July 28th, 2003. — Photograph: Torsten Blackwood/AFP/Getty Images. LEADERS from over 170 nations gathered in New York last month to sign a historic climate pact (http://www.ibtimes.com/earth-day-2016-over-170-nations-sign-paris-climate-change-agreement-un-headquarters-2358181) that aims to keep the rise in global temperatures to within 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels — an internationally-accepted red line. However, for some low-lying island nations, it may already be too late. According to a new study published on Friday in the Environmental Research Letters (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054011), sea-level rise and coastal erosion have already claimed five reef islands in the Pacific's Solomon Islands. The study, carried out by a team of Australian researchers, provides the first scientific evidence that confirms numerous anecdotal accounts of extreme shoreline changes put forward by scientists and local inhabitants across all provinces of the Solomon Islands. “Shoreline recession at two sites has destroyed villages that have existed since at least 1935, leading to community relocations. Rates of shoreline recession are substantially higher in areas exposed to high wave energy, indicating a synergistic interaction between sea-level rise and waves,” the authors said in the study. “Understanding these local factors that increase the susceptibility of islands to coastal erosion is critical to guide adaptation responses for these remote Pacific communities.” Over the past 100 years, global average sea level has risen nearly 7 inches, at a rate of about 3.4 millimetres per year (http://climate.nasa.gov). However, the seas surrounding the Solomon Islands have risen at an average rate of seven to ten millimetres per year (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818111001445) — up to three times faster than the global average. This has put Solomon Islands, which support a population of roughly 560,000 people, at a much greater risk of inundation due to climate change-induced sea level rise. “Five of the twenty vegetated reef islands along the barrier reef on the exposed, northern coast of Isabel have been totally eroded away in recent decades,” the authors said in the study, referring to one of the provinces of the Solomon Islands. “A further six islands on Isabel had declined in area by more than 20 percent between 1947 and 2014.” All the islands that disappeared ranged in size from one to five hectares but were not populated. However, the other six islands facing imminent inundation are. “These rapid changes to shorelines observed in Solomon Islands have led to the relocation of several coastal communities that have inhabited these areas for generations. These are not planned relocations led by governments or supported by international climate funds, but are ad hoc relocations using their own limited resources,” the authors of the study wrote for The Conversation (https://theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511). “In fact, in some cases entire communities have left coastal villages that were established in the early 1900s by missionaries, and retraced their ancestral movements to resettle old inland village sites used by their forefathers.” Solomon Islands are far from the only low-lying pacific region located at ground zero of global warming. Previous studies (http://www.ibtimes.com/climate-change-pacific-islanders-bear-brunt-ground-zero-global-warming-2209315) have shown that over the past decade, 15 percent of the population of Tuvalu — an island nation halfway between Australia and Hawaii — has left the country, while 12 percent moved internally. In Nauru, which has a similarly-sized population of just over 10,000, 10 percent have left the country in the past decade. http://www.ibtimes.com/climate-change-five-reef-islands-pacific-have-now-been-lost-sea-level-rise-2365611 (http://www.ibtimes.com/climate-change-five-reef-islands-pacific-have-now-been-lost-sea-level-rise-2365611) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 11, 2016, 02:12:38 pm you don't think the earth's crust moves up and down do you ?
the world's crust is floating on magma whole islands and continents can move,rise and fall and some believe the poles have moved and the earth's crust has rotated and destroyed land masses but some highly paid scientist dumb arses think that co2 the thing that all life is made of is evil. global warming scientist need to justify their huge funding and their very existence,they have been caught over and over faking the data,and yet a lot of scientist are not in agreement with the ones who say climate change is man made. i think many of the climate change fear porn stories have proven to be a load of rubbish because too many of them were based on lies that keep leaking out. islands made of sand can wash away "it's always been that way" so if your island is sinking then you should move, adapt or die. or build an ark lol Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 11, 2016, 03:49:50 pm from The Conversation.... Sea-level rise has claimed five whole islands in the Pacific: first scientific evidence By SIMON ALBERT, ALISTAIR GRINHAM, BADIN GIBBES, JAVIER LEAON and JOHN CHURCH | 7:16AM AEST - Saturday, May 07, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/theconversation_20160507a_SolomonIslands_zpsmomanhvi.jpg~original) (http://cdn.theconversation.com/files/120910/width1356x668/image-20160502-19554-vjdnoz.jpg) The Solomon Islands are low-lying and vulnerable to changes in sea level. — Photograph: Javier Leon. SEA-LEVEL RISE, erosion and coastal flooding are some of the greatest challenges facing humanity from climate change. Recently at least five reef islands in the remote Solomon Islands have been lost completely to sea-level rise and coastal erosion, and a further six islands have been severely eroded. These islands lost to the sea range in size from one to five hectares. They supported dense tropical vegetation that was at least 300 years old. Nuatambu Island, home to 25 families, has lost more than half of its habitable area, with 11 houses washed into the sea since 2011. This is the first scientific evidence, published in Environmental Research Letters (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054011), that confirms the numerous anecdotal accounts from across the Pacific of the dramatic impacts of climate change on coastlines and people. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/theconversation_20160507b_SolomonIslands_zpsnceda2ba.jpg~original) (https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/120930/area14mp/image-20160503-19546-wyytt2.jpg) All that remains of one of the completely eroded islands. — Photograph: Simon Albert. A warning for the world Previous studies examining the risk of coastal inundation in the Pacific region have found that islands can actually keep pace with sea-level rise (https://theconversation.com/dynamic-atolls-give-hope-that-pacific-islands-can-defy-sea-rise-25436) and sometimes even expand (http://www.bbc.com/news/10222679). However, these studies have been conducted in areas of the Pacific with rates of sea level rise of 3-5 mm per year — broadly in line with the global average of 3 mm per year (https://theconversation.com/sea-level-is-rising-fast-and-it-seems-to-be-speeding-up-39253). For the past 20 years, the Solomon Islands have been a hotspot for sea-level rise. Here the sea has risen at almost three times the global average, around 7-10 mm per year since 1993. This higher local rate is partly the result of natural climate variability. These higher rates are in line with what we can expect across much of the Pacific (http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v8/n10/abs/ngeo2539.html) in the second half of this century as a result of human-induced sea-level rise. Many areas will experience long-term rates of sea-level rise similar to that already experienced in Solomon Islands in all but the very lowest-emission scenarios (https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter13_FINAL.pdf). Natural variations and geological movements will be superimposed on these higher rates of global average sea level rise, resulting in periods when local rates of rise will be substantially larger than that recently observed in Solomon Islands. We can therefore see the current conditions in Solomon Islands as an insight into the future impacts of accelerated sea-level rise. We studied the coastlines of 33 reef islands using aerial and satellite imagery from 1947-2015. This information was integrated with local traditional knowledge, radiocarbon dating of trees, sea-level records, and wave models. Waves add to damage Wave energy appears to play an important role in the dramatic coastal erosion observed in Solomon Islands. Islands exposed to higher wave energy in addition to sea-level rise experienced greatly accelerated loss compared with more sheltered islands. Twelve islands we studied in a low wave energy area of Solomon Islands experienced little noticeable change in shorelines despite being exposed to similar sea-level rise. However, of the 21 islands exposed to higher wave energy, five completely disappeared and a further six islands eroded substantially. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/theconversation_20160507c_SolomonIslands_zpsj1sjcacf.jpg~original) (https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/120931/area14mp/image-20160503-19521-zyqkfx.jpg) Many homes are close to sea level on the Solomons. — Photograph: Simon Albert. The human story These rapid changes to shorelines observed in Solomon Islands have led to the relocation of several coastal communities that have inhabited these areas for generations. These are not planned relocations led by governments or supported by international climate funds, but are ad hoc relocations using their own limited resources. The customary land tenure (native title) system in Solomon Islands has provided a safety net for these displaced communities. In fact, in some cases entire communities have left coastal villages that were established in the early 1900s by missionaries, and retraced their ancestral movements to resettle old inland village sites used by their forefathers. In other cases, relocations have been more ad hoc, with indivdual families resettling small inland hamlets over which they have customary ownership. In these cases, communities of 100-200 people have fragmented into handfuls of tiny family hamlets. Sirilo Sutaroti, the 94-year-old chief of the Paurata tribe, recently abandoned his village. “The sea has started to come inland, it forced us to move up to the hilltop and rebuild our village there away from the sea,” he told us. In addition to these village relocations, Taro, the capital of Choiseul Province, is set to become the first provincial capital in the world to relocate residents and services (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/township-in-solomon-islands-is-1st-in-pacific-to-relocate-due-to-climate-change) in response to the impact of sea-level rise. The global effort Interactions between sea-level rise, waves, and the large range of responses observed in Solomon Islands — from total island loss to relative stability — shows the importance of integrating local assessments with traditional knowledge when planning for sea-level rise and climate change. Linking this rich knowledge and inherent resilience in the people with technical assessments and climate funding is critical to guiding adaptation efforts. Melchior Mataki (http://unohrlls.org/dr-melchior-mataki) who chairs the Solomon Islands' National Disaster Council, said: “This ultimately calls for support from development partners and international financial mechanisms such as the Green Climate Fund. This support should include nationally driven scientific studies to inform adaptation planning to address the impacts of climate change in Solomon Islands.” Last month, the Solomon Islands government joined 11 other small Pacific Island nations in signing the Paris climate agreement in New York (https://theconversation.com/the-paris-agreement-signing-ceremony-at-a-glance-58221). There is a sense of optimism among these nations that this signifies a turning point in global efforts. However, it remains to be seen how the hundreds of billions of dollars promised through global funding models such as the Green Climate Fund can support those most at need in remote communities, like those in Solomon Islands. __________________________________________________________________________ • Simon Albert is a Senior Research Fellow at the School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland; and receives funding from the MacArthur Foundation and Australian Government. • Alistair Grinham is a Senior research fellow at The University of Queensland; and receives funding from The MacArthur Foundation and Australian Government. • Badin Gibbes is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland; and has worked in the water resources and environmental management fields since the 1990s, with funding from a variety of organisations including the Australian Research Council, the National Centre of Excellence in Desalination Australia, Healthy Waterways and Seqwater. • Javier Leon is a Lecturer at the University of the Sunshine Coast; and has received funding from the Australian Research Council. • John Church is a CSIRO Fellow at the CSIRO; and receives funding from the Australian Climate Change Science Program. http://theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511 (http://theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 13, 2016, 10:31:35 am 1001 Reasons Why Global Warming Is So Totally Over In 2016
(http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/01/GettyImages-501082496-640x480.jpg) Let’s start the New Year as we mean to go on: by dancing joyfully and triumphantly on the grave of man-made global warming. Climate change is over. It’s a busted flush. The alarmists now have all the credibility of bewildered Harold Camping followers shivering on a mountaintop the morning after the night before, looking all shifty and embarrassed as they realise the Rapture their models so confidently promised just ain’t going to happen… If you still doubt this, here are three recent pieces which should put your mind at rest. The first – modestly titled The Most Comprehensive Assault On Global Warming Ever – was written by a US physics professor called Mike van Biezen. It lists ten of the reasons (though there are many more) why man-made global warming theory no longer has any credibility. They are: 1.Temperature records from around the world do not support the assumption that today’s temperatures are unusual 2. Satellite temperature data does not support the assumption that temperatures are rising rapidly 3. Current temperatures are always compared to the temperatures of the 1980’s, but for many parts of the world the 1980’s was the coldest decade of the last 100+ years 4. The world experienced a significant cooling trend between 1940 and 1980 5.Urban heat island effect skews the temperature data of a significant number of weather stations 6. There is a natural inverse relationship between global temperatures and atmospheric CO2levels 7. The CO2 cannot, from a scientific perspective, be the cause of significant global temperature changes 8. There have been many periods during our recent history that a warmer climate was prevalent long before the industrial revolution 9.Glaciers have been melting for more than 150 years 10. “Data adjustment” is used to continue the perception of global warming Then there are two pieces on what, for me, is the single most persuasive argument against man-made global warming theory: the (considerably more dramatic) fluctuations of climate long before mankind was in any position to influence it. Here are the key points of an essay on the subject by Ed Hoskins: Our current beneficial, warm Holocene interglacial has been the enabler of mankind’s civilisation for the last 10,000 years. The congenial climate of the Holocene epoch spans from mankind’s earliest farming to the scientific and technological advances of the last 100 years. However all the Northern Hemisphere Ice Core records from Greenland show: the last millennium 1000AD – 2000AD has been the coldest millennium of the entire Holocene interglacial. each of the notable high points in the Holocene temperature record, (Holocene Climate Optimum – Minoan – Roman – Medieval – Modern), have been progressively colder than the previous high point. for its first 7-8000 years the early Holocene, including its high point “climate optimum”, had virtually flat temperatures, an average drop of only ~0.007 °C per millennium. but the more recent Holocene, since a “tipping point” at ~1000BC, has seen a temperature diminution at more than 20 times that earlier rate at about 0.14 °C per millennium. the Holocene interglacial is already 10 – 11,000 years old and judging from the length of previous interglacials the Holocene epoch should be drawing to its close: in this century, the next century or this millennium. the beneficial warming at the end of the 20th century to the Modern high point has been responsible the “Great Man-made Global Warming Scare”. eventually this late 20th century temperature blip will come to be seen as just noise in the system in the longer term progress of comparatively rapid cooling over the last 3000+ years. other published Greenland Ice Core records as well as GISP2, (NGRIP1, GRIP) corroborate this finding. They also exhibit the same pattern of a prolonged relatively stable early Holocene period followed by a subsequent much more rapid decline in the more recent past. When considering the scale of temperature changes that alarmists anticipate because of Man-made Global Warming and their view of the disastrous effects of additional Man-made Carbon Dioxide emissions in this century, it is useful to look at climate change from a longer term, century by century and even on a millennial perspective. The much vaunted and much feared “fatal” tipping point of +2°C would only bring Global temperatures close to the level of the very congenial climate of “the Roman warm period”. If it were possible to reach the “horrendous” level of +4°C postulated by Warmists, that extreme level of warming would still only bring temperatures to about the level of the previous Eemian maximum, a warm and abundant epoch, when hippopotami thrived in the Rhine delta. Finally, a study by another amateur enthusiast, JWR Whitfield, examining the relationship between CO2 and climate on an even longer term scale (400,000 years plus). This represents a fairly recent development in our understanding of climate. Back in 1998, for example, when Michael Mann et al presented their hugely influential paper “Observed Climate Variability & Change”, the ice-core data available to scientists went back only 100,000 years (thus covering only one of the planet’s glaciation periods). Since then, thanks to two enlarged time scale Antarctica ice cores – Vostok and Epica – we can go back much further, covering at least four Glacial (cold) and Interglacial (warm) periods. Two key things become clear from this data. The first is that, on a longer-term scale, Earth’s climate has fluctuated far more dramatically than the puny and inconsequential 0.8 degrees C rise in global mean temperature we’ve experienced since 1850. And the second is that rises and falls in CO2 lag rises and falls in temperature: that is, it’s temperature which pushes CO2 levels, not the other way round. Whitfield goes on to examine the influence of the sun and of the oceans on climate which, he demonstrates, is much stronger than the small-to-non-existent influence of the trace gas CO2. Not that any of this stuff is new, of course. But it’s useful information to keep handy every time you come upon another of those of smug, sanctimonious types who has been taught by the New York Times, the Guardian, the BBC, HuffPo or whoever that “deniers” are motivated solely by money or ideology and have no scientific arguments to support their case. Actually, this is a classic case of what psychologists call “projection”. The climate alarmists were abandoned by scientific reality long ago – and the only reason they keep on trying to prop up their bankrupt cause is either because it pays the mortgage or because it suits their left-liberal Weltanschauung – or both. The good news for those on the sceptical side of the argument is that we won it long ago – as will become increasingly clear over the months and years. The bad news is that there won’t be what our friend Greg Garrison likes to call on his WIBC talk radio show a “blue dress moment” where some killer scientific fact emerges that decides the issue once and for all. That’s because the whole global warming scare isn’t really about “the science” and never was about “the science.” Always, but always, it has been about the cynical exploitation of mass crowd hysteria and about the sly manipulation by activists and crony capitalists of the political system in order to advance the cause of global governance. None of the people involved in this scam deserve the merest scintilla of respect. They are pure scum. They have not a single redeeming quality and everything they do is worthless – as I shall not hesitate to remind them from now on. It strikes me that in the past that I have been far too kind and generous to this bunch of parasites and tinpot tyrants. My New Year’s resolution is to take the gloves off and take the fight to the enemy. Join me, why don’t you? It could be fun. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/04/1001-reasons-why-global-warming-is-so-totally-over-in-2016/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 09, 2016, 11:54:00 am from Fairfax NZ.... Autumn temperatures the warmest since 1938, says NIWA By RACHEL THOMAS | 4:41PM - Wednesday, 08 June 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160608_1465393393628sa_zpsubogpmpm.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/c/4/z/g/o/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1c4oea.png/1465393393628.jpg) A woman in a dressing gown makes the most of the recent autumn weather at Worser Bay, Wellington, with her dog. — Photograph: David White/Fairfax NZ. AN “exceptionally warm” autumn has brought the warmest temperatures to the country since 1938. The national average temperature in autumn was 14.7 degrees Celcius, which is 1.4°C above the autumn average, according to NIWA's climate summary for March, April and May 2016. Virtually every climate station in New Zealand recorded higher than average temperatures for this time of year, NIWA forecaster Chris Brandolino said. In Wellington, the average was even higher: 15.3°C, which was 1.6°C above what the city is used to, as well as its highest average on record. The toasty weather meant power consumption in the capital was down, a Wellington Electricity spokesman said. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160608_1465393393628sb_zpsapf6foky.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/c/5/0/j/q/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1c4oea.png/1465393393628.jpg) Some Wellingtonians found autumn warm enough for swimming. — Photograph: David White/Fairfax NZ. “In April and May 2016 we saw electricity consumption decline by about 4 percent compared to the same period in 2015,” the spokesman said. The network covers the Hutt Valley, Wellington and Porirua. That trend could well continue, with Niwa predicting a warmer than average winter ahead. “Expect in the next couple of weeks, this Thursday and Friday especially, there are some opportunities for daily record highs in parts of the North Island,” NIWA meteorologist Ben Noll said. Auckland, Napier and Gisborne were in line for some especially warm days, he said. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160608_1465393393628sc_zps5zfthdim.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/c/4/z/h/8/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1c4oea.png/1465393393628.jpg) Wellington inner city dwellers make the most of the recent autumn weather. — Photograph: David White/Fairfax NZ. The balmy weather was a result of high sea surface temperatures to the west, coupled with frequent northwesterlies, Noll said. “The main driving force is how warm the sea surface temperatures around New Zealand are, they are some of the warmest we have seen in the last 100 to 130 years.” “That's the baseline for above average temperatures.” Levin had its highest mean temperature in more than 120 years — measuring 15.7°C, which was 1.9°C higher than its average. The highest temperature was recorded on March 8th in Hastings, Napier and Gisborne, which all reached 33.1°C. (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160608_1465393393628sd_zpsnmigdrvx.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/c/4/z/i/y/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1c4oea.png/1465393393628.jpg) A sun seeker at Worser Bay during the recent run of great weather. — Photograph: David White/Fairfax NZ. Rainfall levels were near normal or below normal for the main centres, despite extreme storms which hit the lower North Island in May. “May was sort of two different months,” Noll said. “The first half was really tranquil and very warm and the second half was a much stormier pattern with cooler temperatures.” Porirua received a hammering on May 5th, when flooding meant residents were forced to evacuate homes and several schools, and roads were closed (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/79644478). That same day, Palmerston North suffered surface flooding after a torrential downpour (http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/news/79659454). Overnight on May 24th, the country was hit by a massive electrical storm, which saw 2,316 recorded lightning strikes around New Zealand in 12 hours. BY THE NUMBERS: • 14.7°C: the national average temperature for March to May. • 1.4°C: the rise from the normal national average temperature for March to May. • 4 percent: the drop in demand for electricity in Wellington in autumn. • 47.8mm: the amount of rain Palmerston North received in three hours on May 5th. • 2316: the number of lightning strikes in NZ in 12 hours overnight on May 24th. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • Take me to the April sun in Cuba Street: High pressure to thank for blissful Wellington weather (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington/79390905) • ‘Epic’ thunder and lightning light up Wellington (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/80354798) • Flooding hits Wellington region hard, after long period of settled weather (http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/79636915/flood-warning-for-wellington.html) http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/80839810 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/80839810) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 12, 2016, 11:25:39 pm from The Washington Post.... 30 years ago scientists warned Congress on global warming. What they said sounds eerily familiar. By CHRIS MOONEY | 10:40AM EDT - Saturday, June 11, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160611sjhc_SenatorJohnHChafee_zpsvjrvikt0.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/06/10/National-Politics/Images/Merlin_134363.jpg&w=1484) John H. Chafee, the late Republican senator from Rhode Island. He died in 1999. — Photograph: Ray Lustig/The Washington Post. IT WAS such a different time — and yet, the message was so similar. Thirty years ago, on June 10th and 11th of 1986, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works commenced two days of hearings (http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/gdoc/hearings/8/86602726a/86602726a_1.pdf), convened by Senator John H. Chafee (Republican-Rhode Island), on the subject of “Ozone Depletion, the Greenhouse Effect, and Climate Change.” “This is not a matter of Chicken Little telling us the sky is falling,” Chafee said at the hearing. “The scientific evidence … is telling us we have a problem, a serious problem.” The hearings garnered considerable media coverage, including on the front page of The Washington Post (see below). “There is no longer any significant difference of opinion within the scientific community about the fact that the greenhouse effect is real and already occurring,” said newly elected Senator Al Gore, who, as a congressman, had already held several House hearings on the matter. Gore cited the Villach Conference, a scientific meeting held in Austria the previous year (1985), which concluded that (https://www.wmo.int/pages/themes/climate/international_background.php) “as a result of the increasing greenhouse gases it is now believed that in the first half of the next century (21st century) a rise of global mean temperature could occur which is greater than in any man's history.” “They were the breakthrough hearings,” remembers Rafe Pomerance, then a staffer with the World Resources Institute, who helped suggest witnesses. “You never saw front-page coverage of this stuff.” The scientists assembled included some of the voices that would be unmistakable and constant in coming decades. They included NASA's James Hansen, who would go on to become the most visible scientist in the world on the topic, and Robert Watson, who would go on to chair the soon-to-be formed United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And what they said was clear: Human greenhouse gas emissions would cause a major warming trend, and sea level rise to boot. Here's how the hearings were covered on the front page of The Post: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160611wpfp_WashingtonPostFrontPage_zpsbzx42prb.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/06/Post-Cover.jpg&w=1484) A story on the front page of The Washington Post on June 11th, 1986. The New York Times also covered the hearings (http://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/11/us/swifter-warming-of-globe-foreseen.html), writing that “The rise in carbon dioxide and other gases in the earth's atmosphere will have an earlier and more pronounced impact on global temperature and climate than previously expected, according to evidence presented to a Senate subcommittee today.” Two years later, still more famously, Hansen would testify in another series of hearings (http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/24/us/global-warming-has-begun-expert-tells-senate.html?pagewanted=all) that had an even greater public impact when it came to consciousness-raising — in part because at that point, he said that the warming of the globe caused by humans was already detectable. “It is time to stop waffling so much and say that the evidence is pretty strong that the greenhouse effect is here,” he said then. In 1986, by contrast, scientists were still mostly predicting the future, rather than saying they had measured and documented a clear warming trend — one that could be clearly distinguished from natural climate variability — and that it was already having demonstrable consequences. “The 1986 testimony is interesting because it was so similar to my 1988 testimony,” Hansen recalls. “I already had, and showed, some of the climate modeling results that formed the basis for my 1988 testimony.” Granted, in some cases the future temperature projections made in the 1986 hearings — based on assumptions about the rate of increase in greenhouse gas emissions and a high sensitivity of the climate to them — suggested temperatures might rise even more, or even faster, than scientists now believe they will. By email, Hansen clarified that we now know the world is closer to one scenario he presented in 1986 — called Scenario B — than to Scenario A, which assumed a much more rapid rate of greenhouse gas growth, and accordingly, much faster warming. Still, the theoretical understanding was in place for why temperatures would rise as greenhouse gases filled the atmosphere — simply because scientists knew enough physics to know that that's what greenhouse gases do. “We knew in the '70s what the problem was,” said George Woodwell, founding director of the Woods Hole Research Center, who also testified in 1986. “We knew there was a problem with sea level rise, all disruptions of climate. And the disruptions of climate are fundamental in that they undermine all the life on the Earth.” Much of the formal understanding had been affirmed by a 1979 report (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12181/carbon-dioxide-and-climate-a-scientific-assessment) by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, led by the celebrated atmospheric physicist Jule Charney of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. That group famously assessed that if carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were to double, the “most probable global warming” would amount to 3 degrees Celsius, with a range between 1.5 degrees and 4.5 degrees, a number quite similar to modern estimates (https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf). “We have tried but have been unable to find any overlooked or underestimated physical effects that could reduce the currently estimated global warmings due to a doubling of atmospheric CO² to negligible proportions or reverse them altogether,” the scientists behind the report wrote. Indeed, the fundamental understanding of the greenhouse effect, and that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas because of its particular properties, dates back to the 19th century (https://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm), when the Irish scientist John Tyndall conducted experiments to determine the radiative properties of gases. No wonder, then, that there was so much that scientists could say about it in 1986. And indeed, if you look at global temperature trends, it turns out they were speaking at a time when the planet's temperatures were beginning a steady upswing, one that, despite various yearly deviations, would continue inexorably to the present: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160611lot_LandOpenTemperature_gif_zpsgqkrdmmt.gif~original) (https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/06/Fig.A21.gif&op=noop) “This hearing helped bring the concern together, and essentially painted a picture that things are kind of spinning out of control, that science is trying to tell us something, that the world seems to be changing even faster than our scientific understanding of the problem, and worst of all, our political leaders are way behind the eight ball,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton climate scientist who testified that day, and argued that action was warranted on climate change even though not everything was known about its consequences. “I have to say, reading my own testimony … you know, I'd stick by everything in that today, even though it's 30 years later,” Oppenheimer said. There was an additional context, though, that we're now less conversant with: The hearings were also about the issue of the depletion of the Earth's protective ozone layer by chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs. Scientists had recently discovered an “ozone hole” over Antarctica (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/bhartia-qa.html) that frightened the public, and seemed a definitive indicator of just how much human activities could change the atmosphere. Even today, some still confuse the issue of climate change with that of the depletion of the ozone layer. They are not the same, but they are closely related in that both showed how seemingly small actions by individual humans, or by human industry, could add up to planetary consequences. However, the ozone problem would prove far easier to fix. In 1987, just a year later, the nations of the world adopted the Montreal Protocol (http://ozone.unep.org/en/treaties-and-decisions/montreal-protocol-substances-deplete-ozone-layer), which is today regarded as a major success in environmental protection. Under the treaty, a flexible and adaptable approach was taken to reductions — and regular scientific assessments allowed for course adaptation based on the latest information about how well progress was proceeding. Thus, by 2007, the U.N. Environment Program could declare of the treaty (http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/MP_A_Success_in_the_making-E.pdf) that “to date, the results of this effort have been nothing less than spectacular.” The contrast with climate change is stark. Despite having been alerted by scientists not only in 1986, but also in 1979 and, frankly, even earlier, what happened was not policy action, but rather the beginnings of a long political battle. Even as the formation of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1988, and the global adoption of the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, signaled steps toward action in the scientific and diplomatic communities, skeptical scientists emerged to challenges the views expressed by Hansen and others, supported by conservative think tanks and sometimes linked to fossil fuel interests. Meanwhile, U.S. politics shifted, as over the 1990s and especially the 2000s the climate change issue became polarized and it became rarer to see Republicans, such as Chafee, who were also strong environmentalists and advocates for climate action. “Thirty years ago we had a Republican senator who was leading the charge on addressing what he said then was a real and serious threat of climate change from the emission of gases from fossil fuel burning,” says Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (Democrat-Rhode Island), recalling the 1986 hearings. “You can read through all the things that Senator Chafee said back then, and it has all been proven true. It's very disappointing that thirty years later, there is no such voice anywhere in the Republican Senate, and if you look for a micron of daylight between what the fossil fuel industry wants, and what the Republican Party in the Senate does, you won't find it.” It was only in late 2015, in Paris, that the United States helped to negotiate a global agreement to address climate change, one in which each country sets its own pace on reducing emissions. But scientists widely agree that this accord isn't strong enough, on its own terms, to ensure that warming remains below a 2-degree Celsius danger zone. Thirty years after the 1986 hearings, meanwhile, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-climate-exclusive-idUSKCN0Y82NW) that if elected, he would attempt “renegotiating” that agreement. “Those agreements are one-sided agreements, and they are bad for the United States,” Trump said. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • These elephant seals just taught scientists why Antarctica is melting so fast (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/06/08/seals-wearing-little-sensors-are-showing-scientists-why-antarctica-is-melting) • Alaska's huge climate mystery — and its global consequences (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/06/03/alaskas-huge-climate-mystery-and-its-global-consequences) • What Charles Koch really thinks about climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/06/06/what-charles-koch-really-thinks-about-climate-change) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/06/11/30-years-ago-scientists-warned-congress-on-global-warming-what-they-said-sounds-eerily-familiar (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/06/11/30-years-ago-scientists-warned-congress-on-global-warming-what-they-said-sounds-eerily-familiar) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on June 13, 2016, 01:00:54 pm this proves man made global warming is bullshit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTSGg1_cxfA Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 13, 2016, 04:50:09 pm No it doesn't. It merely shows that the anti-warmalists/flat-earthers are desperately churning out lots of bullshit propaganda because they KNOW they cannot produce REAL scientific evidence to refute what the GENUINE peer-reviewed scientific world has been saying about global-warming/climate change. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: guest49 on June 13, 2016, 05:47:51 pm "Peer reviewed" is the elephant in the room
Independent review, may be a bit more credible. The warmalists are still struggling with the fact that the world isn't warming according to plan! Shame on it! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on June 13, 2016, 08:09:41 pm the climate scam is all about new ways for the wealthy to control developing nations and milk the world's people out of their hard earned money.
a nice new form of taxing and controlling which will only benefit 1% of the world's richest parasites follow the money,the man made climate fear mongering scare tactics spewed out by the corporate owned agenda is created by the lying mainstream media and it is purely political and for the rich to rip off the world's poorest people and it's a nice new religion for the self hating brainwashed simpleton minions who are desperate for something to believe in and need a cause to give them a reason to live. man made warming is a crock of bullshit,humans are like fleas on a dog's back the earth can shake them all off any time it pleases nothing is new about the climate just one thing the fools started keeping records that dont mean shit because they dont go far enough back. maybe man will go extinct like the way of the dinosaurs and frankly i dont care if they do because most of them are too stupid selfish and unworthy to live on this beautiful gem we call earth. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 10, 2016, 10:38:07 pm from The Washington Post.... Greenland ice sheet ‘summit’ plunged to record low July temperature. So what? By JASON SAMENOW | 11:59AM - Monday, August 08, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160808gl_Greenland_zps47th5wwh.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2016/08/Capture-greenland.png&w=1484) GREENLAND and its ice sheet have warmed briskly in recent years, and this summer — like most in recent years — has been warmer than normal. But in July's final moments, at the apex of Greenland's ice sheet, the mercury plunged to 23 degrees below zero (-30.7 Celsius). The frigid measurement at Summit Station (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/sum) set a record low for the month according to the Danish Meteorological Institute. It was 5 degrees (3 Celsius) colder than the previous record set in 1992. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160808ssgl_SummitStationGreenland_zpsvvuzjwtw.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2016/08/summit-station.jpg) Summit Station, Greenland. — Photograph: NOAA. Several blogs run by climate change doubters (http://realclimatescience.com/2016/08/greenland-shatters-its-record-for-july-cold) have touted the record as if to suggest it is evidence that flies in the face of global warming. But it's nothing of the sort. It's simply a curiosity that serves as an interesting contrast to recent record warmth. Consider temperature measurements have been kept at Summit Station only since about 1990, which is “not worth much,” according to Jason Box, an Arctic climate researcher with the Geological Survey of Denmark. Box said the extreme was “interesting” in isolation but noted that the melting on the surface of Greenland's ice sheet was above normal during July. “I wouldn't start screaming Greenland is cooling down,” added Marco Tedesco, a Greenland expert based at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University. Konrad Steffen, principal investigator of Greenland's Climate Network (http://cires1.colorado.edu/steffen/gcnet), agreed that the cold spell was “nothing significant.” He said that despite the record, the cold was fairly ordinary and similar conditions had occurred in other years. Much more often than not, Greenland has been unusually warm. Earlier this year, Greenland logged its highest June and April temperatures ever recorded. These records were established in Southwest Greenland. Summit Station, at an altitude of almost 10,500 feet (3,200 meters) near Greenland's center, is among its coldest locations. At the end of July, a very strong area of Arctic high pressure was parked nearby. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160808glga_GreenlandGraphic1gif_zpsjknkmozj.gif~original) (https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2016/08/66.44.60.159.217.12.55.6.gif&op=noop) Surface pressure difference from normal July 31st across Northern Hemisphere. Notice the huge positive anomaly over the Greenland ice sheet. — Graphic: NOAA. “The anomalous high pressure would likely drive large longwave radiative losses … inducing (record) cold temperatures,” explained Daniel McGrath, a research scientist at Colorado State University, who has studied Greenland temperature trends. But despite this bitter cold, Summit Station has warmed at a feverish pace in recent decades. McGrath led a study published in 2013 (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50456/full) that concluded that Summit Station warmed at a rate “six times the global average” and “in the 99th percentile of all globally observed warming trends” between 1982 and 2011. This summer has also been much warmer than average. Tedesco said that since April 1st, temperatures at high-elevation weather stations in Greenland, including Summit Station, have been about 1 degree Celsius warmer than normal. “At lower elevations, we are talking about 3 Celsius above the mean for the same period,” he said. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20160808glgb_GreenlandGraphic2_zpsika31hqh.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2016/08/13956799_10209900643542515_1872287853_n.jpg&w=1484) Temperature difference from normal (in Celsius) over Greenland and surrounding areas in July. — Graphic: Jason Box. Weather data from the Danish Meteorological Institute show warm weather extremes vastly outnumbering cold weather extremes in recent years. Of all of Greenland's monthly record warm temperatures (http://www.dmi.dk/groenland/arkiver/vejrekstremer), 8 of 12 have occurred since 2000, and 10 of 12 since 1990. By contrast, all of Greenland's monthly record cold temperatures (excluding those at Summit Station) occurred before 2000. Records date back to 1958. • Jason Samenow is The Washington Post's weather editor and Capital Weather Gang's chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • Greenland witnessed its highest June temperature ever recorded on Thursday (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/06/10/greenland-witnessed-its-highest-june-temperature-ever-recorded-on-thursday) • The drought no one is talking about in the southeastern United States (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/08/08/the-drought-no-one-is-talking-about-in-the-southeast-u-s) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/08/08/greenland-ice-sheet-summit-plunged-to-record-low-july-temperature-so-what (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/08/08/greenland-ice-sheet-summit-plunged-to-record-low-july-temperature-so-what) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 11, 2016, 08:53:03 pm Climate scammers they blow smoke out their arse.
it gets a record level colder and they say nothing is happening here lmao The force can have a strong influence on the weak minded lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=532j-186xEQ what these fools are really saying is global warming is a load of rubbish Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 12, 2016, 10:32:29 am Yeah, well YOU believe all of the bullshit that spouts out of Trump's Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 14, 2016, 08:03:52 pm Hillary for jail trump for prez ;)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 19, 2016, 09:16:51 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Even on a summer escape, hints of climate calamity intrude By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Thursday, August 18, 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Tribune%20Newspapers%20Pix%202016/latimes_20160818dh_zpsmf5ofbkt.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-57b54b29/turbine/la-1471499117-snap-photo) Four years later, a cartoon from 2012 is a reminder of the increasing peril of climate change. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times. LAKE CHELAN, WASHINGTON — There are pluses and minuses to combining work with a vacation. Here's the plus: at this moment as I write, I can look up from my laptop and see speedboats and jet skis carving wakes across the surface of a slate blue lake. Beyond, the hillsides are covered with fir trees and vineyards. The sky is blue, the sun is bright and a slight breeze softly shifts the August heat. Everything has been picture-perfect here this week. I've only occasionally allowed the daily news to intrude on my holiday escape. That is very different from this time a year ago, when scenes from Lake Chelan became part of the national news. Huge wildfires raged through the forest, burned cabins by the lake, threatened the town and filled the air with a choking smoke that sent vacationers running. Now, this afternoon, I can see the scorched trees and destroyed lakeside homes directly across the lake. But, like a phoenix, new structures are already rising from the ashes. The trees will come back eventually. A new crop of grass already covers the charred ground. Fire is not a new phenomenon in this corner of the West, it is part of a natural cycle. Still, things are not quite as they once were. There have been observable changes in the 25-plus summers I have come here with my family that go beyond the hundreds of new vacation homes along the shore and the transition from apple orchards to grapes and winemaking. The glacial lake, measuring 1,500 feet at its deepest point, does not feel as frigid as it once did. In past years, a plunge in the water could be bracing, if not shockingly cold; now it feels pleasantly brisk. Another change: a man I met at a local winery yesterday told me the cold months used to bring snowpack six feet deep. Recent winters, he said, have been nearly snowless. This part of central Washington has shared in the drought that has hit California and much of the western U.S. — a dearth of precipitation that has produced serious water shortages and more extreme and frequent wildfires. Something big is happening. A drive south down Interstate 5 brings a series of shocks. Two years ago, I approached Mount Shasta in late summer and found it completely bare of snow. The sight was disturbing, like seeing a beloved grandfather pale and naked. Miles further, the the stretch of highway cutting through the dust, haze and barrenness of California's Central Valley feels like a scene from “Mad Max”. When my son was small enough that I could lift him on my shoulders, we hiked to the marvelous ice caves at Mount Rainier which were the frozen blue reaches of the mountain's glaciers. He is grown now and doesn't need me to carry him, but we could not make the same trek. The ice caves have melted. In the same way, the glaciers in Glacier National Park are melting, and the ice packs at the top and bottom of the world as well. Deserts are expanding, oceans are warming and becoming more acidic and weather phenomena across the planet are increasingly more extreme and dangerous. Something big, indeed. Some people — including politicians and public relations specialists in thrall to major purveyors of fossil fuels — say the changes that can be observed from Chelan to Miami and Los Angeles to Nantucket are nothing more than normal shifts in the weather. Most of the world's scientists, of course, disagree. They say much of what is happening is the result of rapid changes in Earth's climate caused by human activity. In a rational world, proposals to deal with climate change would be at the top of the agenda in any contest for the presidency. Unlike the many false fears being raised in the current campaign, this is one concern that is verifiable and frighteningly real. Despite that, one of America's major political parties denies the science, dismissing climate change a hoax, skewing the political conversation toward the absurd. And so, with real action either blocked or coming too slowly, most of us simply get on with our lives, demanding too little from our politicians and shutting out thoughts about a threat so big that it is hard to wrap our minds around it. Still, we cannot avoid small, disturbing reminders — like lake water that is too comfortably warm — even on the sweetest days of summer. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-chelan-climate-20160818-snap-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-chelan-climate-20160818-snap-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: clint eastwood on August 19, 2016, 03:28:03 pm The WRI say there plans for over 1000 extra coal fired power stations to be built worldwide :o
....anything we do in NZ will make no difference, .....it's an evolutionary process...get over it Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 21, 2016, 06:30:35 pm looking forward to some warm weather ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: nitpicker1 on August 29, 2016, 07:33:38 pm looking forward to some warm weather ;D Here y'are, Pantsy, it's brewing for ya The ocean between New Zealand and Australia is one of the fastest-warming ocean regions on the planet, heating up at four times the global average. Now scientists are working to understand what this accelerated warming in what's called the East Australia Current means for the coastal environments of both countries and their resident marine species. Oceanographer Moninya Roughan, a visiting Seelye Fellow at the University of Auckland, is researching the effect of one of the strongest influences on ocean conditions in the region, and will be giving a public talk on her work this week. "New Zealand and Australia sit at the tail pipe of the East Australia Current where global ocean circulation affects the coastlines of both countries so we need a much better understanding of its effects," she said. Roughan, from UNSW Australia, leads a comprehensive ocean observation system comprising a network of moorings, HF Radar and an underwater autonomous "glider" that transmits data in almost real time by satellite. The data should help scientists better understand what drives change in this part of the ocean. Measurements over the past 70 years show that over the past century, surface temperatures off the coast of Tasmania have risen as much as 2.28degC. One of the key species that may be affected by environmental changes are tiny lobster larvae that spend a year adrift at sea before returning to the coast to develop into juveniles. With many not making it back from the journey, the lucrative spiny lobster fishery is facing decline and scientists suspect it is due to changing ocean conditions. The lobster project, a collaboration between UNSW, Associate Professor Andrew Jeffs from the University of Auckland's Institute of Marine Science and NSW Fisheries, involves observing lobster larvae swimming in a special tank with a continuous flow of seawater to mimic natural conditions. So far the research has established that while ocean warming may favour baby lobster and help them develop, the strengthening currents transport them further south than normal. https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/tasman-sea-climate-change-hotspot ..."So far the research has established that while ocean warming may favour baby lobster and help them develop, the strengthening currents transport them further south than normal. ... " Your crayfishers will find they must set their pots way down here at my back door soon. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 29, 2016, 10:57:07 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/Miscellaneous%20Stuff/Denialists_zpsphqxtxjr.jpg~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 01, 2016, 12:27:06 am Yep, that sure describes anti-warmalists to a TEE, eh? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/08_Laugh.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 01, 2016, 01:33:29 am screw this cold weather i'm freezing
bring on the summer heat my feet are cold ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2016, 11:05:42 am Notice how most months over the past few years have beaten the record for the warmest for that particular month ever recorded since records have been kept? Stop smoking that wacky-backy and allow reality to infuse your brain. The planet is getting warmer, as documented all over the world. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2016, 11:06:30 am (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 14, 2016, 12:14:09 pm (https://az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/2014/12/21/6355478914400590591320306707_mrw-my-friends-swat-multiple-fireflies-for-no-reason-and-laugh-about-it-17311.gif)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 15, 2016, 02:59:28 pm (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/17_Clapping.gif)
(http://thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/205_156257.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 15, 2016, 03:11:04 pm Feel free to continue making a dork of yourself with ignorant posts. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 15, 2016, 08:24:35 pm same with you ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 01, 2016, 12:30:24 pm (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20161001_1475279161564s_zpsr4nl86mn.jpg) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/food-wine/food-news/84792773) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 01, 2016, 02:56:30 pm climate change is a sick joke
weather cycles are not man made they have been happening for hundreds of millions of years a cow fart tax or a carbon tax won't change anything,at the worst it will just give funding to the creeps enslaving everyone on the planet "what a joke that will be. Oh yes and thanks to ktj for placing the add for infowars.com it's a great place to find some real truth Yes infowars.com it's so far away from the rabid left wing mainstream media which incase you didn't figure it all out yet is just political spin and pc brainwashing for the dumbed down sheeple with the agenda of pushing everyone ever closer towards a one world government that will be ruled over by unelected social engineers that will do the bidding of the 1% always working incrementally to take away our right to vote for our own future and destroy the rest of every tiny bit of freedom our fathers bled or died in wars to protect. "Go on then throw it all away" Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 02, 2016, 11:50:11 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkqjXh6VVk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkqjXh6VVk) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 03, 2016, 03:13:38 pm temperatures warmer than they should be hahahaha ;D
how many hundred million years has this clown been living on the planet Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 07, 2016, 12:24:34 pm from The Washington Post.... • Hurricane Matthew (https://www.washingtonpost.com/newssearch/?query=Hurricane Matthew) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161006hm_HurricaneMatthew14_zpswovz1xsm.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/10/06/Foreign/Images/Hurricane_Matthew_Florida-0bc52.jpg) Clouds cover the sky over the beach near the Daytona Beach Boardwalk and Pier ahead of Hurricane Matthew in Florida. — Photograph: Will Vragovic/Tampa Bay Times via Associated Press. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161006hm_HurricaneMatthew15_zpsg52kz6ho.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/10/06/Foreign/Images/2016-10-06T122535Z_01_TOR902_RTRIDSP_3_STORM-MATTHEW.jpg) Hurricane Matthew is seen approaching the East Coast of the United States in this National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellite image. — Picture: NOAA/Reuters. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161006hm_HurricaneMatthew16_zpsetze2k73.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/10/06/Foreign/Images/612941796.jpg) A man walks near the Cocoa Beach Pier as Hurricane Matthew approaches Cocoa Beach, Florida. The storm is expected to reach the area on Thursday afternoon, bringing heavy wind and widespread flooding. — Photograph: Mark Wilson/Getty Images. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 07, 2016, 12:33:24 pm Time to get in the beer & popcorn and watch the show. from The Washington Post • A detailed breakdown of impacts facing Florida's east coast from Hurricane Matthew (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/10/06/in-focus-the-unprecedented-hurricane-disaster-facing-the-east-coast-of-florida) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 07, 2016, 03:49:04 pm ‘BLACK LIVES MATTER’ SUPPORTERS PLAN LOOTING SPREES AS HURRICANE MATTHEW HITS
"In white neighborhoods"...."I need a new TV & iPhone" (http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/061016lootfront2.jpg) With Hurricane Matthew set to devastate the east coast, some people are preparing to callously exploit the mayhem by going on looting sprees. The extreme weather event is hours away from launching a “potentially catastrophic” Category 5 siege on Florida’s east coast before stretching into Georgia and South Carolina, but some are more concerned about how they can hijack the chaos to commit criminal acts. A quick Twitter search reveals dozens of messages posted by Americans living in or near the affected areas that brazenly talk about the opportunity for looting that the hurricane will provide. “God Please let this hurricane hit us so I can do some looting,” tweeted one user. “So we looting after the hurricane? I do need a new TV & iPhone and some clothes,” added another. “Ready for hurricane Matthew to hit so I can start looting,” remarked another. When asked if they would be looting, one Twitter user responded, “yep, but in white neighborhoods.” An analysis of the Twitter accounts shows that many of them are sympathetic towards ‘Black Lives Matter’ – supporters of which have used BLM protests as an excuse to carry out mass looting in Ferguson, Baltimore and most recently Charlotte. Some of the accounts also featured anti-Donald Trump posts as well tweets complaining about racism and “cultural appropriation”. It goes without saying that these kind of tweets are an absolute disgrace – over a hundred people have already died in Haiti as a result of the hurricane – but they are par for the course when it comes to BLM supporters and leftists in general. Read just some of the shocking tweets below http://www.infowars.com/black-lives-matter-supporters-plan-looting-sprees-as-hurricane-matthew-hits/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 14, 2016, 02:45:59 pm from The Washington Post.... A comet smashing into ancient Earth may have set off catastrophic global warming By SARAH KAPLAN | 2:00PM EDT - Thursday, October 13, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161013ci_CometImpact_zps0idnvd7b.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/03/09/Interactivity/Images/iStock_000023806175_Full1425921851.jpg&w=1484) THE warming was almost instantaneous. In the blink of an eye, geologically speaking, thousands of gigatons of carbon were released into the atmosphere. The global temperature rose by as many as eight degrees Celsius. The oceans became more acidic. Sea levels surged upward. Hundreds of species went extinct. Sound familiar? These events actually happened 55.6 million years ago, during a period of dramatic global warming called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). Clues from the geologic record show how hot it was: Arctic sediment cores containing no evidence of ice; rock layers with unusual ratios of carbon isotopes; billions of tiny, shelled microorganisms that died. This catastrophic period in Earth's history is the best analog we have to the climate change that is happening today. But there were no humans around burning fossil fuels in the year 55.6 million before present. Primates had only just evolved. So what could have caused atmospheric carbon and global temperatures to spike so dramatically? In the journal Science on Thursday, researchers report the discovery of tiny, glass globules in rock core samples (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6309/225) as far apart as New Jersey and Bermuda — which they believe may be evidence of an ancient, catastrophic comet impact that set off the period of global warming. The glass spheres, called microtektites, are the remains of the molten rock that gets blown in the air when a massive object collides with the Earth. They contain “shocked” quartz that appears only in the wake of an impact. In 1980, the discovery of shocked quartz and tektite deposits in the Caribbean from 66 million years ago helped convince Nobel Prize-winning physicist Luis Alvarez that a massive asteroid may have been what killed the dinosaurs; a decade later, geophysicists discovered the Chicxulub crater off the coast of Mexico, where the impact occurred. The newly described microtektites come from the part of the fossil record where carbon starts to spike — a layer known as the Paleocene-Eocene boundary. Those glass impact sperules really point to that there may have in fact been an impact,” said Dennis Kent, who studies Earth magnetism at Rutgers and the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and is a co-author on the paper. “If so, the fact that it occurred just at the time of the PETM is either an amazing coincidence, or it says there may be some close correlation, there may be some causation involved.” Kent has argued that a comet impact could have triggered the thermal maximum since 2003, when he reported on finding strange magnetic nanoparticles in sediment cores (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X03001882) taken off the Atlantic coast. Comets carry large amounts of carbon-12, the isotope that became suddenly abundant during the PETM. Kent believes that an initial, instantaneous release of carbon from the impact could have set off a greenhouse effect that caused frozen methane in the seafloor to melt, releasing more carbon and starting a positive feedback cycle that made the planet hotter and hotter. The impact could also have triggered landslides in the north Atlantic that exposed the methane, and volcanic activity that was happening at the hotspot underneath what is now Iceland would have exacerbated the problem. The microtektites are a “coup de grace,” Kent said, “which really points to an impact.” (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161013m_Microtektites_zpskvlwgvjr.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp-content/uploads/sites/36/2016/10/schaller1HR.jpg&w=1484) Images of some of the microtektites discovered by Schaller and Fung. — Illustration: M.F. Schaller et al/Science. They were discovered by Morgan Schaller, a geochemist at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and lead author of the paper, and doctoral student Megan Fung. Fung had been examining sediment cores from various spots around the Atlantic looking for fossils of foraminifera, a class of single-celled sea creatures that was one of the main victims of the PETM warming. Months had gone by with no success, so Schaller came over to see what was wrong. “Morgan came down and kind of dumped the sample on a tray,” Fung recalled, “and in a couple of minutes found one of these sphereules.” “And then we jumped up and down and got really excited,” Schaller interjected. They both laughed. Other scientists are less convinced. Geology is a discipline that operates on immense time scales: It takes a while to irrevocably change the Earth, and even longer for that change to be recorded in the rock record. Even the most conservative explanations of the PETM describe a phenomenon that happened far faster than almost anything in Earth's history, so researchers are understandably skeptical of suggestions that it could have started in a day. James Zachos, a paleo-oceanographer and PETM specialist at the University of California in Santa Cruz, noted that the abundance of microtektites Schaller and Fung found suggests a relatively small impact. A comet of that size wouldn't have contained nearly enough carbon to trigger the massive changes that characterized the PETM. “These things happen on Earth every million years,” he said — the timing of the impact relative to the thermal maximum is probably just a coincidence. Unlike Kent, who is convinced that the initial pulse of carbon was released very quickly, Zachos argues that it happened over the course of thousands of years. He thinks it's more likely that volcanic activity at the ocean floor heated up carbon in the crust and sent it pluming into the atmosphere. If all this seems like an obscure debate about events that occurred millions of years ago, keep in mind that the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum is the only period in history that comes close to mirroring the climate change that Earth is experiencing today. If scientists want to understand what happens when a certain amount of carbon is added to the atmosphere, or when ocean temperature rise a specific number of degrees, the PETM can tell them. “All the things you hear about when climatologists talk about what is happening now and will happen more so in the future, that is all based on theory, based on climate models,” Zachos said. “And yet we see exactly that happening 56 million years ago during the PETM, so that is an independent verification of theory.” “I see that, and I know the models are correct,” he continued, “Because it happened before.” • Sarah Kaplan is a reporter for Speaking of Science (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science) at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • Ancient asteroid impact was even bigger than the one that killed the dinosaurs, scientists say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/05/18/ancient-asteroid-impact-was-even-bigger-than-the-one-that-killed-the-dinosaurs-scientists-say) • What we're doing to the Earth has no parallel in 66 million years, scientists say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/21/what-were-doing-to-the-earth-has-no-parallel-in-66-million-years-scientists-say) • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Fascinating photos of our solar system and beyond (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/images-of-space-2015/2015/01/14/6218aa6c-95c0-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_gallery.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/10/13/a-comet-smashing-into-ancient-earth-may-have-set-off-catastrophic-global-warming (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/10/13/a-comet-smashing-into-ancient-earth-may-have-set-off-catastrophic-global-warming) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 28, 2016, 10:39:27 am from The Washington Post.... The North Pole is an insane 36 degrees warmer than normal as winter descends The Arctic is super-hot, even as a vast area of cold polar air has been displaced over Siberia. By CHRIS MOONEY and JASON SAMENOW | Thursday, November 17, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161117bb_BaffinBay_zpsvbo32zul.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/12/15/Production/Daily/A-Section/Images/Arctic_Report_Card-03315.jpg) Ice floes in Baffin Bay above the Arctic Circle. — Photograph: Jonathan Hayward/Associated Press. POLITICAL PEOPLE in the United States are watching the chaos in Washington in the moment. But some people in the science community are watching the chaos somewhere else — the Arctic. It's polar night (http://www.arctic.uoguelph.ca/cpe/environments/sky/features/sun_moon/daylight.htm) there now — the sun isn't rising in much of the Arctic. That's when the Arctic is supposed to get super-cold, when the sea ice that covers the vast Arctic Ocean is supposed to grow and thicken. But in fall of 2016 — which has been a zany year for the region, with multiple records set for low levels of monthly sea ice — something is totally off. The Arctic is super-hot, even as a vast area of cold polar air has been displaced over Siberia. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161117asia_ArcticSeaIce1_zpsuej6pmhb.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/GFS-025deg_NH-SAT1_T2_anom.png&w=1484) At the same time, one of the key indicators of the state of the Arctic — the extent of sea ice covering the polar ocean — is at a record low. The ice is freezing up again, as it always does this time of year after reaching its September low, but it isn't doing so as rapidly as usual. In fact, the ice's area is even lower than it was during the record-low 2012: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161117asib_ArcticSeaIce2_zps6mnbwpxv.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/N_stddev_timeseries.png&w=1484) Twitter's expert Arctic watchers also are stunned. Zack Labe, a PhD student at the University of California at Irvine who studies the Arctic, tweeted out an image (https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/798622676289875969) on Wednesday from the Danish Meteorological Institute showing Arctic temperatures about 20 degrees Celsius higher than normal above 80 degrees North Latitude. “Today's latest #Arctic (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Arctic?src=hash) mean temperature continues to move the wrong direction … up. Quite an anomalous spike!,” Labe wrote. Here's the figure: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161117asic_ArcticSeaIce3_zps7swffkfv.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/meanT_2016.png) As you can see, temperatures north of 80 latitude were around -5 degrees Celsius — still below freezing, but not by that much — instead of the normal of around -25 degrees Celcius. “Despite onset of #PolarNight (https://twitter.com/hashtag/PolarNight?src=hash), temperatures near #NorthPole (https://twitter.com/hashtag/NorthPole?src=hash) increasing. Extraordinary situation right now in #Arctic (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Arctic?src=hash), w/record low #seaice (https://twitter.com/hashtag/seaice?src=hash),” added Daniel Swain (https://twitter.com/Weather_West/status/798998753881403392), a climate scientist at UCLA. This is the second year in a row that temperatures near the North Pole have risen to freakishly warm levels. During 2015's final days, the temperature near the Pole spiked to the melting point thanks to a massive (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/12/30/freak-storm-has-pushed-north-pole-to-freezing-point-50-degrees-above-normal) storm that pumped warm air into the region. So what's going on here? “It's about 20°C [36 degrees Fahrenheit] warmer than normal over most of the Arctic Ocean, along with cold anomalies of about the same magnitude over north-central Asia,” Jennifer Francis, an Arctic specialist at Rutgers University, said by email Wednesday. “The Arctic warmth is the result of a combination of record-low sea-ice extent for this time of year, probably very thin ice, and plenty of warm/moist air from lower latitudes being driven northward by a very wavy jet stream.” Francis has published research suggesting that the jet stream, which travels from west to east across the Northern Hemisphere in the mid-latitudes, is becoming more wavy and elongated as the Arctic warms faster than the equator does. “It will be fascinating to see if the stratospheric polar vortex continues to be as weak as it is now, which favors a negative Arctic Oscillation and probably a cold mid/late winter to continue over central and eastern Asia and eastern North America. The extreme behavior of the Arctic in 2016 seems to be in no hurry to quit,” Francis continued. Francis cited the work of Judah Cohen (https://www.aer.com/science-research/climate-weather/arctic-oscillation), a forecaster with Atmospheric and Environmental Research, who has linked odd jet stream behavior with cold air over Siberia. Indeed, another Arctic expert, James Overland with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said that the jet stream at the moment is well configured to transport warmth northward into the Arctic. “There is strong warm advection into the Arctic, especially northern-central Canada, in through the Atlantic, and east Siberian/Chukchi Sea,” Overland said. The whole situation is pretty extreme, several experts agreed. “Both the persistence and magnitude of these temperature anomalies are quite unusual,” Labe added by email. “Large variability in temperatures is common in the Arctic (especially during the cold season), but the duration of this warm Arctic — cold Siberia pattern is unusual and quite an impressive crysophere/sea ice feedback.” (The “cryosphere” refers to that part of the Earth’s system that is made up of ice.) Abnormally warm air has flooded the Arctic since October. Richard James (http://www.prescientweather.com/team), a meteorologist who pens a blog on Alaska weather (http://ak-wx.blogspot.com), analyzed 19 weather stations surrounding the Arctic Ocean and found that the average temperature was about 4 degrees (2 degrees Celsius) above the record set in 1998. Since November, temperatures have risen even higher. “It is amazing to see that the warmth has become even more pronounced since the end of October,” James wrote on his blog (http://ak-wx.blogspot.com/2016/11/arctic-warmth.html). Mark Serreze, who heads the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, agrees that something odd is going on. Not only are air temperatures unusually warm, but water temperatures are as well. “There are some areas in the Arctic Ocean that are as much as 25 degrees Fahrenheit above average now,” Serreze said. “It's pretty crazy.” What's happening, he explains, is sort of a “double whammy.” On the one hand, there is a “very warm underlying ocean” due to the lack of sea ice forming above it. But, at the same time, kinks in the jet stream have allowed warm air to flow northward and frigid Arctic air to descend over Siberia. “The sea ice is at a record low right now, for this time of year, that’s one thing,” Serreze said. “And why it's so low — again, there's so much heat in the upper ocean in these ice-free areas, the ice just can't form right now. The ocean's just got to get rid of this heat somehow, and it's having a hard time doing so.” (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161117asid_ArcticSeaIce4_zpssphgmlvx.jpg~original) (https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/201610.gif&op=noop) The situation this winter could set the Arctic's ice up for very thin conditions and a possible record low next year, Serreze said, although it's too soon to say. The weather in the Arctic can change swiftly. Temperatures could cool and the ice could rebound. But the record-low sea ice extent and unprecedented warmth in the region fit in well with recent trends and portend even more profound changes in the coming years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGOzHVUQCw0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGOzHVUQCw0) • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. • Jason is The Washington Post's weather editor and Capital Weather Gang's chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • Scientists say climate change wiped out an entire underwater ecosystem. Again. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/15/scientists-just-found-another-case-of-climate-change-wiping-out-an-underwater-ecosystem) • Trump taps climate-change skeptic to oversee EPA transition (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/11/meet-the-man-trump-is-relying-on-to-unravel-obamas-environmental-legacy) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/17/the-north-pole-is-an-insane-36-degrees-warmer-than-normal-as-winter-descends (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/17/the-north-pole-is-an-insane-36-degrees-warmer-than-normal-as-winter-descends) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 29, 2016, 09:12:31 am from The Washington Post.... ‘Things are getting weird in the polar regions’ Sea ice is at record low levels in the Arctic and Antarctic, simultaneously. By CHRIS MOONEY | Monday, November 21, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161121kb_KaneBasin_zpsxu0qml6y.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/09/kane-basin-sea-ice.jpg&w=1484) A collage of melting sea ice in the Kane Basin between Greenland and Canada's Ellesmere Island. — Photograph: Chris Mooney/The Washington Post. AS extraordinarily warm temperatures (http://cci-reanalyzer.org/DailySummary/#T2_anom) continue in the Arctic — temperatures tens of degrees Fahrenheit above normal for this time of year in some locations — Arctic sea ice, a key indicator of the overall state of this system, seems to be responding in kind. It is kind of unbelievable: On November 19th, the extent of Arctic sea ice was nearly 1 million square kilometers lower (http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph) (8.633 million versus 9.504 million) than it was on that date during the prior record low year of 2012, according to data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center. On November 20th, the gap widened further, with 8.625 million square kilometers in 2016 versus 9.632 million in 2012. This is happening in a time of year when ice is supposed to be spreading across the polar ocean — yet instead, it is flat or even declining a little lately. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161121asi_ArcticSeaIce_zpsynatgwv0.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/Arctic-sea-ice-on-11.20.20161.jpg&w=1484) “I think that it’s fair to say that the very slow ice growth is a response to the extreme warmth (still ongoing as of today),” said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, by email on Sunday. “Over the past few days, extent has actually decreased in the Arctic, and while I don't think that such a short term decline is unprecedented for this time of year, it is highly unusual, for November is a month when we normally see a quite rapid ice growth.” (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161121asie_ArcticSeaIceExtent_zpspfds561j.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/800179367594688514) It may be time for a refresher on why this matters and why it is so consistent with climate change research going back many decades (https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/sm8001.pdf). The fear (and it's not just a fear any longer, really) is that there is something called a “feedback” in the Arctic climate system. As the climate warms, there should be less sea ice covering the Arctic ocean — and indeed, we've seen great declines. But as sea ice falls, the darker ocean should also absorb more energy from sunlight in the summer, energy that the lighter colored ice would have reflected away. This heat, contained in the ocean, would also prevent sea ice formation. Recent trends in the Arctic seem heavily consistent with this idea. And as if the Arctic data isn't enough, at the very same time, ice around Antarctica is also pushing surprising new lows: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161121ani_AntarcticSeaIce_zpst2tdrbcc.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2016/11/Antarctic-sea-ice-11.20.20161.jpg&w=1484) Antarctic sea ice extent on November 19th also represented a record low for this time of year, based on the center's data (http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph). The dataset in question goes back to the year 1979. “Why Antarctic extent is also very low right now is something we are still puzzling over,” said Serreze. “However, there's really no connection between the extreme mutual anomalies in the two hemispheres that we are aware of. We have to wait and see what happens. Having said this, things are getting weird in the polar regions.” The Antarctic decline is particularly bewildering because just a few years ago, the debate was instead over why floating Antarctic sea ice was pushing record highs (https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum), not record lows — and why this was happening even as the continent's glaciers were losing considerable mass. Despite a major lack of clarity about what this phenomena meant, many climate change doubters seized on the Antarctic sea ice behavior as a key reason for pushing their contrary message. Now, that argument seems to be vanishing for them. While scientists are still trying to understand all aspects of the Antarctic sea ice system, one intriguing study (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/07/05/this-new-antarctica-study-is-bad-news-for-climate-change-doubters) published earlier this year linked a recent sea ice expansion in the region to behavior in the tropical Pacific ocean. It focused specifically on a cycle in the climate system called the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/timeseries/IPOTPI) or IPO, that was also connected to a global warming “pause” or slowdown in the mid-2000s. However, that tropical Pacific pattern has since shifted — which may be contributing to sea ice losses around the Antarctic. Gerald Meehl, the lead author of that study and a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, told me in an email in late October that a pattern of lower Antarctic sea ice is “what you'd expect in an El Nino, as well as transition to positive IPO, so trend for next 5-10 years should be negative, with year-to-year variations.” That comment came at a time when the Antarctic ice was low (https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=3490), but not yet at record low levels, as it is now. We don't know all the causes of what's currently happening in either the Arctic or Antarctic. It's certainly possible that the lows we're seeing now are an extreme, perhaps tied to the aftermath of the powerful 2015-2016 El Nino, and conditions will soon push more back towards the range of what's normal as that event continues to fade. It's important to remember that the data presented above are a snapshot in time, and that can't substitute for a scientific analysis of trends. But as we steer the planet into the unknown, the default position should probably be to expect surprises — surprises not unlike those that we're seeing today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGOzHVUQCw0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGOzHVUQCw0) • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/21/things-are-getting-weird-in-the-polar-regions (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/21/things-are-getting-weird-in-the-polar-regions) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 29, 2016, 09:13:28 am from The Washington Post.... Trump adviser proposes dismantling NASA climate research The proposal was swiftly condemned by Earth science leaders. By JASON SAMENOW | Wednesday, November 23, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161123asi_ArcticSeaIce1980vs2012_zpstyhlmaea.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2013/08/multiYr_seaIce_1980_2012_1024x576.jpg&w=1484) Arctic sea ice minimum in 1980 versus 2012. — Photographs: NASA. AN adviser to Donald Trump says NASA should no longer conduct climate research, a proposal that has been swiftly condemned by leaders in the Earth science and climate communities. Bob Walker, who advised the Trump campaign on space policy, told The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/22/nasa-earth-donald-trump-eliminate-climate-change-research) that NASA should focus on space and leave the investigation of Earth to other parts of the government. “We see NASA in an exploration role, in deep space research,” Walker said. “Earth-centric science is better placed at other agencies where it is their prime mission.” Climate research has been “heavily politicized” and NASA doesn't need to conduct “politically correct environmental reporting,” Walker told The Guardian. Walker is not alone in his point of view. In 2015, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, chaired by Representative Lamar Smith (Republican-Texas), introduced a spending bill that would have slashed NASA's Earth science program by more than $300 million. At a hearing on NASA's budget that same year, Senator Ted Cruz (Republican-Texas) said “a disproportionate amount of federal funds” had been allocated to the Earth science program. But just as NASA's Earth science program has its critics, it also has allies on both sides of the political spectrum. Last fall, after efforts to cut NASA's Earth science budget had failed, 15 former military leaders wrote a letter (https://www.strategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/NationalSecurity_NASA_NSF_Final.pdf) to congressional leaders, urging them to protect funding for NASA Earth science as well as geoscience programs at the National Science Foundation. Notably, the letter was signed by retired Vice Admiral Conrad Lautenbacher, a Republican and administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under President George W. Bush. “These programs are essential parts of a broader whole of government and whole of society effort to provide essential data about and better scientific understanding of global, regional and local Earth processes,” the letter said. “That essential data and better understanding of the underlying science are critical to many strategic planning, strategy, and investment decisions in both the private and public sectors, very much including national security.” In the wake of news on Tuesday that the Trump administration may move to scrap NASA's climate research, leaders in the Earth science community immediately voiced objection. “Not so fast,” said Nancy Colleton, president of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, a think tank that leads efforts in Earth and space science education. “The Trump Administration won't want to put the American people and certainly not American business at risk. That's what NASA science does — it helps us manage risk. It's a security issue on many levels — national, economic, water, and food.” Marshall Shepherd, a former NASA atmospheric scientist, stressed NASA's Earth science work was built into its mission when the agency was established through the 1958 Space Act. “This notion that NASA should just be outwardly focused in space is not consistent with NASA's mission,” said Shepherd, now a professor at the University of Georgia. Shepherd, also past president of the American Meteorological Society, wrote an impassioned op-ed on the significance of NASA's Earth science last year, when the program's budget was threatened: Cutting NASA's earth science budget is shortsighted and a threat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/05/01/cutting-nasas-earth-science-budget-is-short-sighted-and-a-threat). The Guardian quoted several climate scientists (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/22/nasa-earth-donald-trump-eliminate-climate-change-research) who blasted Walker's proposal, including Kevin Trenberth, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Trenberth said eliminating Earth science at NASA would be “a major setback if not devastating.” Still, a story in Scientific American (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/under-trump-nasa-may-turn-a-blind-eye-to-climate-change) suggested that Walker's proposal will not necessarily become Trump policy. “Because he is not a member of the transition team now laying the groundwork for a Trump administration, Walker says he cannot speculate about what near-term space policy decisions the president-elect will soon make,” wrote Lee Billings, author of the Scientific American story. Brian Kahn, a journalist at Climate Central, suggested advocates for NASA Earth science resist the urge to overreact. “Freaking out about NASA's climate budget right now is unproductive,” he tweeted (https://twitter.com/blkahn/status/801439821138948096). “We don't know what Trump will do.” • Jason Samenow is The Washington Post's weather editor and Capital Weather Gang's chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • With Trump, Gingrich and GOP calling the shots, NASA may go back to the moon (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/11/18/with-trump-gingrich-and-gop-calling-the-shots-nasa-may-go-back-to-the-moon) • Massive cuts proposed to NASA earth science budget draw protest (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/04/30/proposed-massive-cuts-to-nasa-earth-science-budget-draw-protest) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/11/23/trump-adviser-proposes-dismantling-nasa-climate-research (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/11/23/trump-adviser-proposes-dismantling-nasa-climate-research) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 29, 2016, 04:26:27 pm More Fake News
about climate change scam for the frightened lemmings Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 12, 2016, 02:36:14 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLuBgZ1bgoY
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 12, 2016, 10:36:47 am Guess what? Donald Trump is wavering on his line about Global Warming. He has been tweeting about it. Haw haw haw....yet another flip-flop from The Donald is coming up. I'm going to piss myself with laughter watching your reaction when The Donald changes his tune. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 12, 2016, 03:15:58 pm trump has already stated he has favorable views about conservation
the thing with obama i am sure he wanted to do a lot of things but he was not allowed thats a problem when you owe favors to your backers trump didn't have establishment backers so he's not beholding to anyone that's why they might kill him or stir up dissent say they want another election blaming russia for hillarys failure dont worry i see trouble brewing the globalists can't stand the fact he will go of the reservation friending with russia to smash isis which they won't like because putin kicked out all the american funded shit stirring NGO's it hard for trump not being a member of the elite club if he makes it in he will need the backing of the common people to get things done. it's not about him making money he already has more than enough its about freeing the people from the elites yoke by working to create jobs so they can feed their kids and not end up living on the street like what the too big to fail bankers did to them.. george bush was a retarded idiot but he was in the club i know you will find that hard to believe maybe your thinking all people are ratbags but you have issues and maybe unresolved hurts, Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 12, 2016, 03:22:33 pm trump has already stated he has favorable views about conservation (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/19_HammerHead.gif)....conservation and global warming are two different things....(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/19_HammerHead.gif) And there is plenty of video footage around (including on YouTube) of Trump saying he will tear up the Paris agreement on climate change within 100 days of becoming the President of the USA. Now, in more video footage (also on YouTube) of Trump being interviewed on Fox News yesterday, he is saying something completely different and being slippery. Trump is taking you idiots who believed him for mugs. He was lying to you and you swallowed his bullshit hook, line & sinker. SUCKER!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 12, 2016, 03:36:32 pm you are a crazy conspiracy nutter who hates people with money that is unless they support the leftist cause the globalist have messed up your mind is there any good reason why the elites funded communism apart from controlling the masses and making money there's no other good reason is there i think you want an unelected world gov telling you what you must do screw that idea they have already made all the world's people slaves give them more power they will do much worse things they will decide when its time for you to die it's called a purge Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 14, 2016, 10:21:38 am from The Washington Post.... Scientists are frantically copying U.S. climate data, fearing it might vanish under Trump The efforts include a “guerrilla archiving event” in Toronto where experts will copy irreplaceable public data, and meetings at the University of Pennsylvania focused on how to download as much federal data as possible in the coming weeks. By BRADY DENNIS | 11:10PM EST - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161213ho_HurricaneOtto_zps5vqiejzt.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2016-11-24/Reuters/2016-11-24T181005Z_01_TOR900_RTRIDSP_3_STORM-OTTO.jpg&w=1484) A satellite image of Hurricane Otto approaching the coast of Central America on November 24th. — Picture: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. ALARMED that decades of crucial climate measurements could vanish under a hostile Trump administration, scientists have begun a feverish attempt to copy reams of government data onto independent servers in hopes of safeguarding it from any political interference. The efforts include a “guerrilla archiving” (https://ischool.utoronto.ca/content/guerrilla-archiving-event-saving-environmental-data-trump) event in Toronto, where experts will copy irreplaceable public data, meetings at the University of Pennsylvania focused on how to download as much federal data as possible in the coming weeks, and a collaboration of scientists and database experts who are compiling an online site to harbor scientific information (http://climatemirror.org). “Something that seemed a little paranoid to me before all of a sudden seems potentially realistic, or at least something you'd want to hedge against,” said Nick Santos, an environmental researcher at the University of California at Davis, who over the weekend began copying government climate data onto a non-government server, where it will remain available to the public. “Doing this can only be a good thing. Hopefully they leave everything in place. But if not, we're planning for that.” In recent weeks, President-elect Donald Trump has nominated a growing list of Cabinet members who have questioned the overwhelming scientific consensus around global warming. His transition team at the Department of Energy has asked agency officials for names of employees and contractors who have participated in international climate talks and worked on the scientific basis for Obama administration-era regulations of carbon emissions. One Trump adviser suggested that NASA no longer should conduct climate research (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/11/23/trump-adviser-proposes-dismantling-nasa-climate-research) and instead should focus on space exploration. Those moves have stoked fears among the scientific community that Trump, who has called the notion of man-made climate change “a hoax” and vowed to reverse environmental policies put in place by President Obama, could try to alter or dismantle parts of the federal government's repository of data on everything from rising sea levels to the number of wildfires in the country. Michael Halpern, deputy director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, argued that Trump has appointed a “band of climate conspiracy theorists” to run transition efforts at various agencies, along with nominees to lead them who share similar views. “They have been salivating at the possibility of dismantling federal climate research programs for years. It's not unreasonable to think they would want to take down the very data that they dispute,” Halpern said in an email. “There is a fine line between being paranoid and being prepared, and scientists are doing their best to be prepared…. Scientists are right to preserve data and archive websites before those who want to dismantle federal climate change research programs storm the castle.” To be clear, neither Trump nor his transition team have said the new administration plans to manipulate or curtail publicly available data. The transition team did not respond to a request for comment. But some scientists aren't taking any chances. “What are the most important .gov climate assets?” Eric Holthaus, a meteorologist and self-proclaimed “climate hawk,” tweeted from his Arizona home on Saturday evening. “Scientists: Do you have a US .gov climate database that you don't want to see disappear?” Within hours, responses flooded in from around the country. Scientists added links to dozens of government databases to a Google spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12-__RqTqQxuxHNOln3H5ciVztsDMJcZ2SVs1BrfqYCc/edit#gid=0). Investors offered to help fund efforts to copy and safeguard key climate data. Lawyers offered pro bono legal help. Database experts offered server space and help organizing mountains of data. In California, Santos began building an online repository to “make sure these data sets remain freely and broadly accessible.” Climate data from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been politically vulnerable. When Tom Karl, director of the National Centers for Environmental Information, and his colleagues published a study in 2015 (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6242/1469.full) seeking to challenge the idea that there had been a global warming “slowdown” or “pause” during the 2000s, they relied, in significant part, on updates to NOAA's ocean temperature data set (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/marineocean-data/extended-reconstructed-sea-surface-temperature-ersst-v4), saying the data “do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus’.” In response, the U.S. House Science, Space and Technology Committee chair, Representative Lamar S. Smith (Republican-Texas), tried to subpoena the scientists and their records (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/12/22/meet-the-house-science-committee-chairman-whos-trying-to-put-global-warming-research-on-ice). That effort launched by Holthaus is one of several underway to preserve key federal scientific data. In Philadelphia, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, along with members of groups such as Open Data Philly and the software company Azavea, have been meeting (http://www.ppehlab.org/blogposts/2016/12/7/precarious-data-a-meeting-at-penn) to figure out ways to harvest and store important data sets. At the University of Toronto this weekend, researchers are holding what they call a “guerrilla archiving” event to catalogue key federal environmental data ahead of Trump's inauguration. The event “is focused on preserving information and data from the Environmental Protection Agency, which has programs and data at high risk of being removed from online public access or even deleted,” the organizers said. “This includes climate change, water, air, toxics programs.” The event is part of a broader effort to help San Francisco-based Internet Archive (https://archive.org/about) with its End of Term 2016 (http://eotarchive.cdlib.org/2016.html) project, an effort by university, government and nonprofit officials to find and archive valuable pages on federal websites. The project has existed through several presidential transitions. At the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting in San Francisco, where more than 20,000 earth and climate scientists have swarmed the city's biggest conference center this week, an air of gallows humor marked many conversations. Some young scientists said their biggest personal concern is funding for their research, much of which relies on support from NASA and other agencies. “You just don't know what's coming,” said Adam Campbell, who studies the imperiled Ross Ice Shelf of Antarctica. But others also arrived at the meeting with a strengthened sense of resolve. Campbell was planning to join hundreds of other people at a rally Tuesday, organized in part by the activist group ClimateTruth.org, encouraging researchers to “stand up for science.” “People have felt a call to arms,” Campbell said. “We need to be outspoken.” Lawyers with the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund — which provides legal assistance to researchers facing lawsuits over their work on climate change — will be holding one-on-one consultations with researchers who think they might need help from a lawyer. And the organization's table in the AGU exhibition hall is piled high with booklets titled “Handling Political Harassment and Legal Intimidation: A Pocket Guide for Scientists”. “We literally thought about it the day after the election,” said Lauren Kurtz, the legal defense fund's executive director. “I have gotten a lot of calls from scientists who are really concerned…. So it's intended in some ways to be reassuring, to say, ‘There is a game plan; we're here to help you’.” The 16-page guide contains advice for government researchers who believe their work is being suppressed, as well as how scientists should react if they receive hate mail or death threats. Holthaus, who encouraged scientists to flag key databases, said the effort to safeguard them is mostly precautionary. “I don't actually think that it will happen,” he said of efforts by an incoming administration to obscure or alter scientific data. “But I think it could happen…. All of these data sets are priceless, in the sense that if there is a gap, it greatly diminishes their usefulness.” That's the main concern for Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University. He said he doubts that even the most hostile administration would try to do away with existing climate data, given the potential backlash. “I think it's much more likely they'd try to end the collection of data, which would minimize its value. Having continuous data is crucial for understanding long-term trends,” Dessler said. “Trends are what climate change is about — understanding these long-term changes. Think about how much better off the people who don't want to do anything about climate change would be if all the long-term temperature trends didn't exist.” He added, “If you can just get rid of the data, you're in a stronger position to argue we should do nothing about climate change.” • Chris Mooney in Washington and Sarah Kaplan in San Francisco contributed to this report. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • VIDEO: What a Trump presidency means for climate change (http://www.washingtonpost.com/video/business/what-a-trump-presidency-means-for-climate-change/2016/11/09/74d45bf6-a6a3-11e6-ba46-53db57f0e351_video.html) • Trump taps former Texas Governor Rick Perry to head Energy Department he once vowed to abolish (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/trump-taps-former-texas-gov-rick-perry-to-head-energy-department-he-once-vowed-to-abolish) • Energy Department rejects Trump's request to name climate change workers, who remain worried (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/12/13/energy-dept-rejects-trumps-request-to-name-climate-change-workers-who-remain-worried) • Trump has picked the most conservative EPA leader since 1981. This one will face much less resistance. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/13/trump-has-picked-the-most-conservative-epa-leader-since-1981-this-one-will-face-much-less-resistance) • The Arctic just had its warmest year on record ‘by far’, scientists report (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/the-arctic-where-tillerson-and-exxon-want-to-drill-shattered-temperature-records-in-2016) • Shrinking mountain glaciers are ‘categorical evidence’ of climate change, scientists say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/12/shrinking-mountain-glaciers-are-categorical-evidence-of-climate-change-scientists-say) • Atmospheric levels of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, are spiking, scientists report (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/11/atmospheric-levels-of-methane-a-powerful-greenhouse-gas-are-spiking-scientists-report) • Trump says ‘nobody really knows’ if climate change is real (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/11/trump-says-nobody-really-knows-if-climate-change-is-real) • Trump transition team for Energy Department seeks names of employees involved in climate meetings (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/09/trump-transition-team-for-energy-department-seeks-names-of-employees-involved-in-climate-meetings/) • Trump names Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma attorney general suing EPA on climate change, to head the EPA (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/07/trump-names-scott-pruitt-oklahoma-attorney-general-suing-epa-on-climate-change-to-head-the-epa) • Al Gore just had ‘an extremely interesting conversation’ with Trump on climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/12/05/ivanka-trump-to-meet-with-al-gore-to-discuss-climate-issues) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/scientists-are-frantically-copying-u-s-climate-data-fearing-it-might-vanish-under-trump (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/13/scientists-are-frantically-copying-u-s-climate-data-fearing-it-might-vanish-under-trump) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 21, 2016, 09:36:16 am (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1211/you-won-now-get-over-it-democrats-politics-1353614629.png) (https://lovelace-media.imgix.net/uploads/8/52ffe960-b3d0-0133-98c6-0a6c20e5e327.gif?w=740&h=533&fit=max&auto=format) OMG The lefties are Paranoid, panicking and starting to feel threatened by the thought crime of a normal thinking man that has common sense, Oh no this is scary i think i might now have wow phobia,because Prez Trump might take away my funding and say climate change is a fear mongering scam for ripping off money from the poor masses and giving it to the wealthy, and a lot of scientist might agree with him and steal our funding boohoo (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/7e/ac/24/7eac24e3946e4912bbad28a72d64b091.jpg) Paranoia involves intense anxious or fearful feelings and thoughts often related to persecution, threat, or conspiracy. Paranoia occurs in many mental disorders (http://s6.postimg.org/qhyekt44h/david_rockefeller_on_the_verge_of_new_world_orde.jpg) It is very easy to take too much cannabis, and the after-effects can be paranoia, these symptoms can include extreme social anxiety, ... Dr Sexy Pants Paranoia prognosis don't smoke too much dope (https://titanicbrassblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/clinton-tinfoil-hat-600-x-337.jpg?w=600) (https://d1sui4xqepm0ps.cloudfront.net/when-you-just-wanna-be-pr-full.jpg?foo=bar%3Cimg%20src=) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2016, 03:19:03 pm Yeah, we KNOW you're too DUMB to understand the science. It's just embarrassing for your family that you continue to display your intellectual disability. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2016, 03:19:37 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 21, 2016, 05:18:31 pm Oh look the muppet pasted another picture i just love it didn't know scientist were here 1000's of years ago ;D cringe alert (https://d1sui4xqepm0ps.cloudfront.net/when-you-just-wanna-be-pr-full.jpg?foo=bar%3Cimg%20src=) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2016, 05:54:40 pm from The Washington Post.... Amid smoggy days in London, growing calls to clean up Europe’s toxic air Across Europe, cities are trying to turn around the deadly results of pushing the supposedly cleaner fuel. By GRIFF WITTE | 4:27PM EST - Tuesday, December 20, 2016 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161220wbl_WaterlooBridgeLondon_zps1loglcfj.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/12/20/Foreign/Images/2016-12-05T033828Z_01_BWA214_RTRIDSP_3_BRITAIN-ECONOMY-PMI-SERVICES.jpg) A bus carries commuters as it travels over Waterloo Bridge in London. — Photograph: Toby Melville/Reuters. LONDON — It's Christmas time on Oxford Street. Brilliant displays of white lights rain from above. Decked-out shoppers dash from one gaudy sale to the next. And Johnny Conquest breathes in poison. “The air is horrible. The taxis stop right here, and when they take off, boom, you can taste it,” says the 67-year-old as the heavenly smell of the caramel peanuts he hawks from a humble street stall mingles with the sickly stench of diesel. “I'm on the worst corner in London.” In at least one important respect, it may be the worst in the world. London has come a long way since the days when its infamous coal-fired pollution shrouded Sherlock in a permanent haze or struck at least 4,000 residents dead in less than a week. But the city's overreliance on diesel-powered vehicles has given it a dubious distinction: a global leader in nitrogen dioxide, a particularly noxious pollutant that shortens the lives of thousands of Londoners a year. Here and in cities across environmentally minded Europe, NO² levels are substantially higher than in North America, or even in Asian and African megacities whose names have become bywords for dirty air. And that is all because of decades of government incentives designed to spur the purchase of supposedly cleaner diesel cars and trucks. “It's a complete policy failure,” said Gary Fuller, who directs an air-quality-study center (http://www.londonair.org.uk/LondonAir/Default.aspx) at King's College London. “No one could defend this.” Rather than try, European mayors are declaring war on diesel, hoping to give their cities a clean start. This month, mayors of three major European capitals, plus Mexico City, announced ambitious plans to ban all diesel vehicles (http://c40-production-images.s3.amazonaws.com/other_uploads/images/925_Mayors_Air_Quality_Commitment_final.original.pdf) within the next decade. “We can no longer tolerate air pollution and the health problems and deaths it causes, particularly for our most vulnerable citizens,” said Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo, who was joined in the pledge by the mayors of Athens and Madrid. London's new mayor, Sadiq Khan, has not gone as far — yet. But he has made reducing air pollution a central pillar of his young administration, more than doubling funding for clean-air campaigns with a billion-dollar commitment and announcing plans that will radically transform the city's fleet of iconic — but diesel-dependent — taxis and buses. “With nearly 10,000 Londoners dying early every year (https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/hiainlondon_kingsreport_14072015_final.pdf) due to air pollution, tackling poor air quality is a public health emergency,” Khan said in announcing the moves. The scale of the challenge has been on display recently in cities across the continent. Paris this month experienced its worst air-pollution episode in a decade, with a thick blanket of ugly air smothering the City of Light for days. Municipal leaders temporarily made public transit free to cut cars from the roads. In Milan, safe limits on dangerous fine particles were breached each day for a week, prompting the city council to stiffen a ban on the worst-polluting diesel vehicles. Wood-burning fires also were forbidden, a decision that echoed that of a town near Naples, which last year outlawed pizza-making in a bid to cleanse its choking air. London, too, has been feeling the effects, with air-quality-monitoring stations this month showing some of the worst pollutant levels in recent years. The forecast for the coming days prompted one green activist to quip that Santa should take care not to exert himself during his rounds in Britain. But as a habitual London visitor, Santa will have seen worse over the city's long history. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20161220lf_LondonFog_zpsw99ir8ci.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/12/14/Foreign/Images/626977648.jpg) London is shrouded in fog on December 1st. — Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images. Air quality has been a problem in London since at least the Middle Ages. Rapid industrialization and urban growth lent a chronically smoky backdrop to literature throughout the Victorian period. In December 1952, coal-belching homes and factories enveloped London in smog so thick that air, rail and road traffic was halted for five days as cows dropped dead in their fields and people suffocated on the streets. That event — known as the Great Smog (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/learn-about-the-weather/weather-phenomena/case-studies/great-smog) — inspired the world's first clean-air legislation four years later. The regulation of furnaces and fireplaces, plus the banning of coal in key areas, ushered in dramatic improvements. But it also gave lawmakers the illusion that the problem of urban air pollution had been solved. A fateful bet on diesel has brought it back with a vengeance. Governments across Europe have aggressively promoted diesel vehicles, reasoning that diesel's lower carbon-dioxide output makes it gentler on the planet than gasoline. In London, the streets are filled with diesel-powered buses and taxis. Continent-wide, diesel accounts for about half the car market. But diesel has one glaring disadvantage: It is a major source of NO², a pollutant that stunts lung growth and has been linked to a range of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The diesel push has meant that although air in Europe is far cleaner overall (https://air.plumelabs.com) than in many parts of the globe, it still can be — and often is — deadly. “It's been a public health catastrophe on an unimaginable scale,” said Simon Birkett, founder and director of the advocacy group Clean Air in London (http://cleanair.london). “We'll probably never know the full extent of the impact.” In particularly traffic-swollen areas of central London, it took just the first eight days of 2016 to breach the European Union's NO² limits for the entire year. Samantha Walker, policy director for Asthma UK, said that such high concentrations of pollutants can bring on an attack in minutes and that prolonged exposure among children can cause health impacts that last a lifetime. Citing those health costs, Khan, London's mayor since May, has launched plans to expand zones in the capital where only low-emission vehicles can tread, and to replace thousands of diesel-powered buses and taxis with hybrid and fully electric vehicles. Birkett, the activist, said Khan deserves plaudits for such moves. But he also urged the mayor to go further by joining Paris, Madrid, Athens and Mexico City in pledging to eliminate diesel vehicles altogether by 2025. “There's an opportunity here to re-engineer cities,” Birkett said. “We need to ban diesel just like we banned coal 60 years ago.” Fuller, the King’s College scientist, said an outright diesel ban would be “a huge challenge” for any city given the dependence on diesel for public transit and delivery trucks. Air-quality solutions, Fuller said, need to be “holistic,” with a focus not just on what comes out of a vehicle's tailpipe but also on persuading people to abandon their cars altogether in favor of public transit, walking and biking. In a sprawling and ancient city such as London, that is not always easy. For years, officials have batted around the idea of pedestrianizing Oxford Street, London's blinged-out central shopping district. There is just one problem. “There's nowhere else for the traffic to go,” said Conquest, the sidewalk peanut vendor. Instead of a walker's paradise, Oxford Street remains a vehicle-clogged dystopia, with some of the world's worst NO² levels. Buses and taxis chug along emitting diesel fumes day and night, while tall buildings trap the noxious gases for pedestrians to breathe. Conquest, a slight and spry man who has been selling his wares on Oxford Street for 50 years, said he has been lucky. He stays in shape and has been spared the health effects that have hobbled so many others. But he says he does not doubt that decades spent breathing toxic air have taken their toll. “I run marathons,” he said. “I would have won a few of them if I hadn't been standing on this corner.” • Griff Witte is The Washington Post's London bureau chief. He previously served as the paper's deputy foreign editor and as the bureau chief in Kabul, Islamabad and Jerusalem. __________________________________________________________________________ Related stories: • VIDEO: Londoners talk about their city's noxious air pollution (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/world/londoners-talk-about-their-citys-noxious-air-pollution/2016/12/20/b5f9fcf6-c3e7-11e6-92e8-c07f4f671da4_video.html) • Paris is so smoggy that the city will pay for your bus fare (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/12/08/paris-is-so-smoggy-that-the-city-will-pay-for-your-bus-fare) • In Scotland, gusts of wind usher in a quiet energy revolution (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/in-scotland-gusts-of-wind-usher-in-a-quiet-energy-revolution/2016/10/15/e5da2f5a-8a57-11e6-8cdc-4fbb1973b506_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/amid-smoggy-days-in-london-growing-calls-to-clean-up-europes-toxic-air/2016/12/20/909612aa-c203-11e6-92e8-c07f4f671da4_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/amid-smoggy-days-in-london-growing-calls-to-clean-up-europes-toxic-air/2016/12/20/909612aa-c203-11e6-92e8-c07f4f671da4_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 21, 2016, 08:08:37 pm nothing compared to china is it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DtOhe2LfQ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 09, 2017, 10:25:57 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br4SQ-Jhmq8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br4SQ-Jhmq8) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 19, 2017, 02:12:03 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Wildfires, sea level rise, coral bleaching: Climate change is already here By SEAN GREENE | 3:50PM PST - Wednesday, January 18, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783660_GlobalWarming0_zpssa9w94ur.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-587ffff4/turbine/la-sgreene-1484783660-snap-photo) Clockwise from top left: Al Seib/Los Angeles Times; Don Bartletti/Los Angeles Times; Rick Loomis/Los Angeles Times; John McConnico/Associated Press. FROM extreme wildfires in the Western United States to melting ice sheets in Antarctica, the effects of rising temperatures on Earth have not gone unnoticed. On Wednesday, NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://www.latimes.com/topic/weather/scientific-research/national-oceanic-atmospheric-administration-ORGOV0000102-topic.html) announced 2016 was the hottest year on record (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-hottest-year-2016-20170118-story.html). Before that, the record was set in 2015 (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-2015-hottest-year-20160119-story.html). Before that, it was 2014 (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-warmest-year-20150116-story.html). Both agencies linked the record-breaking temperatures to human-caused climate change. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases released by cars, factories and power plants trap more heat in the atmosphere, causing temperatures to climb upward. Although the most severe consequences of this warming have yet to come — especially if greenhouse gas emissions remain at current levels — some of the effects have already been felt. Scientists, public health officials and even the Pentagon are watching with great concern. Here’s a look at some of those effects: Wildfires in the West are twice as bad (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783661_GlobalWarming1_zpsug7sqhlu.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-57f59195/turbine/la-1475711561-snap-photo) A stand of burned ponderosa pines is silhouetted against a smoky sky near Yosemite National Park in August 2013. The trees burned in the Rim fire, which consumed more than 250,000 acres. — Photograph: Don Bartletti/Los Angeles Times. Over the last 30 years, the West has seen a dramatic increase in wildfires. Scientists recently determined (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-climate-change-fire-20161010-snap-story.html) that human-caused warming nearly doubled the area of land that has burned since the 1980s. That amounts to 16,000 additional square miles, or the size of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined. The difference was the amount of plants, trees and dead vegetation that dried out in the warmer, drier conditions that have become more common in recent decades. Without these dry conditions, half as much land would have burned, the study found. The authors said they may have underestimated the role climate change plays in wildfire. Their analysis did not include other effects of warming, such as the spread of tree-killing bark beetles and declining snowfall in the West. As the Arctic ice melts, sea levels rise (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783662_GlobalWarming2_zpsh7lxgpk7.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-56bfc5d5/turbine/la-sci-sn-water-land-gravity-sea-level-2016021-001) More storms falling over land have helped offset the rate of sea level rise caused by melting glaciers and ice sheets. — Photograph: John McConnico/Associated Press. Melting glaciers and diminishing sea ice have increased the amount of water in the oceans, leading sea levels around the world to rise by an average of about 6 inches over the last century. At the same time, higher temperatures have caused seas to expand. By the end of the century, waters could rise by 6 feet or more (http://www.latimes.com/nation/antarctica-contribution-to-sea-rise-20160406-snap-htmlstory.html), threatening 13.1 million residents (http://www.latimes.com/world/global-development/la-na-global-sea-levels-story.html) of U.S. coastal cities with flooding, two studies predict. In another study, scientists determined that the average American produces about 16 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year and is responsible for melting (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-co2-sea-ice-20161103-story.html) about 50 square meters of Arctic sea ice. Higher sea levels mean high tides can more easily swamp low-lying coastal regions, such as South Florida (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-climate-miami-20160918-snap-story.html). This also means storm surges (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hurricane-matthew-climate-change-20161007-snap-htmlstory.html) from hurricanes and tropical storms will hit coastlines harder. Scientists say the surge from Hurricane Matthew, which struck Florida in October, was amplified by climate change. A sea of problems (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783663_GlobalWarming3_zpsujucplt5.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-580133f0/turbine/la-1476474040-snap-photo) A school of fish hovers over staghorn coral on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. — Photograph: Rick Loomis/Los Angeles Times. The oceans absorb heat and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. That buffers (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/06/local/la-me-acidic-oceans-20121007) some of the effects of climate change seen on land, but it shifts them under the sea. A warmer ocean is capable of holding more dissolved carbon dioxide, which causes the water to become more acidic over time. Ocean acidification (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-phytoplankton-acidic-oceans-20160708-snap-story.html), sometimes called the twin of global warming, can interfere with the ability of shellfish and corals to form hard shells. It also makes fish and sea snails behave abnormally (http://baynature.org/article/sea-snails-could-lose-flight-response). Last year saw record coral bleaching events, leading one publication to pen a somewhat hyperbolic obituary (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-great-barrier-reef-not-dead-20161014-snap-story.html) for the Great Barrier Reef. The truth is corals can recover from some bleaching events — if the temperature goes back down. Plants and animals on the move (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783664_GlobalWarming4_zpsn5vejgnx.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-58507b64/turbine/la-sgreene-1481669515-snap-photo) An alpine chipmunk, found only in the high elevations of the central and southern Sierra Nevada, has seen its natural range restricted by climate change. — Photograph: Juan Parra/Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. In response to rising temperatures, thousands of plant and animal species have migrated uphill or toward the poles where it's still cool enough for them. The result: Species leave their ancestral homes, causing local extinctions (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-extinction-20161213-story.html) in those areas. As suitable habitat becomes harder to come by, many species — such as the alpine chipmunk of the Sierra Nevada — will find themselves boxed in to small ranges, increasing the risk of a species-wide global extinction. But as some species flounder in warmer temperatures, others thrive. Global warming has opened up new habitats for mosquitoes, which transmitted the Zika virus (http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-global-zika-qa-03092016-story.html) throughout South America and contributed to the near-collapse of native birds (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-hawaii-native-birds-20160907-snap-story.html) on the Hawaiian islands. Warmer temperatures may be nice for now, but the feeling won't last (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Tribune%20Images/latimes_20170118gw_1484783665_GlobalWarming5_zps2zs3rxuu.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5717ae06/turbine/la-sci-sn-climate-change-weather-america-20160-001) People enjoy the beach on a hot day in Malibu in February 2016. — Photograph: Wally Skalij/Los Angeles Times. In April, a study found that 80% of the U.S. population lives in counties that are experiencing more pleasant weather (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-weather-america-20160420-story.html) than they did 40 years ago. This boils down to warmer winters and milder summers. But by the end of the century, that trend will flip. If greenhouse gas emissions continue unchecked, more people in the U.S. will experience hotter summers and more common heatwaves (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-heatwave-science-20160620-snap-story.html). That has public health officials worried. In Los Angeles, rising temperatures could degrade the quality of our air and water and lead to an increase in cardiovascular disease and asthma (http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhall/la-me-climate-health-20160223-story.html). A 2006 heat wave saw triple-digit temperatures last for more than a week, killing 650 people in California. __________________________________________________________________________ Related story: • Earth sets heat record in 2016 — for the third year in a row (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-hottest-year-2016-20170118-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-global-warming-effects-20170118-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-global-warming-effects-20170118-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 08, 2017, 11:39:55 am (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/20170208_1486513890805sr_zpslzd7xtad.jpg~original) (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/hurricaneforce-atlantic-storm-to-push-north-pole-to-melting-point-in-winter-20170207-gu7uzl.html) (click on the picture to read the news story) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 11, 2017, 08:32:57 pm from The Washington Post.... NASA took on an unprecedented study of Greenland’s melting. Now, the data are coming in. The new information suggests the possibility of a more rapid rate of global sea-level rise. By CHRIS MOONEY | 5:06PM EST - Friday, February 10, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170210gnc_GreenlandNorthwestCoast_zpsopu7a74m.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/02/omg20170209.jpg&w=1484) A research ship is on Greenland's northwest coast during a NASA mission to survey the seafloor. — Photograph: NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory-Caltech. IN 2015, in a moment of science communication genius, NASA created a mission called “OMG” (https://omg.jpl.nasa.gov/portal). The acronym basically ensured that a new scientific mission — measuring how quickly the Oceans are Melting Greenland — would get maximum press attention. The subject is actually extremely serious. OMG amounts to a comprehensive attempt, using ships, planes, and other research tools, to understand what's happening as warm seas creep into large numbers of fjords that serve as avenues into the vast ice sheet — many of which contain large and partly submerged glaciers that are already melting and contributing to sea-level rise. Greenland is, in fact, the largest global contributor to rising seas — adding about a millimeter per year to the global ocean, NASA says — and it has 7.36 potential meters (over 24 feet) to give. The question is how fast it could lose that ice, and over five years, OMG plans to pull in enough data to give the best answer yet. “We've never observed Greenland disappearing before, and that's what OMG is about,” says Josh Willis, a researcher at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who is the principal investigator on the mission. “We want to watch how it shrinks over the next five years, and see how we can use that information to better predict the future.” And now the first data are coming in, in the form of not one (http://www.tos.org/oceanography/assets/docs/29-4_morlighem.pdf) but two (http://www.tos.org/oceanography/assets/docs/29-4_fenty.pdf) new studies published in the journal Oceanography by NASA scientists and affiliated university researchers, seeking to measure the swirl of oceans around Greenland and in particular how a warm, deep layer of Atlantic-originating water is moving and interacting with its glaciers. Basically, it works like this: Waters swirl in a broadly clockwise rotation around the enormous island (see below), often darting inward toward the outlying glaciers along the way. And in fjords that are the deepest, the Atlantic layer, which tends to be over 200 meters (more than 650 feet) deep, has the greatest chance of causing sustained melting. “Where it's deep, there's warm water,” says Willis. Above the Atlantic layer, meanwhile, is a layer of colder polar water that has far less of an effect on glaciers — meaning that the big and thick glaciers often get hit hard at their bases, even as the small and thin ones don't necessarily get hit much at all. Here's a figure that the scientists have produced, showing the overall flow of waters around the ice island: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170210gmoc_GreenlandMapOfCurrents_zpsppkklj4v.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/02/OMG-greenland-map-of-currents.png) The newly published research does not present any answer — yet — to the big question animating all of this: How fast will Greenland melt and raise seas in a way that threatens, say, Florida? In order to answer this key question, the researchers need comprehensive data on the depths and shapes of the fjords, the thickness of the glaciers, and the behavior of the oceans around a Greenland coastline that, NASA notes, is 27,000 miles in length. Then, they will need to feed all of that information into a computer simulation that projects climate change forward to 2100 and calculates the consequences, at a high resolution, for Greenland's icy coasts. “It's too early” to run the model, said Mathieu Morlighem, a researcher at the University of California and the lead author of one of the papers presenting the accumulating data. “I think you need to wait another year or two, maybe more. It was not possible at all before OMG.” Still, the recently published findings mark a start. Morlighem's study (http://www.tos.org/oceanography/assets/docs/29-4_morlighem.pdf), for instance, looked at the depth and shape of the seafloor near the fronts of and beneath numerous Greenland glaciers. The research shows that numerous glaciers extend deeper beneath the surface of the ocean than previously thought. For instance, Store Glacier in northwestern Greenland (at around 70 degrees North latitude in the image above) starts at 400 meters (around 1,300 feet) deep where its front touches the ocean, and then plunges to depths as high as 1,000 meters deep (3,280 feet) farther inland — making it quite vulnerable to the ocean. Prior research, however, had suggested the glacier was much shallower. The same was true of numerous other glaciers, which also appear more vulnerable than previously thought. “OMG is transforming our knowledge of which glaciers are vulnerable to more warming or not,” Morlighem said. “So I wouldn't say we have been surprised; it's more, we had no idea, for many of these fjords, what they were looking like.” Overall, the data are also showing that Greenland's west coast is far more vulnerable, in general, than its east, Morlighem said. The second study, meanwhile, examines ocean circulation around the Greenland coast and finds, strikingly, that between 68 degrees North latitude along the coast and 77 degrees North (see above), the deepest warm layer of Atlantic water cools from 3.5 degrees Celsius down to 2.5 degrees Celsius. Moreover, it does so in part because the water busily melts away at a large and deep glacier called Upernavik at 73 degrees North, which touches the ocean in 675 meter (over 2,000 foot) deep waters. The cold meltwater from the glacier spills into the ocean and, through mixing, cools the warm Atlantic water somewhat. “The glaciers there are actively losing enough ice, and enough fresh water, that it's important for the oceanography, and how the water changes as it goes up the west coast of Greenland,” says Willis. That in itself is proof that Greenland is melting quite a lot. The big picture is that NASA's new data suggest — that's right — new vulnerabilities. “Overall, together I think these papers suggest that the glaciers as a whole are more vulnerable than we thought they were,” Willis said. He says that, of course, with the aforementioned caveat that NASA is not ready yet to feed the data into a model that actually shows how this could play out over the decades of our future. For now, we're still stuck with official estimates from bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The panel said in 2013 (http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_Chapter13_FINAL.pdf) that Greenland's melting might at most contribute 21 centimeters to sea-level rise by 2100, with some possible addition from rapid ice collapse (this is the high-end number for what scientists call the “likely” range in a worst-case global warming scenario, to be precise). But missions like OMG, in the meantime, are giving us plenty to worry about. “These kinds of results suggest that we could be in for more sea level rise than we thought,” Willis said. “And we're not alone; the fact is that almost every time some new results come out of Greenland or Antarctica, we find these glaciers are more vulnerable than we thought.” • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/10/nasa-took-on-an-unprecedented-study-of-greenlands-melting-now-the-data-are-coming-in (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/10/nasa-took-on-an-unprecedented-study-of-greenlands-melting-now-the-data-are-coming-in) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 12, 2017, 12:46:54 pm Meanwhile, in Birdsville, Queensland yesterday.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9bX8ek9H40 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9bX8ek9H40) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 25, 2017, 11:10:25 pm I used to be a believer but after reading and listening to level headed and highly credentialed scientists who've been in
the business a lot longer than the general warmist mob, I'm no longer part of the warming religion. Then you've got the dishonest propaganda stunts like the "97% consensus"! Pfft My take is the" consensus" among those scientists left capable of critical thinking is that CO2 gets logarithmically weaker as a greenhouse gas as you double its concentration (currently it is about half of 1/1000th of the atmosphere). There is propaganda war going on with SJWs/Eco Warriors beleiving their jihad will be good for "the planet" even if they are wrong, and energy economists and seasoned climate scientists stating the warming is not exceptional and going full retard by making cheap baseload energy more expensive will actually weaken civilisation and make it harder for society (especially poor nations) to cope with the normal ravages of climate. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 25, 2017, 11:26:21 pm https://youtu.be/U-9UlF8hkhs
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 25, 2017, 11:32:36 pm https://youtu.be/-sHg3ZztDAw
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 10, 2017, 02:19:21 pm This is a classic example of a “stupid American” in a position of power listening to the unproven, bullshit god delusions inside his head instead of listening to rational peer-reviewed climate science. from The Washington Post.... On climate change, Scott Pruitt causes an uproar — and contradicts the EPA's own website On CNBC's “Squawk Box”, Scott Pruitt said he does not agree that human activity is “a primary contributor to the global warming that we see”. By CHRIS MOONEY and BRADY DENNIS | 3:22PM EST - Thursday, March 09, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170309sp_ScottPruitt_zpsfe8jekir.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/Wires/Online/2017-03-09/AP/Images/Pruitt_Global_Warming_89290.jpg-7a7d9.jpg) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt said on Thursday, March 9th, 2017, he does not believe that carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming, a statement at odds with mainstream scientific consensus. — Photograph: Susan Walsh/Associated Press. SCOTT PRUITT, the nation's top environmental official, strongly rejected the established science of climate change on Thursday, outraging scientists, environmentalists, and even his immediate predecessor at the Environmental Protection Agency. “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it's a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt, the newly installed EPA administrator, said on the CNBC program “Squawk Box”. “But we don't know that yet,” he continued. “We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.” His comments represented a startling statement for an official so high in the U.S. government, putting him at odds not only with other countries around the globe but also with the official scientific findings of the agency he now leads. President Trump in the past has called the notion of human-fueled climate change a hoax. And other cabinet members, including Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, have previously questioned the scientific basis for combating global warming. But Pruitt's attempt to sow scientific doubt where little exists alarmed environmental advocates, scientists and former EPA officials, who fear he plans to use such views to attack Obama-era regulations aimed at reining in pollution from the burning of coal and other fossil fuels. “The world of science is about empirical evidence, not beliefs,” Gina McCarthy, the EPA's most recent administrator, said in a statement. “When it comes to climate change, the evidence is robust and overwhelmingly clear that the cost of inaction is unacceptably high. Preventing the greatest consequences of climate change is imperative to the health and well-being of all of us who call Earth home.” She added, “I cannot imagine what additional information the Administrator might want from scientists for him to understand that.” Pruitt's climate change comments resulted in instant headlines on Thursday. As criticism mounted, White House press secretary Sean Spicer batted back a question about Pruitt's comments from a reporter who cited Pruitt's words and how they contradict the scientific consensus on climate change. “That's a snippet of what Administrator Pruitt said,” said Spicer. “He went on and said I don't think we know conclusively, this is what we know. I would suggest that you touch base with the EPA on that. But he had a very lengthy response and that is just one snippet of what the Administrator said.” But Pruitt, who was visiting the energy industry conference CERAWeek in Houston, also waded into related controversial topics during his CNBC interview. In particular, he questioned whether it was EPA's role to regulate carbon dioxide emissions — something undertaken through the agency's Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration's most significant policy to combat climate change — and challenged the Paris agreement on climate change. “Nowhere in the equation has Congress spoken,” said Pruitt on whether his agency is obligated to regulate carbon dioxide. “The legislative branch has not addressed this issue at all. It's a very fundamental question to say, ‘Are the tools in the toolbox available to the EPA to address this issue of CO², as the court had recognized in 2007, with it being a pollutant?’” (Pruitt was apparently referring to the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts versus EPA (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf), in which the court ruled that “harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized” and that the EPA had been “arbitrary and capricious” in failing to issue a determination on whether greenhouse gases endanger the health and welfare of the public.) The remarks appeared to fundamentally call into question whether the EPA has a role in the regulation of greenhouse gases that drive global warming, including not only carbon dioxide but methane. Last week, Pruitt's agency withdrew an agency request to oil and gas companies to report on their equipment and its methane emissions, which could have laid the groundwork for tighter regulations. Pruitt also dismissed the international Paris climate agreement, which the Obama administration helped to lead and which was joined by nearly 200 countries in late 2015, as a “bad deal” for the United States. “It's one thing to be talking about CO² internationally,” Pruitt said. “But when you front-load your costs, as we endeavored to do in that agreement, and then China and India back-loaded their costs for 2030 and beyond, that's not good for America. That's not an America first type of approach.” On the science of climate change, Pruitt's statements fly in the face of an international scientific consensus (https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf), which has concluded that it is “extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.” For that matter, they also contradict the very website of the agency that Pruitt heads. The EPA's “Climate Change” website (https://www.epa.gov/climate-change-science/causes-climate-change) states the following: Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20th century. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming. For this conclusion, the EPA cites the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the leading global scientific consensus body that assesses the state of the science roughly every five years. Pruitt spoke with CNBC amidst growing anticipation that the Trump administration will soon move to begin a formal rollback of President Obama's Clean Power Plan, an EPA policy capping emissions from electricity generating stations, such as coal-fired power plants. Pruitt himself sued the EPA over the Clean Power Plan in his previous role as the attorney general of Oklahoma. And that's just one of multiple lawsuits that he filed against the EPA — others were over mercury and air pollution, the agency's attempts to regulate pollution of waterways, and methane emissions from oil and gas facilities, to name a few. The EPA chief has made several statements in the past that are similar to the present one, perhaps, but not so strongly worded. For instance, writing for National Review in 2016 (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435470/climate-change-attorneys-general), he stated that “Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind.” In his Senate confirmation hearing, meanwhile, he stated in a tense exchange with Senator Bernie Sanders (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/18/bernie-sanders-to-scott-pruitt-why-is-the-climate-changing) that “the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that in some manner.” Another of Pruitt's predecessors — now in the business community — also commented on the science of climate change in the context of his remarks. “The time for debate on climate change has passed,” Lisa Jackson, President Obama's first EPA administrator and now vice president of Environment, Policy and Social Initiatives at Apple, told The Washington Post. “Certainty is what business needs,” said Jackson. “And relying on science is something that we do every single day. So now if we're going to question science, I think it has an impact on more than just some federal rules, or some law, it has a huge impact on human health, the environment, and our economy.” • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. __________________________________________________________________________ • VIDEO: Does the Trump administration believe in climate change? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/d2b9d6a2-0511-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_video.html) • VIDEO: Spicer downplays EPA chief's carbon dioxide emissions denial (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/60668f52-04fb-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_video.html) • VIDEO: Pruitt talks about the future of the EPA at CPAC (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/9e51ab3c-fb99-11e6-aa1e-5f735ee31334_video.html) • EPA environmental justice leader resigns, amid White House plans to dismantle program (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/epas-environmental-justice-leader-steps-down-amid-white-house-plans-to-dismantle-program) • White House eyes plan to cut EPA staff by one-fifth, eliminating key programs (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/01/white-house-proposes-cutting-epa-staff-by-one-fifth-eliminating-key-programs) • Humans have caused an explosion of never-before-seen minerals all over the Earth (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/01/humans-have-caused-an-explosion-of-never-before-seen-minerals-all-over-the-earth) • Antarctic ice has set an unexpected record, and scientists are struggling to figure out why (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/01/antarctic-ice-has-set-an-unexpected-record-and-scientists-are-struggling-to-figure-out-why) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/on-climate-change-scott-pruitt-contradicts-the-epas-own-website (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/on-climate-change-scott-pruitt-contradicts-the-epas-own-website) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on March 10, 2017, 05:43:49 pm so he's doing a great job then
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 10, 2017, 08:25:10 pm from The Washington Post.... This climate lawsuit could change everything. No wonder the Trump administration doesn't want it going to trial. The children's climate law suit could spawn a whole new universe of climate litigation. Which is why Trump wants to shut it down. By CHELSEA HARVEY | 4:57PM EST - Thursday, March 09, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170309jdb_JusticeDepartmentBuilding_zpsnv9cy4ii.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/10/17/National-Security/Images/AP_Phone_Records_Subpoenas_01ae3-0531.jpg&w=1484) The Justice Department building in Washington D.C. — Photograph: J. David Ake/Associated Press. A GROUNDBREAKING CLIMATE LAWSUIT, brought against the federal government by 21 children, has been hailed by environmentalists as a bold new strategy to press for climate action in the United States. But the Trump administration, which has pledged to undo Barack Obama's climate regulations, is doing its best to make sure the case doesn't get far. The Trump administration this week filed a motion to overturn a ruling by a federal judge back in November that cleared the lawsuit for trial (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/01/trump-could-face-the-biggest-trial-of-the-century-over-climate-change) — and filed a separate motion to delay trial preparation until that appeal is considered. The lawsuit — the first of its kind — argues the federal government has violated the constitutional right of the 21 plaintiffs to a healthy climate system. Environmental groups say the case — if it's successful — could force even a reluctant government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and take other measures to counter warming. “It would be huge,” said Pat Gallagher, legal director at the Sierra Club, who is not involved in the case. “It would upend climate litigation, climate law, as we know it.” The landmark lawsuit was originally filed during the Obama administration. The 21 plaintiffs, now between the ages of 9 and 20, claim the federal government has consistently engaged in activity that promotes fossil fuel production and greenhouse gas emissions, thereby worsening climate change. They argue this violates their constitutional right to life, liberty and property, as well the public trust doctrine, while holds that the government is responsible for the preservation of certain vital resources — in this case, a healthy climate system — for public use. While legal experts are uncertain as to the lawsuit's likelihood of success, few have disputed its pioneering nature. Similar cases have been brought on the state level, but this is the first against the federal government in the United States. And in November, the case cleared a major early hurdle when U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken denied motions filed by the Obama administration, as well as the fossil fuel industry, to have the lawsuit dismissed, ordering that it should proceed to trial. The move allowed the case to join the ranks of climate lawsuits filed in other nations (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/08/how-climate-change-battles-are-increasingly-being-fought-and-won-in-court), which could upend the way environmental advocacy is conducted around the world. Just last year, a court in the Netherlands ordered the Dutch government to cut carbon emissions by a quarter within five years. Similar climate-related suits have been brought and won in Austria, Pakistan and South Africa. Shortly after President Trump's inauguration, the plaintiffs submitted a request that the Department of Justice preserve all documents that could be relevant to the lawsuit, including information on climate change, energy and emissions, and cease any destruction of such documents that may otherwise occur during the presidential transition. The request came just days after reports began to surface of climate information disappearing from White House and certain federal agency websites. “We are concerned with the new administration's immediate maneuver to remove important climate change information from the public domain and, based on recent media reports, we are concerned about how deep the scrubbing effort will go,” Julia Olson (https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/our-team), chief legal counsel for the plaintiffs and executive director of the advocacy group Our Children's Trust (https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org), said in a statement at the time. “Destroying evidence is illegal and we just put these new U.S. Defendants and the Industry Defendants on notice that they are barred from doing so.” The Trump administration is combating this request in its motion to stay litigation (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571d109b04426270152febe0/t/58c08c47b8a79bc99bee0728/1489013831549/Doc+121+Fed+Motion+to+Stay+Litigation.pdf), along with its motion to appeal. The administration charges that the United States could be “irreparably harmed” if the case's proceedings are not halted pending consideration of its appeal, claiming that “the extraordinary scope of this litigation and the concomitant scope of discovery that Plaintiffs appear to be seeking set this case apart.” “One of the things that the government argues is that the preservation of documents itself represents a burden on the government,” said Michael Burger (http://www.law.columbia.edu/faculty/michael-burger), executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. “What they're arguing is that they'll be irreparably injured by having to go through discovery here.” This, he added, “sends kind of the wrong signal, or at least a very dangerous signal, in terms of what the government's priorities are or what it’s thinking of doing. It shouldn't be any kind of burden for the government to preserve documents that are already in existence.” But given the broad implications of the case for U.S. climate action, especially if the plaintiffs prevail, “it's not surprising that the Trump administration would want to quash it,” said Gallagher, the Sierra Club legal director. If the case were successful, the federal government would be obligated to take meaningful action against climate change, probably through a planned reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This type of order would run counter to the current administration's priorities. On Thursday, Scott Pruitt, the EPA chief, rejected the underlying science of climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/on-climate-change-scott-pruitt-contradicts-the-epas-own-website), and the administration has indicated its intent to cancel a number of Obama-era climate and environmental regulations, including the Clean Power Plan, and withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. Whether either of the federal government's most recent motions will hold up remains to be decided. According to Burger, this largely depends on Aiken, the federal judge who ordered that the case proceed to trial, who essentially must sign off in order for the appeal to take place. “In order to do that, the judge needs to basically agree that there are issues of law that could be determinative that the case would be better served if the Ninth Circuit [Court of Appeals] heard it now,” Burger said. Appeals most typically occur after a final opinion on a case has been reached through trial, he noted, pointing out that although it's “common enough for parties to seek interlocutory appeal, it's the exception rather than the rule that it be granted.” A stay of the proceedings, pending appeal, is also subject to Aiken's decision. This means there are multiple combinations of outcomes that could occur for the case's proceedings. “It's conceivable that Judge Aiken could certify her order on the motion to dismiss for interlocutory appeal and not grant a stay on the proceedings,” Burger noted. In this situation, the case would be heard in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which would essentially decide whether it should proceed on the basis of the claims the plaintiffs have already set forth, while at the same time continuing through discovery at the district court level, he said. Regardless of the final outcome, legal experts have highlighted the lawsuit's importance as a novel approach to the climate issue in the United States. “It could spawn a whole new universe of litigation at both the state and the federal levels,” Gallagher said. • Chelsea Harvey is a freelance journalist covering science for The Washington Post. She specializes in environmental health and policy. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/this-climate-lawsuit-could-change-everything-no-wonder-the-trump-administration-doesnt-want-it-going-to-trial (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/09/this-climate-lawsuit-could-change-everything-no-wonder-the-trump-administration-doesnt-want-it-going-to-trial) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on March 11, 2017, 02:47:05 pm from The Washington Post.... EDITORIAL: Scott Pruitt demonstrates what climate denial sounds like The EPA chief flouts the responsibilities of his job. By EDITORIAL BOARD | 7:12PM EST - Thursday, March 09, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170309epaasp_EPAAdministratorScottPruitt_zpsztm46bi2.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/03/09/Editorial-Opinion/Images/AFP_MI9LA-2113.jpg) Scott Pruitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, on Capitol Hill. — Photograph: Zach Gibson/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. “I DON'T want to be called a denier,” CNBC anchor Joe Kernen said (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html) to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on Thursday morning. “I know you don't want to be called that, either.” But what else can one call Mr. Pruitt, after he said this to Mr. Kernan: “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it's a primary contributor to the global warming that we see. But we don't know that yet…. We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.” That is not “skepticism”, a term that implies reasonable doubt in the face of inadequate information. That is denial of a scientific consensus built on ample evidence that gets stronger every year, and it is denial of Mr. Pruitt's essential responsibilities as the nation's chief environmental watchdog. If Mr. Pruitt had merely said that it is hard to establish humanity's effects on the climate with precision, no one could accuse him of being wrong. Scientists cannot say exactly how much warming will occur after a given amount of carbon dioxide is pumped into the atmosphere — and probably will not be able to until after the warming has occurred. But that is not evidence of no or small effect. Scientists have calculated a range of possible values for the planet's “sensitivity” to carbon dioxide released by human activity — and it is not a comfortable one. The numbers suggest that, even if experts are far too pessimistic in their estimates, the risks of continuing to rapidly change the atmosphere's chemistry are worryingly high and demand that every country on Earth act before doing so becomes much more expensive or impossible. Yet Mr. Pruitt did not stick to mere misdirection about climate sensitivity. He argued, wrongly, that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that carbon dioxide is even “a primary contributor” to the climate change scientists have already measured — even though they have painstakingly ruled out alternative culprits. In fact, the notion that greenhouse-gas emissions play a leading role in global warming is not questionable. There is still plenty of room for more research about the future manner and severity of the impact but not for denial that there is a significant impact that humans should attempt to limit. Accepting the expert consensus is a matter of reason versus unreason. On the side of reason are scientists armed with decades of data and the insights of basic physics, which counsel that adding heat-trapping gases to the atmosphere will trap more heat. Human fingerprints are increasingly visible in the data. Here, per CNBC's own account (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html) of the Pruitt interview, is the joint conclusion of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: “The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.” It is little wonder the Trump administration is reportedly preparing to sharply cut NOAA's budget (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/03/white-house-proposes-steep-budget-cut-to-leading-climate-science-agency). Ignoring data may seem easier if you collect less of it. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic: • Letters to the Editor: What cuts to NOAA mean (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/cuts-to-noaa-endanger-us-troops/2017/03/06/79ce5598-01d0-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_story.html) • Letters to the Editor: Pruitt will enable irreversible pollution of our atmosphere (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pruitt-will-enable-irreversible-pollution-of-our-atmosphere/2017/02/28/cb6ca536-fd15-11e6-9b78-824ccab94435_story.html) • The Washington Post's View: Pruitt and Perry continue to play down climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pruitt-and-perry-continue-to-play-down-climate-change/2017/01/21/c891c61c-de97-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html) • Christine Todd Whitman: I was EPA administrator. Advice for the next one: Don't walk back environmental progress. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-was-epa-administrator-advice-for-the-next-one-dont-walk-back-environmental-progress/2016/12/12/da72ba08-be44-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html) • The Washington Post's View: A man who rejects settled science on climate change should not lead the EPA (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-man-who-rejects-settled-science-on-climate-change-should-not-lead-the-epa/2016/12/09/fdf7b422-bd83-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/scott-pruitt-demonstrates-what-climate-denial-sounds-like/2017/03/09/66dc1508-04f8-11e7-b9fa-ed727b644a0b_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/scott-pruitt-demonstrates-what-climate-denial-sounds-like/2017/03/09/66dc1508-04f8-11e7-b9fa-ed727b644a0b_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 26, 2017, 05:31:11 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Encore cartoon: NASA climate science set adrift By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/David%20Horsey/latimes_20170524dh_1495155845_zpsw4xmkbc3.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-591e448b/turbine/la-1495155845-u0fjhksgt1-snap-image) I'M ON a brief vacation in America's wide-open spaces, so I offer this updated version of a drawing done a few years ago when NASA's space shuttle program ended. At the time, the American space agency had no way to get to the International Space Station without hitching a ride with the Russians. Now, NASA's work could be made more difficult by a very different problem: The Trump administration's proposed NASA budget eliminates money for gathering data about climate change, apparently because the president would rather not learn any inconvenient facts that get in the way of boosting the fossil fuels industry. My lonely cartoon astronaut looks even more lonely today. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-nasa-science-20170518-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-nasa-science-20170518-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 26, 2017, 05:31:40 pm Can you get your head around this? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/03_Huh.gif) (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/shocked.gif) from The Washington Post.... So much water pulsed through a melting glacier that it warped the Earth's crust In melting Greenland, scientists detect a pulse of water and ice the size of 18,000 Empire State Buildings. By CHRIS MOONEY | 12:02PM EDT - Thursday, May 25, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170525rg_RinkGlacier_zpshzp1ca8k.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/05/NASAJohnSonntag-002.jpg&w=1484) Rink Glacier on Greenland's west coast. — Photograph: John Sonntag/NASA. NASA SCIENTISTS detected a pulse of melting ice and water traveling through a major glacier in Greenland that was so big that it warped the solid Earth — a surge equivalent in mass to 18,000 Empire State Buildings. The pulse — which occurred during the 2012 record melt year — traveled nearly 15 miles through the Rink Glacier in western Greenland over four months before reaching the sea, the researchers said. “It's a gigantic mass,” said Eric Larour, one of the study's authors and a researcher at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “It is able to bend the bedrock around it.” Such a “wave” has never before been detected in a Greenland or Antarctic glacier. The total amount of mass carried in the wave — in the form of either water, ice or some combination of both — was 1.67 billion tons per month, or 6.68 billion tons over four months, according to the study, which was published in Geophysical Research Letters (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2017GL073478/full). The study was led by the lab's Surendra Adhikari and co-authored by Erik Ivins. “These solitary waves, they're fairly well known in rivers,” said Ivins, also a researcher at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “Rivers can have inundations upstream where a lot of water is collected, and the water gets bunched up as it's going downstream and doesn't ever really flatten out. It just remains as this wave and continues down a river.” However, the scientists don't know what the wave actually looked like or precisely what caused it — much of it was occurring below the surface of the glacier. They also don't know precisely what it was made of. “We are losing a combination of water and ice. We don't know what fraction,” said Adhikari. The researchers were able to detect the wave only because a GPS sensor, located in a rocky inland area a little over 12 miles, moved 15 millimeters as the wave went by, pushing down on the Earth's crust and causing a deep indentation. “The GPS can sense that,” Larour explained. Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Penn State University who was not involved in the study, explained it this way: “Find a bed,” Alley said by email. “Put a little piece of tape on the sheet. Put your fist right next to the tape and push down, while watching the tape. The tape will move down as you push down, and also will move horizontally toward your fist just a little. Put your fist farther away, and the tape won't move as much. Push harder, and it will move more. While pushing down, slide your fist past the tape, and you'll see a pattern of vertical and horizontal motions of the tape.” “A bed isn't exactly the elastic Earth, but that's sort of what this team did,” Alley continued. “They saw a ‘fist’ of mass sliding down the glacier past their GPS station, caused by extra meltwater.” Adhikari provided this animation showing the direction of the GPS device's movement (and therefore that of the bedrock or solid Earth) as the bulk of mass went by: (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170525sw_SolitaryWave_gif_zps1iia64ol.gif~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/05/Adhikari_SolitaryWave_II.gif) An animation showing horizontal bedrock motion in response to a nearby glacier mass change in the form of a wave. Ice mass change is portrayed by ice thinning/thickening (delta H), the centroid or fulcrum of mass anomaly is denoted by the star, and the direction of bedrock motion is represented by the arrow as measured at a GPS station (circle). As the glacier gains (loses) mass, the bedrock moves toward (away from) it. — Graphic: Caltech/NASA-Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The wave occurred in the wake of a 2012 summer melting event that saw most of the surface of Greenland become covered with liquid water, and that still has not been surpassed by subsequent warm years. The researchers suspect that some of that meltwater flooded beneath the ice sheet and then pulsed outward through Rink Glacier. “It's really related to the deep interior of Greenland that's full of melt, and it’s trying to get rid of that melt through gravitational processes,” said Ivins. The study also documented another, smaller “wave” at Rink Glacier in 2010, another major melt year. Rink is far from the largest glacier in Greenland. It is about 3.4 miles wide at its front where it touches the ocean and a little over half a mile deep in the same location. Researchers have also shown that pulses of meltwater flow out from beneath the glacier in colorful silt-filled plumes (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/30/another-typical-day-for-greenland-scientists-find-more-reasons-it-will-melt-faster), presumably through subterranean channels, which could be how some of this mass exited to the ocean in 2012. The scale of the pulse, 6.68 billion tons, or gigatons, is still only a fraction of what Greenland contributes to the ocean every year in the form of water and ice. NASA has estimated that Greenland loses 287 billion tons annually at present (though it lost far more than that in the banner melt year of 2012). Still, the research gives a sense of the tremendous magnitude of the changes occurring on Greenland, which is covered by enough ice to raise sea levels by over 20 feet if it were all to slide into the ocean. And it pairs with other studies showing that the breaking off of large pieces from Greenland glaciers causes major earthquakes (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/06/25/giant-earthquakes-are-shaking-greenland-and-scientists-just-figured-out-the-disturbing-reason-why) and that enormous lakes atop the Greenland ice sheet can vanish within hours (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/06/03/scientists-finally-have-an-explanation-for-why-huge-lakes-atop-greenland-are-vanishing) into its depths. The study also raises questions about whether more huge ice and water pulses will be seen as the Arctic continues to warm and Greenland to melt — and thus whether this is how a melting ice sheet exports its mass to the ocean. But mostly, it's just staggering to contemplate. If the analogy of 18,000 Empire State Buildings isn’t striking enough, the researchers offered another: The mass loss through Rink Glacier from the wave, they say, was equivalent to “150 million fully loaded 18-wheelers.” • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/05/25/so-much-water-pulsed-through-a-melting-glacier-that-it-warped-the-earths-crust (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/05/25/so-much-water-pulsed-through-a-melting-glacier-that-it-warped-the-earths-crust) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on June 05, 2017, 05:58:10 pm Yes, and some people are stupid enough to believe the hoax
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 11:06:53 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Climate change, our biggest threat, can't be stopped at the border By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/David%20Horsey/latimes_20170628dh_1498634334_zpst27vvlqx.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59535864/turbine/la-1498634334-65pui36knf-snap-image) AT Squaw Valley near Lake Tahoe last weekend, skiers were half naked. Guys were going shirtless. Girls were in bikini tops. Everybody was in shorts. Ski season in California has not ended and may not completely stop before the snow starts falling again in late autumn. Skiing with skin bared is not unprecedented. Years ago at Heavenly Valley, I got the worst sunburn of my life when I shed my shirt for a day on the slopes. But that was a day in March, not a day at the end of June. For the last several years, the snowpack in the Sierras was far below normal, severely stressing the water supply of a state locked in a five-year drought. But that drought ended abruptly this year as the precipitation poured down. The mountain snow got so deep that some ski areas experienced temporary shutdowns when chairlifts could not clear the top of the accumulated snow. Yet, even as the snowpack sticks around, warm temperatures have kicked in — really warm temperatures. On Sunday it was 111 degrees in some parts of the Los Angeles basin. That was not entirely remarkable because temperatures above 100 were registered all along the Pacific coast, from Washington and Oregon through California and Nevada and into Arizona. Anyone heading to Las Vegas this week will be scorched by 106-degree days. Is this just weather, the endless series of transient atmospheric phenomena that give us something to talk about when we strike up a conversation with a new neighbor? Or are droughts and huge snowpacks and really high temperatures signs of climate change? That is not easy to sort out. A lot of us confuse weather and climate, like Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe who brought a snowball to the floor of the Senate in February 2015 as a prop to somehow demonstrate that climate change is a hoax. He seemed to think a major snowstorm in Washington in February was proof the planet is not warming. That one snowstorm did not prove anything. Weather happens. Rain and snow come and go. Hot days come in the summer. Cold days come in winter. Always has been, always will be. Climate, though, is something else. Climate is a sustained pattern, something that can be reckoned to stay within certain norms over many years — until it doesn't. When the patterns shift in significant ways, that is climate change. Most of the world's scientists say that is happening now. Weather worldwide is getting more extreme, glaciers are melting, the polar ice caps are receding, growing seasons are shifting, sea levels are rising and annual temperatures are consistently hitting higher records. In some places, those record temperatures are causing real alarm. One month ago, the citizens of Turbat, Pakistan, suffered through a day that hit 128 degrees. That is very close to the scientifically-confirmed, highest global temperature ever recorded (in Death Valley, of course). Pakistani officials are certain their country is enduring the new extremes of global warming. In the United States, the current leadership is not so convinced. Even though the Department of Defense lists global chaos caused by climate change as a daunting security challenge in the years to come, our president (who pays little attention to what experts in his government have to say) seems not to give a hoot. His big idea for protecting national security is a travel ban on Muslims that does little to enhance procedures that already exist for catching terrorists who may try to slip into the country. His big idea on climate change is to abandon the Paris accords that set greenhouse gas reduction goals for nearly every country on the planet. Statistically, the odds that any American will die in a terrorist attack is one in millions. The chance that any American will be affected by climate change, however, is already 100%. But terrorists are more viscerally scary, in a swarthy-skinned movie-villain sort of way. For politicians, it is easy to drum up fears about fanatic creeps who behead innocent people and scream religious slogans before they blow themselves up in public squares. It is much tougher to raise alarm about climate change, an existential threat that is still hard to fully comprehend. And it does not help that the best remedies for the problem are opposed by the fossil fuels industry that funds the campaigns of the politicians who choose to believe there is no climate problem at all. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-bikini-ski-20170628-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-bikini-ski-20170628-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 11:07:10 am from The Washington Post.... EPA chief pushing governmentwide effort to question climate change science Critics call the red-team versus blue-team idea “childish” and “incredibly insulting”. By BRADY DENNIS and JULIET EILPERIN | 4:49PM EDT - Saturday, July 01, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170701sp_ScottPruitt_zpsefph8fzo.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-02-28/AP/EPA_Pruitt_Emails_12722-1364c.jpg&w=1484) Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is a driving force behind an effort to re-evaluate climate science in numerous federal agencies. — Photograph: Associated Press/Susan Walsh. THE Trump administration is debating whether to launch a governmentwide effort to question the science of climate change, an effort that critics say is an attempt to undermine the long-established consensus human activity is fueling the Earth's rising temperatures. The move, driven by Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, has sparked a debate among top Trump administration officials over whether to pursue such a strategy. A senior White House official, who asked for anonymity because no final decision has been made, said that while Pruitt has expressed interest in the idea, “there are no formal plans within the administration to do anything about it at this time.” Pruitt first publicly raised the idea of setting up a “red team versus blue team” effort to conduct exercises to test the idea that human activity is the main driver of recent climate change in an interview with Breitbart (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/07/epas-scott-pruitt-wants-to-set-up-opposing-teams-to-debate-climate-change-science) in early June. “What the American people deserve, I think, is a true, legitimate, peer-reviewed, objective, transparent discussion about CO²,” Pruitt said in an interview with Breitbart's Joel Pollack. But officials are discussing whether the initiative would stretch across numerous federal agencies that rely on such science, according to multiple Trump administration officials, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement has been made. Energy Secretary Rick Perry, who once described the science behind human-caused climate change as a “contrived phony mess,” also is involved in the effort, two officials said. At a White House briefing this week, Perry said, “The people who say the science is settled, it's done — if you don't believe that you're a skeptic, a Luddite. I don't buy that. I don't think there is — I mean, this is America. Have a conversation. Let's come out of the shadows of hiding behind your political statements and let's talk about it. What's wrong with that? And I'm full well — I can be convinced, but let's talk about it.” The idea, according to one senior administration official, is “to get other federal agencies involved in this exercise on the state of climate science” to examine “what we know, where there are holes, and what we actually don't know.” Other agencies could include the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy and NASA, according to the official, all of which conduct climate research in some capacity. EPA officials on Friday declined to comment, and DOE could not immediately be reached for comment. A plethora of scientific assessments over the years have concluded that human activity — such as the burning of fossil fuels — is driving climate change, and it poses grave risks to the environment and to human health. In its most recent report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that it is “extremely likely” (https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WGIAR5_SPM_brochure_en.pdf) that, since the 1950s, humans and their greenhouse gas emissions have been the “dominant cause” of the planet's warming trend. But that conclusion, shared by the vast majority of experts in the United States and around the world, has done little to stop Pruitt, Perry and other administration officials from raising doubts. The idea of a “red-team blue-team” exercise stems in part from a Wall Street Journal commentary (https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-red-team-exercise-would-strengthen-climate-science-1492728579) by New York University professor Steven Koonin. E&E News on Friday reported that Pruitt intended to formalize the “red team, blue team” effort to challenge mainstream climate science. But should Perry and other agency leaders join the effort, the move would embed the Trump administration's approach to climate science across the government in a very public way. Kelly Levin, a senior associate with the World Resources Institute's major emerging economies objective, wrote in a blog post last month (https://www.wri.org/blog/2017/06/pruitts-red-team-blue-team-exercise-bad-fit-epa-climate-science) that the kind of adversarial process Pruitt is advocating is better suited for policy debates than for scientific findings. Scientific arguments, she wrote, are mediated through a peer-review process in which experts in the same field evaluate one another's work. “Scientific understanding, unlike proposals for what to do about a given problem, is well established through the scientific method,” wrote Levin, noting that 97 percent of peer-reviewed papers on climate change support the idea that humans play a contributing factor. “If skeptics want their voices heard in scientific discourse, they should try to get their findings published in the peer-reviewed literature. They would then be assessed on their merits through peer review.” Some members of EPA's scientific rank-and-file, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, questioned Pruitt's plan. “It's an obvious attempt to cast doubt on climate science under the guise of a common sense-sounding process,” said one EPA employee who focuses on climate issues. “But of course, we already have a process for scrutiny of the science — the peer review process is a much more robust assessment of scientific integrity than a childish color war.” The employee called the effort “incredibly insulting” and said the red team versus blue team idea “is a weaker process than we already have in place for peer review and scientific assessment.” The efforts to question the existing science on climate change has raised questions within the government and among industry officials about whether Pruitt intends to try to roll back the EPA's 2009 “endangerment finding,” which determined that greenhouse gases posed a risk to public health and created the basis for Obama-era regulations on emissions from power plants, automobiles and other sources. Two people with knowledge of the “red-team blue-team” undertaking — one inside the Trump administration and one lobbyist — said its purpose was not explicitly to help target the agency's 2009 finding that emissions of greenhouse gases linked to climate change constitute as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, though that idea is still under discussion among administration officials. President Trump questioned the link between human activity multiple times during the 2016 campaign, though he has not addressed the issue directly since his inauguration. In his most recent remarks, in an interview with “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace in December, Trump said that “nobody really knows” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/11/trump-says-nobody-really-knows-if-climate-change-is-real) if climate change is real. After the president announced a month ago that the U.S. would be withdrawing from the 2015 Paris climate agreement, multiple reporters have asked White House officials to clarify the president's views on climate science. But they have declined to do so. Pruitt's EPA also took down an agency website in late April (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/epa-website-removes-climate-science-site-from-public-view-after-two-decades) that was focused on climate change and highlighted the scientific consensus that it is caused by humans. • Steven Mufson contributed to this report. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. • Juliet Eilperin is The Washington Post's senior national affairs correspondent, covering how the new administration is transforming a range of U.S. policies and the federal government itself. She is the author of two books—one on sharks, and another on Congress, not to be confused with each other—and has worked for The Post since 1998. __________________________________________________________________________ Related story: • How Scott Pruitt moved to the center of power in the Trump administration (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/scott-pruitt-outspoken-and-forceful-moves-to-the-center-of-power-within-the-trump-administration/2017/06/02/a1b4d298-46fa-11e7-a196-a1bb629f64cb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/01/epa-chief-pushing-governmentwide-effort-to-question-climate-change-science (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/01/epa-chief-pushing-governmentwide-effort-to-question-climate-change-science) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 11:07:31 am from the Los Angeles Times.... EPA's Scott Pruitt is Trump's most adept and dangerous hatchet man By DAVID HORSEY | 9:10PM PDT - Sunday, July 02, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/David%20Horsey/latimes_20170702dh_1499054364_zpsmtkhnth4.jpg~original) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5959c120/turbine/la-1499054364-zwv9xh4n63-snap-image) DONALD TRUMP is a crude buffoon who spends his days picking Twitter fights with people he sees on TV. He displays no skill, sophistication or capacity for subtle nuance in foreign or domestic policy. But Trump's personal ineffectualness has not kept his administration from rapidly reversing the direction of the federal government in key areas, thanks to a few deft players who are implementing an aggressive ideological agenda. Perhaps the most disturbingly effective person on the Trump team is Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt. In the few months since Trump's inauguration, Pruitt, has transformed the EPA into a supine lap dog for the oil, gas and coal industries and is well on his way to erasing years of environmental policy built on scientific research. As Oklahoma attorney general, Pruitt sued the EPA to block regulations that business interests found annoying. Industry lobbyists frequently provided him with draft letters that Pruitt signed and sent off to federal regulators as if they were his own words. And his coziness with the people the EPA is supposed to regulate has not changed since he took over as the nation's chief environmental officer. A Freedom of Information Act request filed by The New York Times revealed that the calendar of the EPA boss lists one meeting after another with executives and lobbyists from agribusiness, the chemical industry and, of course, oil companies. He regularly attends dinners and conferences hosted by industry organizations, such as the American Petroleum Institute and the American Farm Bureau Federation. Just days before the EPA reversed a ban on a dangerous pesticide that is known to have ill effects on children, Pruitt huddled with the chief executive of Dow Chemical, the manufacturer of the pesticide. It is not difficult to imagine what they talked about. Ignoring scientists and specialists within his own agency, Pruitt seeks counsel outside the EPA from lobbyists, lawyers and longtime allies who share his pro-industry attitude. The result has been dramatic. Pruitt has loosened, delayed or sought to repeal a wide range of environmental rules covering concerns that include spills and explosions at chemical plants, methane leaks from oil and gas drilling sites and pollution of waterways. Pruitt has become Trump's lead man in attacking climate science and dismantling American compliance with the Paris accord on climate change. A specific target is President Obama's Clean Power Plan that sought to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. According to a new report in The Washington Post, Pruitt may soon be instituting a competitive debate within the EPA about whether human activity contributes to climate change, a debate that could be expanded to other agencies, such as the Department of Energy and NASA. While this may seem like a reasonable idea — what does it hurt to talk things over? — the reality is that it is a stalling tactic. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that the pace of climate change is being increased by human exploitation of fossil fuels. An open-ended internal debate pitting real scientists against shills for industry has only one purpose: prevent government agencies from doing anything about the biggest environmental danger threatening our country and the world. Pruitt is cleverly undermining the role of science in his agency in other little noticed ways. In May and June, he dismissed 47 members of the EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors, a group of respected scientific experts who advise the agency. Now, only 11 members are left, and all meetings for the summer and fall have been canceled. If the board is reconstituted, the expectation is that it will be stacked with industry-friendly replacements. Pruitt has said that he wants to shift the EPA's focus to “tangible pollution”. One would assume, then, that a successful, ongoing project like the cleanup of Chesapeake Bay would have his support. Instead, funding for the EPA's Chesapeake program that is protecting one of America's most abundant fisheries is being zeroed out in the Trump administration's budget plan. Similar projects around the country are also facing drastic budget reductions. At this rate, there will be plenty of tangible pollution for the EPA to deal with in the years to come. If friends of the environment think the way to stop this assault on the nation's land, water and air is to somehow drive Trump from office, they may want to think again. Pruitt is not Trump's man; he is his party's man. As long as so many Republicans continue to betray the legacy of that great Republican president, Theodore Roosevelt, and even the legacy of the lesser Republican president who created the EPA, Richard Nixon, nothing will be different. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hatchet-pruitt-20170702-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hatchet-pruitt-20170702-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 11:08:36 am Yep, those SEPOs (Septic Tank Yanks, full-of-shit) are clowns & buffoons alright. The world's laughing stock!! (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/grin.gif) (https://cdn.smfboards.com/Smileys/smf/2funny.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on July 04, 2017, 12:33:07 pm Sorry, don't have the time to read any of your your lefty posts , but feel free to summarise them for me.....
And yes...I agree...Trump is doing a great job of repairing all the mistakes made by Obumar😛 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 01:28:01 pm Sorry, don't have the time to read any of your your lefty posts , but feel free to summarise them for me..... And yes...I agree...Trump is doing a great job of repairing all the mistakes made by Obumar😛 Mate....I'd have more chance of getting dog-shit to understand a summary than getting it into your fucked-up brain, which is considerably dumber than dog-shit!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2017, 01:28:13 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on July 04, 2017, 01:41:35 pm Wish it would warm faster.....I'm freezing⛄️
...and I want to grow mango's up here in the sub tropics😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 06, 2017, 11:19:47 pm from The Washington Post.... A trillion-ton iceberg the size of Delaware is about to break off Antarctica Scientists say the iceberg will be among the largest ever seen. By CHRIS MOONEY | 2:51PM EDT - Wednesday, July 05, 2017 (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170705lcic_LarsenC_IceCrack_zpsbyyqm1uq.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/05/image011.jpg&w=1484) An aerial view of the Larsen C ice rift. — Photograph: John Sonntag/NASA. AN ENORMOUS ICEBERG, more than 2,000 square miles in area — or nearly the size of Delaware — is poised to detach from one of the largest floating ice shelves in Antarctica and float off in the Weddell Sea, south of the tip of South America. Scientists have been expecting the break from the Larsen C ice shelf, monitoring the progress of a crack that extended to over 100 miles long in recent months. The latest update from scientists with NASA and the University of California found that only three remaining miles of ice continue to connect the impending iceberg to the larger shelf. Those parts of the iceberg that have already detached have begun to move rapidly seaward, widening the rift in recent days and leaving the remaining ice “strained near to breaking point,” according to Adrian Luckman, a scientist monitoring Larsen C at Swansea University in Wales. The expected calving event — on its own — will not affect global sea level, because the ice that has detached was already afloat in the ocean. But some scientists fear that it could hasten the destabilization of the larger Larsen C ice shelf. The iceberg itself will be enormous — one of the most massive ever seen from Antarctica. It will be over 600 feet thick and contain roughly 1 trillion tons of ice, according to an analysis by the European Space Agency and Noel Gourmelen (http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/CryoSat/Giant_iceberg_in_the_making), a scientist at the University of Edinburgh. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20170705lcis_LarsenC_IceShelf_zps15gd0z6e.jpg~original) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/07/2300-LARSEN-v2.jpg) Scientists are divided about the impact of climate change on this particular break in Antarctica's ice shelf. Some have contended there's little proof (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/23/melting-and-cracking-is-antarctica-falling-apart-climate-change) that the break, which will reduce the size of the Larsen C more than scientists have observed previously, reflects the advance of climate change. Ice shelves do, after all, break off sometimes. “We do not need to press the panic button for Larsen C. Large calving events such as this are normal processes of a healthy ice sheet, ones that have occurred for decades, centuries, millennia — on cycles that are much longer than a human or satellite lifetime,” Helen Amanda Fricker, an Antarctic scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, wrote recently. But others disagree. “Of course this is due to climate warming in the peninsula,” Eric Rignot, a NASA and University of California, Irvine expert on Antarctica, said in an email. Antarctica has seen an increase in breaks in its ice shelves in recent years. The Larsen A ice shelf, far closer to the northern tip of the Antarctic peninsula — and therefore, warmer latitudes — collapsed in 1995. In 2002, the same thing happened with Larsen B, its southern cousin, situated slightly closer to the South Pole. Now, Larsen C, still farther toward the South Pole and subject to somewhat cooler temperatures, has seen a major break. But there are big gaps in scientists' knowledge about what might have disturbed the Larsen C ice shelf. Recent studies have suggested that the ice of Larsen C has begun to flow more quickly to the sea (https://www.ess.uci.edu/researchgrp/erignot/files/2011gl046775.pdf) through the shelf in recent years. The ice shelf has also been thinning, and its surface has been getting lower in the water (http://www.the-cryosphere.net/9/1005/2015/tc-9-1005-2015.pdf), suggesting that it might be melting from below. But Fricker presented data to suggest that the ice shelf has since begun to thicken again. “Yes, I agree Larsen C is ‘next in line’ southward after Larsen A and B,” Fricker said by email. “However, there is actually no research showing that Larsen C is getting thinner and flowing faster. In fact, in recent years, it is the opposite.” There is a similar debate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/10/antarctica-is-set-to-lose-an-enormous-piece-of-ice-the-question-is-what-happens-next) over whether this individual break will destabilize the ice shelf and lead to further disintegration. According to Rignot, Larsen C holds back around 1 centimeter of global sea level rise in the form of glaciers feeding into the remaining ice shelf. If the ice shelf were to continue to disintegrate, this ice might flow more rapidly into the sea. An even larger fear is the southward and poleward progression of ice shelf collapse, Rignot said, pointing out that farther south there are ice shelves that, by stabilizing glaciers, are currently preventing vastly more sea-level rise than Larsen C does. Larsen C is among Antarctica's largest ice shelves but pales in comparison to the Ross Ice Shelf and Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf. Earlier this month, scientists reported a major melt event (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/15/scientists-just-documented-a-massive-melt-event-on-the-surface-of-antarctica) that occurred several years ago atop the surface of the Ross Ice Shelf accompanied by at least some rainfall, which also gave them concern. Scientists will be watching the break closely and trying to glean lessons about what to expect from other potentially vulnerable ice shelves in Antarctica. “While it might not be caused by global warming, it's at least a natural laboratory to study how breakups will occur at other ice shelves to improve the theoretical basis for our projections of future sea-level rise,” said NASA's Tom Wagner, who directs the agency's polar programs. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/05/an-iceberg-the-size-of-delaware-is-about-to-break-off-of-antarctica (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/05/an-iceberg-the-size-of-delaware-is-about-to-break-off-of-antarctica) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on July 07, 2017, 12:50:16 am ........"Scientists are divided about the impact of climate change on this particular break in Antarctica's ice shelf.
Some have contended there's little proof that the break, which will reduce the size of the Larsen C more than scientists have observed previously, reflects the advance of climate change. Ice shelves do, after all, break off sometimes. "We do not need to press the panic button for Larsen C. Large calving events such as this are normal processes of a healthy ice sheet, ones that have occurred for decades, centuries, millennia — on cycles that are much longer than a human or satellite lifetime,” Helen Amanda Fricker, an Antarctic scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, wrote recently.".... ..... ...So really you are just doing the same as CNN....It is not proven to have anything to do with climate change yet you put it in the climate change thread....you are in the business of creating FAKE NEWS😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on July 09, 2017, 01:35:29 pm South Island enjoying that global warming feeling
The South Island is shivering at the moment, even as the world is roasting under ever increasing global warming. Police are telling southern drivers “don’t go out” after reports of black ice and car crashes after parts of the South Island plunged to minus 10 degrees Celsius overnight. Heavy fog shrouded Auckland on Saturday morning and domestic flights were cancelled ahead of the series decider between the All Blacks and the British and Irish Lions. Fog restrictions at the airport have been lifted. Police in the south have warned drivers “not to go out on the roads” due to widespread black ice. Police said there were reports of “numerous crashes” in the lower South Island, in Central Otago, Southland, and Te Anau. “Drivers are urged not to go out on the roads at the moment in parts of the Southern district. “You often won’t realise you are heading towards black-ice before you hit it, making it potentially lethal to drive on the roads at the moment.” Treacherous black ice was reported on State Highway 6, SH8, SH94 and SH97. “It’s not even wise to go out walking or cycling as the footpaths will be affected too. It’s been raining again overnight, so it’s more than dangerous than usual if you are trying to drive in these conditions. “If you don’t have to go out anywhere today please stay in until it’s safe to head out and check weather forecasts before making tracks,” police said. Ain’t global warming grand? How grand? Temperatures plunged overnight, with the coldest spot at Mt Cook airport, where the overnight low was -11.3C. In Central Otago, the low was -6.3 in Alexandra while Wanaka and Queenstown got down to -3C. Mt Cook’s temperature did not break any records but it was the eighth coldest overnight July low at the airport since 1993. In winter 2015, Mt Cook airport plunged to -15C. Christchurch was around the freezing point, or slightly below zero, and it’s record low was -6.6C in 1980. But hang on…we’ve had “unprecedented warming” since 1980 haven’t we? Haven’t we? Fairfax Cameron Slater Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 09, 2017, 04:47:54 pm Yeah, you just keep on posting shit. Intelligent people are pissing themselves laughing at your ignorance and stupidity. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on July 09, 2017, 07:02:55 pm Ktj....."Intelligent people are pissing themselves laughing at your ignorance and stupidity."
...well I have only seen one intelligent person here lately....is that who you mean🙄 I think that if you believe this site has a large readership then you are even more deluded that I previously thought....😳 In REALITY....😉...it's only you , me and one or two others🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 16, 2017, 11:36:12 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Winter's snow is disrupting this Sierra Nevada summer The shadow of winter in the Sierra summer — record snowmelt has disrupted seasonal activities. By LOUIS SAHAGUN — Photography by MARK BOSTER | Friday, July 14, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8ce/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-013/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8ce/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-013) EVEN WHEN snowbound and inaccessible to vehicles, the rustic Tioga Pass Resort on the crest of the Sierra Nevada range offered homemade pie, a wood-burning stove and plump sofas to relax on after a day of backcountry skiing. But the winter of 2017 was more than the log cabin lodge, just two miles east of Yosemite National Park, could bear. Trails, roads and campgrounds throughout the Sierra high country were hit hard by snow and runoff from one of the largest snowpacks in recorded history, leaving public agencies scrambling and summer visitors feeling lost. At Tioga Pass Lodge, established in 1914, loyalists' hopes of kicking back on a sunny afternoon have taken a particularly tough wallop. Entombed in 20 feet of hard pack known as “Sierra cement,” the lodge “suffered severe crunch injuries,” said Dave Levy, manager of the resort, which is owned by a consortium of investors. A team led by Levy used shovels to dig down through the snow to reach the kitchen door. Sheared structural support beams appeared like ghostly shadows in the glare of a flashlight. “Inside, the bad news was much worse,” he said. “Doors won't open, windows are shattered, floors are warped, the roof sags. We may reopen sometime next year, but it won't be easy fixing a place built like a jigsaw puzzle with antiquated construction techniques.” A creek running through the property leased from the U.S. Forest Service is surging over its banks with snowmelt, undermining the foundations of the lodge and several cabins surrounding it. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8cf/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-012/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8cf/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-012) In early July, two standup paddle boarders skim along the icy waters of Tioga Lake off Highway 120. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964ef82/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-010/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964ef82/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-010) Snowbanks still line the road in early July near Tioga Lake. Over the July 4th weekend, as thousands of summer vacationers streamed into the mountains with coolers, bicycles, fly rods and barbecues, the runoff in streams peaked. But with many popular trails and campgrounds still closed because of safety and health concerns, rangers struggle to keep up with visitors arriving each day with the question: “Where can we find a place to camp?” The hard recovery ahead “Nearly every campground in the area has problems,” said Deb Schweizer, a spokeswoman for the Inyo National Forest. “There are broken water systems and sewer lines, gates that bent under the weight of so much snow, washed-out bridges and trails, damaged roads, fallen trees, downed power lines. “It's taken an incredible amount of co-operative efforts by multiple agencies to open as many campground facilities and roads as possible — and we're opening more every day,” she said. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964f003/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-009/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964f003/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-009) Massive snowbanks damaged the main building at the Tioga Pass Resort off Highway 120. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d4/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-008/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d4/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-008) Many of the campsites in the Tioga Lake Campground are still flooded, and the roads in and out are still blocked by snow. In the meantime, the Forest Service has been promoting its “dispersed camping” rules, which allow visitors to pitch a tent on certain undeveloped forest lands. This strategy has brought only despair to Dwayne Beaver, leader of the volunteer fire department in Lee Vining, about 10 miles west of the Tioga Pass. “It's costing our fire department money — and lots of lost sleep,” he said. “That’s because whenever someone needs a rescue, or inexperienced campers build an unauthorized fire in a ring of rocks, we have to scramble to deal with it.” Signs of the snowpack-fueled deluge are visible in most of the watersheds draining the Sierra Nevada. Smallmouth bass and other fish, for example, were found floating belly-up in a stretch of the Lower Owens River near the town of Lone Pine — suffocated by mud and debris flows, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power reported. But Southern California Edison and the DWP, which operate extensive networks of dams, diversions and hydroelectric plants across the Sierra range, say that things are not as bad as they could have been. With snowpack levels at 241% of normal, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti in March issued an emergency declaration allowing the DWP to take immediate steps to “armor” its vulnerable Los Angeles Aqueduct in Owens Valley and $1-billion dust-control project on dry Owens Lake, which L.A. tapped to slake its thirst in the last century. Preparing for the worst, engineers and heavy-equipment operators worked furiously to empty reservoirs and clean out ditches and pipelines to keep them from being overwhelmed by flooding. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d1/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-011/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d1/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-011) The snow is melting faster than the giant pumps can remove water from Agnew Lake in the mountains above June Lake. On Thursday, SCE officials launched a helicopter to survey three century-old reservoirs operating under water-level restrictions that state and federal regulators had required in part because the area is prone to earthquakes. The reservoirs — Agnew Lake, Gem Lake and Waugh Lake — are used to store water and generate power at the SCE's Rush Creek Hydroelectric Project near the town of June Lake. From 1,000 feet above Agnew Lake, elevation 8,500 feet above sea level, 12 massive water pumps were clearly visible, sending torrents of snowmelt over the spillway and into Rush Creek, one of Mono Lake's major tributaries. Heavy-duty helicopters had flown them in, engineers had assembled them and the utility officials now were pleased to see them working smoothly. “It took two weeks to design that pumping system and another six weeks to build it,” said Terry Maddox, an SCE energy systems engineer. “It handled the peak flows of snowmelt, and now the worst is over.” As a precaution, however, the Inyo National Forest has closed nearby hiking trails through to September 1st, warning that higher-than-normal water levels make the reservoirs especially vulnerable to seismic activity. The costs of the unprecedented efforts to counter the threat of destructive flooding this year are expected to be passed on to rate payers, officials for the DWP and Southern California Edison said. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d9/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-005/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964e8d9/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-005) Nora Livingston, lead naturalist guide for the Mono Lake Committee, walks through a field of seep monkey flowers blooming in the Horse Meadows area in the Mono basin near Lee Vining. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964f0b6/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-004/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964f0b6/turbine/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-pictures-004) A white-lined Sphinx moth pollinates a field of seep monkey flowers. Moths the size of hummingbirds The wet winter added 2½ feet of water to Mono Lake, nesting grounds for thousands of California gulls, and it transformed the surrounding meadowlands into wildflower panoramas. Nora Livingston, 27, a naturalist with the nonprofit Mono Lake Committee, has been revising her guided tours to highlight new natural wonders that seem to crop up daily. Bringing her Subaru to a stop along a dirt road near Lower Horse Meadows, Livingston said, “Follow me. I want to show you something truly amazing.” Moments later, she was striding along a meandering wetlands edged with sage that had been bone-dry for years. Now, yellow seep monkey flowers blossomed in a half-mile-long swath. With the flowers have come swarms of Western tiger swallowtail butterflies and Sphinx moths the size of hummingbirds. Birds such as lazuli buntings and mountain bluebirds feast on the insects attracted to the flowers. Reaching out as if to embrace the vista, Livingston said, “This would not have happened without all that snow and high water on the mountains.” (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964edf4/turbine/la-1499786736-shc02gm3mb-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5964edf4/turbine/la-1499786736-shc02gm3mb-snap-image) The warm colors of sunset are reflected in the pools of water next to a tributary of Bishop Creek. A wet winter and heavy snowmelt have caused the water levels to rise in the creeks and rivers in the Owens Valley and throughout the Sierras. • Louis Sahagun is a staff writer at the Los Angeles Times. He covers issues ranging from religion, culture and the environment to crime, politics and water. He was on the team of L.A. Times writers that earned the Pulitzer Prize in public service for a series on Latinos in Southern California and the team that was a finalist in 2015 for the Pulitzer Prize in breaking news. He is a CCNMA: Latino Journalists of California board member, and author of the book, “Master of the Mysteries: the Life of Manly Palmer Hall” (https://www.amazon.com/Master-Mysteries-Revelations-Manly-Palmer/dp/1934170631). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • After the drought, the ‘Killer Kern’ river is a different beast (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-kern-river-4th-july-20170705-story.html) • The Kings River flooded from snowmelt that couldn't be measured or predicted (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-kings-river-flooding-snowpack-20170626-story.html) • Skiers hit the slopes in bikini tops as California's endless winter endures a heat wave (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-endless-winter-20170617-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-20170714-htmlstory.html (http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-flooding-sierra-nevada-20170714-htmlstory.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 03, 2017, 11:43:35 am ...oh no....the "climate change conspiracy theorists" busted again🙄
Aussie Bureau of Meteorology caught manipulating data, full inquiry underway by Cameron Slater on August 3, 2017 at 11:30am The Aussie Bureau of Meteorology has been busted manipulating data. The Australian reports: The Bureau of Meteorology has ordered a full review of temperature recording equipment and procedures after the peak weather agency was caught tampering with cold winter temperature logs in at least two locations. The bureau has admitted that a problem with recording very low temperatures is more widespread than Goulburn and the Snowy Mountains but rejected it has attempted to manipulate temperature records. The bureau’s chief executive, Andrew Johnson, has called for an urgent review and the immediate replacement of recording equipment at a number of undisclosed sites. The action was outlined in a letter to federal Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg and follows weeks of turmoil over why data showing minus 10.4C readings at Goulburn and Thredbo went missing. Bush meteorologist Lance Pidgeon blew the whistle on the missing data after watching the minus 10.4C Goulburn recording from July 2 disappear from the bureau’s website. “The temperature dropped to minus 10.4, stayed there for some time and then it changed to minus 10 and then it disappeared,” Mr Pidgeon said. He relayed his concerns to scientist Jennifer Marohasy, who has queried the bureau’s treatment of historical temperature data. After questions were asked, the bureau restored the original recording of minus 10.4C to its website. A bureau spokeswoman said the low recording had been checked for “quality assurance” before being posted. The bureau said limits were set on how low temperatures could go at some stations before a manual check was needed to confirm them. “The bureau’s quality control system, designed to filter out spurious low or high values was set at minus 10 minimum for Goulburn which is why the record automatically adjusted,” a bureau spokeswoman said. “The error was picked up yesterday internally and quality control processes are being reviewed for those stations where temperatures below minus 10 are possible.” Dr Johnson told Mr Frydenberg the failure to record temperatures of minus 10.4C at Goulburn on July 2 was due to equipment being “not fit for purpose”. Sounds like a cover-up is underway. Dr Johnson said failure to record the very low temperatures had “been interpreted by a member of the community in such a way as to imply the bureau sought to manipulate the data record”. “I categorically reject this implication,” he said. The bureau’s handling of temperature data and the homogenisation of records to form a national average has been controversial. It has said warmer minimum temperatures were one reason for the upward trend in average temperatures due to climate change. Homogenisation is another word for manipulation. Dr Marohasy said Dr Johnson’s claims of equipment failure were easily disproven by the screen shots that showed the very low temperatures before being “quality assured” out. She said claims the omission of the very low temperatures did not affect the national temperature record were also easily disproven. “While Goulburn station is not a listed ACORN-SAT station, it is used to homogenise Canberra and Canberra is an ACORN-SAT station,” Dr Marohasy said. The bureau did not respond to questions about how widely the quality control system had been applied and at what upper temperature the cut-off had been set. Dr Marohasy has evidence of the initial minus 10.4C recording at Thredbo before it was deleted for quality assurance. “This either reflects an extraordinary incompetence, or a determination to prevent evidence of low temperatures,” Dr Marohasy said. Sounds like they’ve been caught red-handed. -The Australian Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:30:55 am Theory proposed in the eighties. Models developed around said theory predicting runaway warming.
Models proved wrong by observations. Theory is a failure. The planet has been steadily heating since the last iceage, as one would expect. Only thing keeping the global warming show going is politically driven grant money (like billions). Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:36:39 am This is how Co2 works on earth's atmosphere:
For every DOUBLING of Co2 you get a 1.1C increase in the earth's mean temperature. Think about that. Before the coal and oil burning era there was about 280ppm CO2 in the atmosphere. Now there's about 400ppm. In 50 years oil and gas seemingly will run very low. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:39:16 am Co2 is only 0.04% of the earth's atmosphere.
97% of that is NOT produced by humans (not that that's a game changer anyway, but it helps to get some perspective). Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:46:23 am I used to be a warmunist.
Now I'm a lukewarmer. Yeah it's slowly warming, as it has since the last ice age, but there is no reason to panic. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:55:32 am Co2 directly can't cause runaway global warming. Theories have to be invented on how this reality non-alarming Co2 caused warming is supposedly "amplified" by feedbacks (eg more warmth causes more clouds therefore more heat is trapped in the atmosphere. But the warming as detected by weather balloons and satellites (which don't lie) show unremarkable warming (certainly not worth wasting trillions deindustrialising).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 11:03:41 am Oh and the 97% consensus is a major propaganda plank in the warmunist house of cards. What those "studies" did was take a bunch of research papers then state 97% agreed that man was the main contributor heating the planet. This was done by mislabelling sceptic work as being part of this phoney consensus. People the waved this "97%" shonky propaganda exercise around as "proof" that the world is going to hell in a handbasket. The study was a fraud and the only thing scientists in it actually agreed on was that the planet was warming and humans had SOME influence.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 10, 2017, 08:06:49 pm from The Washington Post.... EDITORIAL: This is how bad things could get if Trump denies the reality of climate change Recent studies provide a glimpse at the dangerous future ahead. By EDITORIAL BOARD | 7:45PM EDT - Tuesday, August 08, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/08/Editorial-Opinion/Images/2017-08-07T010229Z_562400651_RC1E8B3E5B80_RTRMADP_3_SPAIN-WEATHER-DROUGHT-2373.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/08/Editorial-Opinion/Images/2017-08-07T010229Z_562400651_RC1E8B3E5B80_RTRMADP_3_SPAIN-WEATHER-DROUGHT-2373.jpg) Parched ground at the Guadalteba reservoir during a strong drought in Ardales, Spain. — Photograph: Jon Nazca/Reuters. OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO, the Trump administration must decide whether to approve or suppress a major federal climate change report (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/07/climate/climate-change-drastic-warming-trump.html). Though scientists have signed off on its findings, including that the average U.S. temperature has spiked in the past several decades and that humans have almost certainly played a predominant role, President Trump and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt have indicated they simply do not believe the experts. Even as the federal climate assessment has been under review, the warnings have grown starker. A paper published last week in Nature Climate Change (https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3352.epdf) offered a harrowing view. International negotiators committed in Paris to keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius, the point past which experts warn warming could be very dangerous. Analysts from the University of Washington and the University of California at Santa Barbara found that there is only a 5 percent chance the world will achieve that goal. Instead of predicting how technology or policy might change, the researchers looked at how nations have done until now and inferred from those trends what will happen in the future. As economies expand, they emit more planet-warming carbon dioxide into the air. Fortunately, over time economies also produce more efficiently, using less fuel and therefore emitting less carbon dioxide for every widget assembled or mile driven. By projecting population growth, economic expansion and carbon efficiency into the future, the analysts came up with a rough guide to where the global temperature will be at the end of the century. They found that there is a 90 percent chance the world will warm between 2 degrees and 4.9 degrees Celsius, with a median of 3.2 degrees. Though this avoids the most alarming scenarios scientists have previously considered, it also excludes the least concerning, finding virtually no chance the Earth will keep warming below the desirable level of 1.5 degrees Celsius. How does this translate into the real world? Some other new research provides answers. Experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles found (http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/8/e1603322.full) that at 4.5 degrees of temperature rise by 2100, highly populated and impoverished swaths of South Asia would experience heat waves so extreme that human beings would not be able to survive without protection. At 2.25 degrees of warming, heat-wave temperatures in the region would be dangerous but not as deadly. Another new analysis from European Union researchers warned (https://phys.org/news/2017-08-european-heatwave-deaths-skyrocket-climate.html) that deaths due to extreme weather across Europe could increase from about 3,000 per year to 152,000 annually if the Earth warmed 3 degrees by century’s end. Each of these studies comes with caveats. For example, much of the risk would be averted with a strong global commitment to cutting carbon dioxide emissions, particularly if green technology became significantly cheaper, making it easier to decarbonize than in the past. Yet even if the breakthroughs do not come, or do not come fast enough, the latest research suggests it is neither unrealistic nor pointless to aim for the low end of the range of possible climate outcomes, even over 2 degrees, to at least limit the damage to the planet’s habitability. That path, however, requires leaders to admit there is a problem. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The Washington Post's View: California's cap-and-trade program could offer other states guidance (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/californias-cap-and-trade-program-could-offer-other-states-guidance/2017/07/28/80aadf4c-6e4c-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html) • Joel Clement: I'm a scientist. I'm blowing the whistle on the Trump administration. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/im-a-scientist-the-trump-administration-reassigned-me-for-speaking-up-about-climate-change/2017/07/19/389b8dce-6b12-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html) • The Washington Post's View: The dream of ‘clean coal’ is burning up (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-dream-of-clean-coal-is-burning-up/2017/07/09/784bc838-61a0-11e7-a4f7-af34fc1d9d39_story.html) • Robert J. Samuelson: Trump ignores the messy reality of global warming — and makes it all about him (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-ignores-the-messy-reality-of-global-warming--and-makes-it-all-about-him/2017/06/04/6bf913ec-47bf-11e7-a196-a1bb629f64cb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-bad-things-could-get-if-trump-denies-the-reality-of-climate-change/2017/08/08/087b8bb0-7bae-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-bad-things-could-get-if-trump-denies-the-reality-of-climate-change/2017/08/08/087b8bb0-7bae-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 09:59:46 pm "Each of these studies comes with caveats. For example, much of the risk would be averted with a strong global commitment to cutting carbon dioxide emissions, particularly if green technology became significantly cheaper, making it easier to decarbonize than in the past"
Even if all the Paris targets were met, it would make fuck all difference to the climate AND it would cost TRILLIONS. The Paris targets won't be met. China and India value the wellbeing of their people over Western green/left bullshitting. Renewables(aka unreliables) are stupidly expensive. This is a typical "could happen" hysteria piece from the braindead media on climate 😀 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 10, 2017, 10:06:09 pm ....and whatever we do in little old , insignificant NZ, will not be detectable..so let's not bother losing any sleep...
....and I am looking forward to growing mango's in Northland😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:17:13 pm Enjoy the warmth while you can because if we get another little ice age then that will be very nasty.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 10, 2017, 10:23:01 pm Ok..any idea when that will be...I'll stock up the firewood😉
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:24:59 pm There are some solar cycle scientists who are predicting net cooling for approx three decades. I know extreme heat. Cold is a lot more ugly.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:27:48 pm I don't completely buy the solar cycle climate predictions but I'd say they could be right.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 10, 2017, 10:31:05 pm Ok..so no need to be concerned...it's part of the evolutionary process...let's just accept it...humans will one day no longer exist either by climate change, or nuclear war or whatever...is it really worth worrying about...just enjoy while it lasts😜
...but sadly...my working holiday comes to an end tomorrow...returning to NZ...hope it has warmed up a bit since mid June.....have to get some work done on the boat ready for spring😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:46:15 pm Well if the warmunist cult manages to suck pollies into replacing life giving cheap reliable power with stupid expensive unreliable power and the world does cool, the a lot of poor people will die from living in frigid dwellings.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 10, 2017, 10:49:52 pm Well living somewhere with firewood might not be such a bad idea. Numb nuts pollies are possibly going to tax the crap out of energy for the sake of appeasing the great global warming scam.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 10, 2017, 11:04:29 pm ....and that's the great thing about democracy...we get what the majority of us deserve😉
...I wouldn't want it any other way...although I do feel for the minorities...but I manage not to lose any sleep over it😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 12, 2017, 10:24:37 am ....looks like I will have to put off planting the mango trees...
....bloody global cooling😳 Global Warming delivers coldest NZ winter in eight years It may have been warm overnight this week, but New Zealand is currently experiencing its coldest winter since 2009. MetService meteorologist Georgina Griffiths said not only has it been cold, the main centres have also experienced more rain than last year, with Christchurch sitting at 134 per cent of its usual rainfall at 551mm compared with 411mm. However, just to confuse people even more – especially in eastern parts of the country – temperatures are expected to hit 18 degrees, even 20 degrees in Napier, this weekend. “It has been enormously wet and cold, it’s been a crappy year, basically. It’s an unusual and extremely volatile year.” A volatile year. Damn Global Warming. I knew it was responsible for something. Cold. Wet. And now? Warm! Can you believe it? She said most towns were “running quite cool bar this recent four or five day warm blip”. “The temperatures for the first 60 per cent of the year, 220 days, Christchurch is running a full degree and a half cooler than this time last year. That might not sound much but actually when you get a year when it’s 1 degree above the long term average you’re almost into record territory.” Wellington and Auckland were each running 1 degree colder than last year. “It may not sound like much, but it’s very significant difference over a seven-month time period.” OMG! Surely this indicates the cusp of a mini Ice Age? You know, like we had during the ’60s? Or? Or, the amount of sun spot activity is dropping as per normal solar seasonal variations, and all this is just another normal day in long term climate change. But fear not Global Warming people. In the face of the coldest winter in eight years, the scientists have found new hope: “This is the coldest winter we have had in a long while – since 2009 for many regions. The difference in temperatures between last winter, which was incredibly warm, and this winter, has been absolutely noticeable on the wardrobe, and the power bill.” MetService duty meteorologist April Clark told the Herald earlier today most of the country was enjoying temperatures on average up to 4C warmer than usual for this time of year. “It has been, on average, warmer, especially than what we have been having. The last couple weeks of July, pretty much almost every main centre was colder than average. So maybe that’s why it’s feeling so warm.” Maybe. Thank goodness we don’t have to rely on uncorrupted science. We can just go “meh, it feels warm, so… you know, maybe.” Nz herald Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 12, 2017, 10:46:49 am The normal trend for the last 11000 or so years is gradual warming (with some spikes and troughs) and gradual sea level rise. If this continues it won't be a surprise. If the sun "goes quiet" for a significant period it also won't be a surprise if we get a significant period of no warming, or even bad cold. Don't throw away your long johns.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 12, 2017, 11:49:33 am I guess all the government funded climate bodies will have to "homogenize" all that evil unpleasant unwarm temp data, again 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 12, 2017, 04:14:42 pm from The Washington Post.... EDITORIAL: This is how bad things could get if Trump denies the reality of climate change Recent studies provide a glimpse at the dangerous future ahead. By EDITORIAL BOARD | 7:45PM EDT - Tuesday, August 08, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/08/Editorial-Opinion/Images/2017-08-07T010229Z_562400651_RC1E8B3E5B80_RTRMADP_3_SPAIN-WEATHER-DROUGHT-2373.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/08/Editorial-Opinion/Images/2017-08-07T010229Z_562400651_RC1E8B3E5B80_RTRMADP_3_SPAIN-WEATHER-DROUGHT-2373.jpg) Parched ground at the Guadalteba reservoir during a strong drought in Ardales, Spain. — Photograph: Jon Nazca/Reuters. OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO, the Trump administration must decide whether to approve or suppress a major federal climate change report (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/07/climate/climate-change-drastic-warming-trump.html). Though scientists have signed off on its findings, including that the average U.S. temperature has spiked in the past several decades and that humans have almost certainly played a predominant role, President Trump and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt have indicated they simply do not believe the experts. Even as the federal climate assessment has been under review, the warnings have grown starker. A paper published last week in Nature Climate Change (https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3352.epdf) offered a harrowing view. International negotiators committed in Paris to keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius, the point past which experts warn warming could be very dangerous. Analysts from the University of Washington and the University of California at Santa Barbara found that there is only a 5 percent chance the world will achieve that goal. Instead of predicting how technology or policy might change, the researchers looked at how nations have done until now and inferred from those trends what will happen in the future. As economies expand, they emit more planet-warming carbon dioxide into the air. Fortunately, over time economies also produce more efficiently, using less fuel and therefore emitting less carbon dioxide for every widget assembled or mile driven. By projecting population growth, economic expansion and carbon efficiency into the future, the analysts came up with a rough guide to where the global temperature will be at the end of the century. They found that there is a 90 percent chance the world will warm between 2 degrees and 4.9 degrees Celsius, with a median of 3.2 degrees. Though this avoids the most alarming scenarios scientists have previously considered, it also excludes the least concerning, finding virtually no chance the Earth will keep warming below the desirable level of 1.5 degrees Celsius. How does this translate into the real world? Some other new research provides answers. Experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles found (http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/8/e1603322.full) that at 4.5 degrees of temperature rise by 2100, highly populated and impoverished swaths of South Asia would experience heat waves so extreme that human beings would not be able to survive without protection. At 2.25 degrees of warming, heat-wave temperatures in the region would be dangerous but not as deadly. Another new analysis from European Union researchers warned (https://phys.org/news/2017-08-european-heatwave-deaths-skyrocket-climate.html) that deaths due to extreme weather across Europe could increase from about 3,000 per year to 152,000 annually if the Earth warmed 3 degrees by century’s end. Each of these studies comes with caveats. For example, much of the risk would be averted with a strong global commitment to cutting carbon dioxide emissions, particularly if green technology became significantly cheaper, making it easier to decarbonize than in the past. Yet even if the breakthroughs do not come, or do not come fast enough, the latest research suggests it is neither unrealistic nor pointless to aim for the low end of the range of possible climate outcomes, even over 2 degrees, to at least limit the damage to the planet’s habitability. That path, however, requires leaders to admit there is a problem. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The Washington Post's View: California's cap-and-trade program could offer other states guidance (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/californias-cap-and-trade-program-could-offer-other-states-guidance/2017/07/28/80aadf4c-6e4c-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html) • Joel Clement: I'm a scientist. I'm blowing the whistle on the Trump administration. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/im-a-scientist-the-trump-administration-reassigned-me-for-speaking-up-about-climate-change/2017/07/19/389b8dce-6b12-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html) • The Washington Post's View: The dream of ‘clean coal’ is burning up (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-dream-of-clean-coal-is-burning-up/2017/07/09/784bc838-61a0-11e7-a4f7-af34fc1d9d39_story.html) • Robert J. Samuelson: Trump ignores the messy reality of global warming — and makes it all about him (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-ignores-the-messy-reality-of-global-warming--and-makes-it-all-about-him/2017/06/04/6bf913ec-47bf-11e7-a196-a1bb629f64cb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-bad-things-could-get-if-trump-denies-the-reality-of-climate-change/2017/08/08/087b8bb0-7bae-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-bad-things-could-get-if-trump-denies-the-reality-of-climate-change/2017/08/08/087b8bb0-7bae-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 12, 2017, 04:15:42 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 12, 2017, 08:43:58 pm Ain't got time to look at cartoons about fantasy, gut it's great to be back home in ....THE SUBTROPICAL NORTH😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 12, 2017, 09:48:58 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 12:34:01 am Looks like a misrepresentation. Take a look at Vostok and Greenland ice core related graphs.
Also the last twenty years of Satellite data show flat to negligible warming as Co2 reaches new records. Warmunists have made dozens of wild theories of why this is so (this is after they tried to deny this warming pause existed). Again, they make little sense. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 01:56:14 am (https://postimg.org/image/j9vb5ds87/)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 02:28:12 am (https://oz4caster.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/climate-reconstructions-1-million-years.gif)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 02:32:14 am (https://oz4caster.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/climate-reconstructions-2000-years-composite.gif)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 02:40:06 am Listen to some talks on YouTube by Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry and John Christie. They are accomplished and highly published (yes peer reviewed) sceptics who know what they are talking about. Stefan Molyneux has also put together quite a good explanation of the "97% consensus" scam (he's not a scientist as far as I'm aware but he has assembled the facts in an easy to understand way, for those who bother to question the eco cult of Co2 doom).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 02:48:58 am Look at the credentials of the scientists I mentioned. There are sites like desmog blog and source watch that try to smear such scientists by weak association with fossil fuel money (they gave a talk at a foundation that received money from big oil etc etc). Desperate propaganda from a failing end of the world cult.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 03:06:21 am https://youtu.be/yTTaXqVEGkU
https://youtu.be/eg_I8QypcvM https://youtu.be/i1CR0v7dwXU https://youtu.be/xPYhDGMFgE4 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 13, 2017, 05:42:25 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/News/EarthTemperatureTimeline_png_zpsdwd8yqiu.png~original) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 13, 2017, 05:57:40 pm Oh jeeezzz....watch out he's going into one of his "cut and paste the same post ad infinitum" fetish attacks🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 06:41:52 pm The spam attacks that wrecked xnc2? I'm sure there's a therapy for that 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 13, 2017, 07:06:59 pm Adj......"I'm sure there's a therapy for that 😁"
....yes... there is....but not sure if it's legal😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 13, 2017, 09:20:57 pm Warmunism is a religion. It's very much like a medieval or stone age religion. Dissidents must be silenced and damaged.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 19, 2017, 07:25:36 pm And what about Arctic sea ice hysteria?
(https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/slide7.png) Oh dear, another massive nail in the alarmism coffin. 😀 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 28, 2017, 02:07:05 pm from The Washington Post.... How Harvey went from a little-noticed storm to a behemoth More than 9 trillion gallons of water have fallen over eastern Texas as worst-case scenarios unfold. By SANDHYA SOMASHEKHAR | 6:06PM EDT - Sunday, August 27, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/27/National-Enterprise/Images/Harvey_32749-6f4db-1718.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/27/National-Enterprise/Images/Harvey_32749-6f4db-1718.jpg) This photo made available by NASA shows Hurricane Harvey over Texas on Saturday, as seen from the International Space Station. — Photograph: Jack Fischer/Associated Press. EVEN IF Hurricane Harvey had been a milder storm, spinning lazily across the Gulf of Mexico, there would have been reasons for alarm early last week. For starters, the jet stream — the air current that meanders across the continent, pushing storms along a familiar path — flowed far north of Texas, and thus when Harvey crashed into the state there was nothing in the atmosphere to shove it somewhere else. Harvey stalled. After making landfall, the storm took a path that positioned it almost perfectly to drag huge bands of rain out of the Gulf and onto the metropolis of Houston, which is interlaced with rivers and bayous and paved over with impervious urban surfaces. Essentially parked near the coastal town of Victoria, Harvey has dumped trillions of gallons of water across Southeast Texas. Harvey also proved that the Gulf of Mexico — in late August, in a warming climate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/25/what-you-can-and-cant-say-about-climate-change-and-hurricane-harvey) — can prove explosive for the development of what is generically called a tropical cyclone. In barely more than a day the storm went from a disorganized tropical depression to a significant hurricane and then all the way up to Category 4 — the second-highest rating on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane intensity scale, which is based on wind speed. The result: a record-setting storm that within 24 hours plunged much of the nation's fourth-largest city and its surroundings under feet of choppy brown water. It threatens to submerge even more of the region during the next few days. “There are a lot of worst-case-scenario stars that aligned,” said Marshall Shepherd, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Georgia and a past president of the American Meteorological Society. “As bad as it is now, we still have days of this to go.” The National Weather Service downgraded Harvey to a Category 1 hurricane on Saturday and then to the status of a tropical storm. The rating change might have given people a false sense of security that the worst of the storm was over. On social media and elsewhere, weather officials and meteorologists emphasized that the danger had not passed and was actually just beginning. “More people die of inland flooding than any other hurricane threat,” the National Weather Service tweeted multiple times. “Houston, let me be blunt,” Travis Herzog, a meteorologist for the ABC affiliate in Houston said on Twitter early on Saturday. “Prepare for a flood today. Prepare for multiple tornadoes. Do not underestimate #Harvey. Respect the water.” A stunning amount of rain has fallen over Texas so far (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/26/harveys-assault-on-texas-is-just-getting-started-disastrous-inland-flooding-expected), and it is expected to continue for several more days as the storm creeps along, weakening slightly. In general, things will probably get worse before they get better; some areas might see as many as 50 inches of rainfall when all is said and done, wreaking damage that experts predict could lead to years of recovery across the region. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/25/Production/Daily/A-Section/Images/2017-08-25T122535Z_538214110_RC1A92612340_RTRMADP_3_STORM-HARVEY.jpg&w=965) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/25/Production/Daily/A-Section/Images/2017-08-25T122535Z_538214110_RC1A92612340_RTRMADP_3_STORM-HARVEY.jpg&w=1484) Hurricane Harvey approaches the Texas Gulf Coast in this GOES East satellite image by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on August 25th. — Picture: NOAA/Reuters. As of Sunday afternoon, the storm had deposited 9 trillion gallons over Southeast Texas, as bands of rain picked up moisture from the Gulf. That's enough water to fill up the Great Salt Lake twice over, meteorology student Matthew Cappucci wrote for The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/27/texas-flood-disaster-harvey-has-unloaded-9-trillion-tons-of-water). “Just how unprecedented is this?” Cappucci wrote. “Well, remember the flooding that New Orleans experienced with Hurricane Katrina? Most places saw about 10 to 20 feet of water thanks to levee failure, inundating about 80 percent of the city. Now, if we took the amount of rainfall that Texas has seen and spread it over the city limits of New Orleans, it would tower to 128 feet in height — roughly reaching as high as a 12-story office building.” Experts say the lack of “steering currents” to move the storm along is unusual and probably responsible for the scale of the flooding. As of Sunday evening, the center of the storm was virtually parked at a spot about 25 miles northwest of the coastal town of Victoria — crawling southeast at 2 miles per hour toward the Gulf. With a more common tropical storm, the damage in any one place would be mitigated by the fact that the storms move quickly, spreading the rain over a larger area. Perhaps making things worse is something called the “brown ocean effect,” which hypothesizes that storms, which typically get their energy over the ocean or another large body of water, can absorb that energy and moisture from rain-soaked land. “The land, in effect, mimics the energy supply of the ocean,” University of Maryland Baltimore County professor Jeff Halverson wrote for the Capital Weather Gang. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/26/how-can-tropical-storms-like-harvey-generate-such-unbelievable-amounts-of-rain) • Joel Achenbach and Jason Samenow contributed to this report. • Sandhya Somashekhar is the social change reporter for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • NOTE: Because of Hurricane Harvey, The Washington Post is temporarily removing the limit (https://www.washingtonpost.com/pr/wp/2017/08/25/the-washington-post-lifts-paywall-for-hurricane-harvey) on the number of articles that can be read without a subscription. • VIDEO: Texans battle against Harvey's destruction (http://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/weather/texans-battle-against-harveys-destruction/2017/08/27/9789cf5e-8b91-11e7-9c53-6a169beb0953_video.html) • Scope of Harvey's destruction starts to come into chilling focus (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/full-extent-of-harveys-aftermath-starts-to-come-into-chilling-focus/2017/08/27/1b2b184a-8b56-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html) • FEMA director: Recovery from Harvey will last ‘many years’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fema-director-says-harvey-is-probably-the-worst-disaster-in-texas-history/2017/08/27/ef01600a-8b3f-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html) • Catastrophic flooding ‘expected to worsen’ in Houston metro area (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/27/catastrophic-flooding-underway-in-houston-as-harvey-lingers-over-texas) • Should Houston have been evacuated? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/08/27/harvey-is-causing-epic-catastrophic-flooding-in-houston-why-wasnt-the-city-evacuated) • Graphic: Tracking the severe flooding (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/national/harvey-impact) • Texans struggling against Harvey: ‘We've been through a lot of hurricanes, but we've never been stuck like this’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/08/27/here-are-the-stories-of-some-texans-trying-to-keep-their-heads-above-water) • From little-noticed storm to behemoth: Gulf of Mexico in a warming climate can prove explosive (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/how-harvey-went-from-a-little-noticed-storm-to-a-behemoth/2017/08/27/2810c15a-8b5f-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html) • How Hurricane Harvey's wrath will impact prices at the gas pump (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/how-hurricane-harvey-will-impact-prices-at-the-gas-pump/2017/08/27/ecac15be-8b64-11e7-91d5-ab4e4bb76a3a_story.html) • A photo of a dog carrying his food after Harvey hit Texas went viral. Here's his story. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/08/27/a-photo-of-a-dog-carrying-a-bag-of-food-after-a-storm-hit-texas-went-viral-heres-his-story) • What you can and can't say about climate change and Hurricane Harvey (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/25/what-you-can-and-cant-say-about-climate-change-and-hurricane-harvey) https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/how-harvey-went-from-a-little-noticed-storm-to-a-behemoth/2017/08/27/2810c15a-8b5f-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/how-harvey-went-from-a-little-noticed-storm-to-a-behemoth/2017/08/27/2810c15a-8b5f-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 28, 2017, 02:08:26 pm It's good to see Mother Earth dishing out a bit of karma to the polluting USA and in particular, to the gun-toting, Trump-voting, bible-bashing wasteful wankers in Texas. What goes around eventually tends to come back around again. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 28, 2017, 05:32:25 pm ...yeah....nah....all a cunning plan by Mother Earth...well spotted....this is the guy who thinks people are mad to believe in god🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 28, 2017, 05:59:02 pm ..hang on....so to cut our emissions in half and live in caves....we would save 0.08% of world emissions....so...basically..even if we did nothing...the result would be harder to measure than the margin of error....let's just be responsible but not stuff our economy pushing a mountain of shit uphill🙄... perhaps just being content playing the insignificant little country that we are...albeit with many inflated egos..would sf This is a list of countries by total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2013. It is based on data for carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbon, hydrofluorocarbon, and sulfur hexafluoride emissions compiled by the World Resources Institute.[1] The emissions data shown below do not include land-use change and forestry. List of countries by 2013 emissions Edit Country GHG emissions (MtCO2e) Percentage of global total (%) World 45261.2517 100.00% China 11735.0071 25.93% United States 6279.8362 13.87% European Union (28)[2] 4224.5217 9.33% European Union (15)[3] 3374.0348 7.45% India 2909.0566 6.43% Russia 2199.1173 4.86% Japan 1353.3473 2.99% Brazil 1017.8745 2.25% Germany 894.0570 1.98% Indonesia 744.3403 1.64% Canada 738.3825 1.63% Mexico 733.0104 1.62% Iran 716.8149 1.58% South Korea 673.5412 1.49% Australia 580.0997 1.28% Saudi Arabia 546.8181 1.21% United Kingdom 546.2641 1.21% South Africa 510.2377 1.13% France 440.8485 0.97% Italy 420.8244 0.93% Turkey 408.4574 0.90% Ukraine 375.6670 0.83% Thailand 369.4310 0.82% Poland 361.1905 0.80% Argentina 334.2374 0.74% Pakistan 326.7740 0.72% Kazakhstan 313.7248 0.69% Spain 306.6117 0.68% Nigeria 304.0637 0.67% Malaysia 303.1518 0.67% Iraq 284.5679 0.63% Egypt 272.3785 0.60% Venezuela 268.4274 0.59% Vietnam 256.7606 0.57% Uzbekistan 225.7986 0.50% United Arab Emirates 221.4243 0.49% Kuwait 195.7803 0.43% Algeria 187.2679 0.41% Netherlands 186.7775 0.41% Philippines 171.6044 0.38% Bangladesh 163.6298 0.36% Colombia 159.5837 0.35% Angola 155.7220 0.34% Libya 133.0112 0.29% Ethiopia 123.3709 0.27% Czech Republic 120.9859 0.27% Belgium 113.4088 0.25% Turkmenistan 112.2850 0.25% Romania 109.4851 0.24% Chile 103.5626 0.23% Oman 101.7895 0.22% Myanmar 98.7527 0.22% Belarus 90.4979 0.20% Israel 89.5907 0.20% Greece 86.9692 0.19% Peru 86.2102 0.19% Cameroon 83.2755 0.18% Qatar 82.8463 0.18% Morocco 78.8839 0.17% Austria 78.4743 0.17% Tanzania 77.9457 0.17% New Zealand 75.0919 0.17% Azerbaijan 69.7221 Wiki Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 10:47:46 am And even if you switched of ALL modern human civilisation now and caused hundreds of millions of deaths in the process, it would make fuck all difference to the climate.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 10:52:56 am Newsflash 1. Harvey was not at all unprecedented in global storm history.
Newsflash 2. Global storm intensity and frequency has DECREASED as human co2 has increased the most. That means there is no correlation between human CO2 and storm frequency or severity. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 29, 2017, 02:34:30 pm from The Washington Post.... Hurricane Harvey previews our stormy future How many ‘100-year’ storms or ‘1,000-year’ floods will it take for us to listen? By EUGENE ROBINSON | 7:44PM EDT - Monday, August 28, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1050w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/28/National-Politics/Images/Botsford170827Hurricane19794.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/28/National-Politics/Images/Botsford170827Hurricane19794.JPG) Volunteers rescue people from their flooded homes along Beamer Road in Houston on August 27th. — Photograph: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post. PAY ATTENTION to what happened to Houston. It is rare to be given such a vivid look at our collective future. Climate change cannot be definitively blamed for Hurricane Harvey, but it likely did make the storm more powerful. Global warming did not conjure the rains that flooded the nation's fourth-largest city, but it likely did make them more torrential. The spectacle of rescue boats plying the streets of a major metropolis is something we surely will see again. The question is how often. The relationship between climate and weather is undeniable but never specific. Tropical cyclones do not batter Siberia's arctic coast and heavy snowfalls do not blanket the beaches of Barbados because the climates are different. But no one blizzard or hurricane can be attributed to climate change beyond the shadow of a doubt — which opens anyone who raises the subject at a time like this to the accusation of “politicizing” a disaster. The science explaining climate change is clear, however, no matter what deniers such as President Trump choose to believe. And it will be political decisions that determine how often we witness scenes of devastation like those in Houston. Begin with the basic fact of a warming planet, due primarily to greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. The waters of the Gulf of Mexico are unusually warm this summer — between two and three degrees above normal — which gave Harvey extra energy and moisture. Hurricanes usually weaken when they approach a coastline, but Harvey was able to gain strength, making landfall as a Category 4 storm. According to Pennsylvania State University professor Michael E. Mann, one of the world's leading experts on climate change, Harvey's unprecedented rainfall totals were likely boosted by global warming in at least two ways. Higher atmospheric and ocean temperatures mean more evaporation, Mann wrote in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/28/climate-change-hurricane-harvey-more-deadly), which means more precipitation. And the fact that the storm parked itself so stubbornly over Houston is due to a jet-stream pattern predicted in scientists' climate-change models. Since 2005, we've had Katrina, Sandy and now Harvey. The flood next time could come in Corpus Christi, Mobile, Pensacola, Tampa Bay, Naples, Miami, Jacksonville, Savannah, Charleston — no one knows where. But there is no doubt that it will come. Humankind has boosted the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by a shocking 40 percent since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when we started burning fossil fuels on a large scale. Even if carbon emissions were magically ended tomorrow, warming would continue for many years. But we can — if we choose — keep climate change from getting catastrophically out of hand. The rest of the industrialized world has decided to move toward a clean-energy future — and reap the economic benefits such a shift can entail. I'm betting that Trump’s successor, whether a Democrat or a Republican, will reverse his shortsighted, self-defeating decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord. But in addition to mitigating climate change, we must adapt to the warming we have made inevitable. Houston officials at least tried to learn one lesson: In 2005, as Hurricane Rita approached, officials ordered an evacuation that turned freeways into parking lots; about 100 people died in the chaos (http://www.chron.com/news/hurricanes/article/Exodus-weighs-heavily-in-death-toll-107-1502590.php). This time, residents were initially advised to stay put (http://www.thedailybeast.com/houston-told-people-to-stay-for-harvey-now-they-cant-get-out) — and, from what we know so far, there appears to have been much less loss of life. But billions of dollars' worth of private and public infrastructure is being destroyed. Because low-lying coastal cities are not likely to pick up and move inland, they are going to need new natural or artificial barriers to protect against storm surge (which might have been the big problem with Harvey, but wasn't) and high-capacity drainage systems to alleviate flooding (which was). Such projects are hugely expensive — but cheaper than repairing the damage from a citywide flood. Also, the nation needs a sustainable way of providing flood insurance to those living in vulnerable areas. The current National Flood Insurance Program charges rates that do not nearly cover its outlays, and for years it relied on out-of-date maps that did not accurately show flood risks. Buildings, meanwhile, can be made more flood-proof. President Barack Obama signed an executive order requiring builders who receive federal funds for a project to account for the risk of flooding in their construction plans. Trump rescinded the measure, saying it was “job-killing” (https://www.minnpost.com/earth-journal/2017/08/trump-gift-industry-puts-new-infrastructure-flood-risk). How many people went to work in Houston today? Folks, nature is telling us something. How many “100-year” storms or “1,000-year” floods will it take for us to listen? • Eugene Robinson writes a twice-a-week column on politics and culture for The Washington Post, contributes to the PostPartisan (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan) blog, and hosts a weekly online chat with readers. In a three-decade career at The Post, Robinson has been city hall reporter, city editor, foreign correspondent in Buenos Aires and London, foreign editor, and assistant managing editor in charge of the paper's Style (https://www.washingtonpost.com/style) section. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Ed Rogers: So far, so good. But this is just the beginning of Hurricane Harvey for President Trump. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/08/28/so-far-so-good-but-this-is-just-the-beginning-of-hurricane-harvey-for-president-trump) • The Washington Post's View: This is how bad things could get if Trump denies the reality of climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-bad-things-could-get-if-trump-denies-the-reality-of-climate-change/2017/08/08/087b8bb0-7bae-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) • Rachel Cleetus: Phoenix heat, Tropical Storm Cindy show how climate change is a threat to our infrastructure (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-week-made-it-clear-climate-change-is-a-threat-to-our-infrastructure/2017/06/23/2ae38e30-576b-11e7-ba90-f5875b7d1876_story.html) • French foreign minister: The world can't fight climate change without the U.S. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-world-needs-the-united-states-in-the-fight-against-climate-change/2017/04/06/4d4ed4a2-1981-11e7-bcc2-7d1a0973e7b2_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hurricane-harvey-previews-our-stormy-future/2017/08/28/cd4737cc-8c26-11e7-91d5-ab4e4bb76a3a_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hurricane-harvey-previews-our-stormy-future/2017/08/28/cd4737cc-8c26-11e7-91d5-ab4e4bb76a3a_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 29, 2017, 02:34:42 pm Quote Buildings, meanwhile, can be made more flood-proof. President Barack Obama signed an executive order requiring builders who receive federal funds for a project to account for the risk of flooding in their construction plans. Trump rescinded the measure, saying it was “job-killing” (https://www.minnpost.com/earth-journal/2017/08/trump-gift-industry-puts-new-infrastructure-flood-risk). How many people went to work in Houston today? Yep, Trump is a fucking idiot alright! A “Child King” who is fucked-in-the-head (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,15517.0.html). Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 29, 2017, 02:35:30 pm Anyway, it's good to see that the Texas oil & gas industry has copped a shitload of damage (to the tune of billions of dollars) from Hurricane Harvey. A great day for Mother Earth, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 02:49:16 pm There is no "mother earth". Just like there are no unicorns and no Santa 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 29, 2017, 02:58:16 pm Whatever, it's still a great day for the planet that the Texas oil & gas industry copped billions of dollars worth of damage from Hurricane Harvey. You could call that KARMA.....or “what goes around tends to come back around again!” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 03:18:42 pm Hard to believe when you first hear it (due to the metastasis of lefty brainwashing) , but if you look deeper you'll eventually realise that fossil fuels underpin the best life that humans have ever had (and may ever have), and that includes the greatest ability to clean up pollution and the ravages of whatever the climate throws at them.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 03:25:20 pm Without the wares of oil industry, NZ would collapse within a couple of weeks into a dystopian nightmare.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 29, 2017, 03:41:00 pm Ktj....."Whatever, it's still a great day for the planet that the Texas oil & gas industry copped billions of dollars worth of damage from Hurricane Harvey."
..ok...so this is the sort of mental capacity that we have amoung our dear employees in kiwirail..... ...we spend billions of dollars in rebuilding after a storm and therefore countless more tonnes of life killing carbon going into the atmosphere to get it back to where it was...and they say it is "a great day for the planet"....😳 ...am I missing something.....🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 29, 2017, 07:58:40 pm I'm wondering if KTJ ever reads what he copies and pastes or even thinks beyond the headline sentence about these things 🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 29, 2017, 08:14:23 pm Nah....there are only 2 reasons he continues to post this stuff...
Saves him from having to think for himself and endure the resulting migraine 🙄....and He has been sucked into paying subscription fees for the leftist Yankee rags...so feels this is the only way to get his money's worth😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 30, 2017, 01:29:38 pm Haha. Sounds probable 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 30, 2017, 01:40:18 pm Haha.....I have read enough of his irrational posts now to be able to "read him like a cheap paperback"....😉
...he claims to be "living on the edge"....just like any other 14 year old🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on August 30, 2017, 06:02:41 pm Yes a lot of people like "living life to the fullest" in front of their PC screen or TV 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 31, 2017, 12:11:00 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... EDITORIAL: Harvey should be a warning to Trump that climate change is a global threat “Harvey's terrible impact spotlights the foolishness of ignoring climate change.” By the LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | 4:00AM PDT - Wednesday, August 30, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59a59bce/turbine/la-donald-trump-20170829/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59a59bce/turbine/la-donald-trump-20170829) President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump arrive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Tuesday. — Photograph: Evan Vucci/Associated Press. AS rains fell and floodwaters rose in Houston, President Trump (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/donald-trump-PEBSL000163-topic.html) took to Twitter with an “oh, gosh” tweet (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/901797906046439426): “Wow — Now experts are calling #Harvey a once in 500 year flood! We have an all out effort going, and going well!” How refreshing it is when the president directs our attention to the words of experts — people who ascertain facts, study the issues, dissect the causes of problems, and put their biases and suppositions aside to figure out solutions. If Trump himself were to consult the experts — such as, you know, climate scientists — he would learn that global warming is real. He'd also learn that although warming did not cause Hurricane Harvey, it certainly makes such storms stronger (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/25/what-you-can-and-cant-say-about-climate-change-and-hurricane-harvey), more unpredictable and quicker to intensify (http://file//localhost/pub/emanuel/PAPERS/Emanuel_BAMS_2017.pdf). Experts — there's that word again — say that warmer air temperatures mean more evaporation of moisture from the seas to the skies, and thus more rainfall from storms. Warmer seas — including the Gulf of Mexico — intensify storms, from their size to their wind speeds, and amplify storm surges. (In southeast Texas, the flat geography allows a surging Gulf to intrude farther inland.) Another wrinkle, according to (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/28/climate-change-hurricane-harvey-more-deadly) atmospheric scientist Michael E. Mann (http://www.michaelmann.net): Climate change modeling suggests that (https://www.nature.com/articles/srep45242) human-propelled global warming could lead to weaker prevailing winds and a jet stream tracking father north. And that appears to have been what led Harvey to park over southeast Texas and dump more than 40 inches of water in places rather than spreading the rain (and pain) around or drifting back out over the Gulf. Trump flew to Corpus Christi early on Tuesday for a personal look at the damage, caused primarily by winds and the surging Gulf. To his credit, the president opted not to visit Houston. Much of that area is still underwater, and a presidential drop-in would only tie up crucial assets necessary for rescuing people sheltering in sodden homes. But we hope that what he sees on his visit (or on TV) spurs some second thoughts about whether human activity — namely, the burning of fossil fuels — is creating a less habitable world. This week, with tens of thousands of people missing, stranded or in need of food, water or shelter, Texas Governor Greg Abbott called Harvey “one of the largest disasters America has ever faced.” Ironically, the president two weeks ago rescinded Obama administration standards (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/climate/flooding-infrastructure-climate-change-trump-obama.html) requiring the federal government to assess and account for the impact of climate change when designing and building new infrastructure projects. Of course, that makes no difference to the current status of Houston, but Harvey’s terrible impact certainly spotlights the foolishness of ignoring climate change. Experts (ahem) in Trump's own Pentagon know that climate change is real (https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/features/defenseReviews/QDR/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf), and they recognize that more extreme heat, droughts, floods and famines threaten international stability while rising seas imperil military bases — especially, of course, naval installations. But rising seas also threaten civilian shipping ports, coastal neighborhoods and sensitive freshwater estuaries. Saline ocean water is already seeping (https://www.nps.gov/ever/learn/nature/cceffectsslrinpark.htm) into the Everglades, threatening the freshwater supply (http://www.ces.fau.edu/arctic-florida/pdfs/meagan-weisner.pdf) of millions of people in southern Florida. Infrastructure must be adapted to account for such changes. And not just in the U.S. Globally, populations in coastal zones are increasing faster than in inland areas (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118571), and many of the world's megacities are built on coasts or in low-lying deltas (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2923420). This is the hot, hard reality the world faces, and as we've noted before, Trump, along with his Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-trump-pruitt-epa-senate-20170204-story.html), Energy Secretary Rick Perry (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/19062017/rick-perry-dismisses-co2-climate-change-oceans-environment-cnbc-kernen) and other proponents of increasing fossil fuel production, are leading the nation in a dangerous direction. This isn't an issue of mere policy differences; their beliefs and agenda imperil the health and safety of the people they have sworn to protect. As difficult as it might be for someone so incapable of introspection and re-evaluation, the president needs to understand that he has subscribed to fake science, and that he must alter his course. We remain optimistic that other actors — the nations of the world, states such as California and local governments, corporations and consumers — will continue to change their behaviors to help confront the problem. But this would be a far more winnable battle if the world wasn’t also forced to fight ignorance in the White House, and a president content to whistle past the flooded graveyard. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Trump visits Texas, hailing officials' Harvey response and promising ‘costly’ federal aid (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-harvey-texas-20170829-story.html) • How Houston can prevent Harvey-like disasters in the future (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-collier-satija-harvey-houston-prevent-20170829-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-harvey-global-warming-trump-flood-20170830-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-harvey-global-warming-trump-flood-20170830-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 31, 2017, 01:50:08 pm Oh jeezzz...him indoors is in "cut and paste to multiple thread" mode again....guess he forgot the Alzheimer's mess again😕
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 31, 2017, 03:48:31 pm Click on all of those links. More than half of them link to peer-reviewed SCIENCE. Unlike the utter twaddle & head-in-the-sand bullshit you post on this subject. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on August 31, 2017, 04:29:54 pm ...now .....what on earth would have given you the slightest clue that I was referring to you😳
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 02:26:41 am Here's a blast from the past..
https://youtu.be/DGOMtTQFxh0 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 12:15:22 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 12:40:43 pm OK clearly short of a sandwich. 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 12:55:11 pm OK clearly short of a sandwich. Yes, I definitely agree....you are quite clearly short of a sandwich. Also, you're not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. And as far as your intellectual abilities go, the lift doesn't quite reach the top floor. I think that explains things adequately. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 01:49:22 pm Your behaviour suggests substance abuse. It'll eat you and your life up mate.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 02:32:36 pm Your behaviour suggests substance abuse. It'll eat you and your life up mate. You're hilarious. A one-man comedy act. Oh well, it's time to turn the page, eh? I'll put that CHART at the top of the new page. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 02:32:53 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 02:41:17 pm And where did you source that lefty bullshit graph from?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 02:53:24 pm Go find the unmolested ice core data from Greenland and Antarctica. Your graph was pulled from some leftoid eco-zombie's backside.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 03:31:03 pm from The Washington Post.... Heat spurs surge in California, Oregon wildfires Ash rained down on Los Angeles from a blaze that the mayor said is the largest in the city's history. In Oregon, search and rescue crews airdropped supplies to hikers who were forced to sleep in the woods after being stranded by fire. By CHRISTOPHER WEBER and ELLEN KNICKMEYER | 7:59PM EDT - Sunday, September 03, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1185w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/Interactivity/Images/crop_90Western_Heat_14943-1c99b.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/Interactivity/Images/crop_90Western_Heat_14943-1c99b.jpg) An airplane makes a drop on a hillside north of Los Angeles on Saturday, September 2nd, 2017. — Photograph: Paul Rodriguez/The Orange County Register/Associated Press. LOS ANGELES — Smoke filled the sky and ash rained down across Los Angeles on Sunday from a destructive wildfire that the mayor said was the largest in city history — one of several blazes that sent thousands fleeing homes across the West during a blistering holiday weekend heat wave. In Oregon, crews were rescuing about 140 hikers forced to spend the night in the woods after fire broke out along the popular Columbia River Gorge trail. Search and rescue crews airdropped supplies on Saturday as flames prevented the hikers' escape. Wildfires burned in a 2,700-year-old grove of giant sequoia trees near Yosemite National Park, forced evacuations in Glacier National Park and drove people from homes in parts of the West struggling with blazing temperatures. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti declared an emergency and asked the governor to do the same after the wildfire destroyed three homes and threatened hillside neighborhoods. More than 1,000 firefighters battled flames that chewed through more than nine square miles of brush-covered mountains. Authorities eased evacuation orders for Burbank and Glendale later on Sunday and were considering doing the same for Los Angeles, however, as easing temperatures and a bit of rain helped the 1,000 firefighters slow the flames' progress. All but 10 percent of the 1,400 people ordered out of their homes in that fire had returned, Garcetti said. “That can change in a moment’s notice and the winds can accelerate very quickly,” Los Angeles Fire Chief Ralph Terrazas told reporters on Sunday. “There is a lot of fuel out there left to burn,” he said. Officials were keeping an eye on thunderstorms in the mountains to the north, which could bring welcome rain but also the risk of flash floods, mudslides and lightning. Burbank resident George Grair was not in the evacuation zone but watched uneasily as flames blackened a hillside in the near distance. “It's very difficult to feel safe. I've got kids in the house,” he told KABC-TV. “I probably slept two hours all night.” The high at Los Angeles International Airport reached 97 degrees on Sunday, topping the previous mark of 92 degrees, set in 1982. Records were also set in parts of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, where the temperature hit 101 degrees. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1050w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/National-Enterprise/Images/Western_Heat_23304-45b09.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/National-Enterprise/Images/Western_Heat_23304-45b09.jpg) A deer runs by a wildfire in hills in Los Angeles' Sun Valley neighborhood. — Photograph: Paul Rodriguez/The Orange County Register/Associated Press. San Francisco residents, meanwhile, stifled under a third day of a rare heat wave in the coastal city, although highs in the San Francisco Bay area fell Sunday from all-time records set the previous two days. “I went to Home Depot, Walgreens, Office Depot, Target. They were sold out,” downtown office worker Alganesh Ucbayonas said Sunday, detailing her unsuccessful search for a fan. “CVS!” she remembered. On Sunday, Ucbayonas sat at her desk in a building lobby squarely between two fans, both scrounged from her office building's storage and trained straight at her face. “I have never seen any heat like this in 10 years in the Bay Area,” she said. Fires burning up and down California's Sierra Nevada and farther to the northwest cast an eerie yellow and gray haze over much of California, and much of the state was under alerts because of poor air quality. California authorities ordered evacuation for a third small town Sunday in one of the wildfires, a blaze that has burned nine square miles near Yosemite National Park. Firefighters battling that blaze were making it a priority to safeguard a 2,700-year-old grove of giant sequoia and a pair of historical cabins at the grove, fire spokeswoman Anne Grandy said. Fire crews had wrapped the two 19th-century cabins and an outhouse in fire-resistant material to protect them from the flames that had entered the Nelder Grove, Grandy said. The flames were consuming old brush and dead wood on the forest floor, but had not burned the giant sequoia, some of which top 20 stories, she said. The millennia-old trees already had “survived thousands of fires,” she said. California crews are also protecting homes from a fast-moving wildfire that forced evacuations in Riverside County. In the Pacific Northwest, high temperatures and a lack of rain this summer have dried out vegetation that fed on winter snow and springtime rain. Officials warned of wildfire danger as hot, dry, smoky days were forecast across Oregon and Washington over the holiday weekend. In Washington state, Governor Jay Inslee proclaimed a state of emergency across all counties as three major fires closed recreation areas and prompted evacuations. Flames in Montana's Glacier National Park prompted officials to remove all residents, campers and tourists from one of the most popular areas of the park. The order on Sunday affects the Lake McDonald area, the western side of the dizzying Going-to-the Sun Road and some of the most visited trails in the area. The Lake McDonald Lodge, built in 1913, closed last week because of heavy smoke in the area. Forecasters said more heat could be expected when remnants of Tropical Storm Lidia move north from Mexico’s Baja California during the weekend. • Story from the Associated Press. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/heat-spurs-surge-in-california-oregon-wildfires/2017/09/03/9b367620-90f5-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/heat-spurs-surge-in-california-oregon-wildfires/2017/09/03/9b367620-90f5-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 04, 2017, 06:36:53 pm Can you please give me your best advice on how to speed up global warming....it's bloody freezing up here🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 06:41:17 pm Ah you want to go back to the good old days when it was warmer than now. Shhhh.. don't tell the warmunists. Their heads might explode, again 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 04, 2017, 06:47:59 pm ..yeah.....I remember when I was a teenager on summer holidays in Manly Beach..
...weeks and weeks of beautiful hot weather....cars..girls..alcohol.....drugs......piss ups....more girls....more alcohol...more druggs..oh. Yeah...those were the days😵 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 07:10:45 pm The warmunist are already trying to wiggle out of the indisputable facts regarding fuck all warming trend over the last 15 years (using all sorts of wacky theories they pulled out of their area at the last moment). Mark my words, if the global climate nose dives into significant an undeniable cooling these same Eco fascists will invent some new bullshit theory to blame humans.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 07:13:57 pm The insurance companies KNOW what human-caused global warming is costing them. You can see it in the cost of their premiums increasing considerably faster than the rate of inflaction. Recent weather-related natural disasters are going to drive up your insurance premiums by an even faster rate. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 07:15:31 pm Last year was the hottest year on record. It was hotter than the previous year which was the hottest year on record. That year was hotter than the previous year which was the hottest year on record. And that year was hotter than the previous year which was the hottest year on record. Get the picture? Somehow I doubt it, 'cause you two are too stupid & dumb to get it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 07:31:40 pm Nope. Weather events cost more because there is more and more expensive infrastructure packed into populous areas, NOT. There is no upward trend in global storm frequency or severity over the last hundred years. Pull your head out of your arse and start researching this stuff for yourself. The bullshit brigade lefty media and Eco fascist warmunists are full of it.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 07:40:07 pm Autocomplete flustercluck. Here's the tidied up version...
Nope. Weather events cost more because there is more and more expensive infrastructure packed into populous areas. There is no upward trend in global storm frequency or severity over the last hundred years. Pull your head out of your arse and start researching this stuff for yourself. The bullshit brigade lefty media and Eco fascist warmunists are full of it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 08:06:36 pm Meanwhile... Australian ski fields are considering extending their ski season this year.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 08:57:28 pm "last year was the hottest year on record"
And this could have been said in any number of years BEFORE humans put any significant Co2 into the atmosphere. The temp and sea level has been gradually rising since the last ice age ended. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 08:59:51 pm Enjoy the glorious "warm" while it lasts. Most of the earth's past has been fucking freezing.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 09:26:48 pm Here's the non-fiddled data from satellites that measure that measure the temp of the lower atmosphere all over the planet. They only started doing this in 1979. Prior to that measurements were taken from sparsely and inconsistently placed thermometers across the globe....
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_July_2017_v6.jpg (http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_July_2017_v6.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 10:37:06 pm WOW!! Six posts in a row!!! Somebody must be getting desperate!!!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 11:03:07 pm Nah not desperate, just using braincells instead of copy and paste mindless spamming 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 11:06:03 pm Ah, I get it....you're too intellectually-challenged to remember everything you wish to post in one go, so you do it in tiny sound-bites to compensate for your limited attention span. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 04, 2017, 11:21:23 pm I can only conclude you gullibly believe everything you are told from the lefty bullshit brigade media.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 04, 2017, 11:56:49 pm WOW....at this rate, it will be no time at all and the thread will be ticking over to yet another new page. Which means I'll be able to post my chart again, just to keep reminding you dunderheads and flat-earthers about the TRUE situation. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 05, 2017, 04:50:20 am I want to grow mangos, could you please tell how I can help the planet warm asap😉
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:07:46 am You're an idiot. You can have the mangos, but you'll also get more tropical cyclones to trash them. Dumbarses like you just haven't got a clue. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:08:32 am Enjoy the glorious "warm" while it lasts. Most of the earth's past has been fucking freezing. Yeah, the desperate arguments of the anti-warmalists. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:09:14 am Meanwhile... Australian ski fields are considering extending their ski season this year. Yet more desperate, yet ignorant, arguments from the anti-warmalists. Face facts, you're an idiot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:09:55 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:10:12 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Hurricane Harvey offers lessons Republicans will probably ignore By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Monday, September 04, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59ac9015/turbine/la-1504481295-8936s6q28a-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59ac9015/turbine/la-1504481295-8936s6q28a-snap-image) HURRICANE HARVEY has exposed the weakness of the three shibboleths that have been the guiding political philosophy for two generations of Republicans. Those three shaky imperatives are that 1) lowering taxes is always a good idea, 2) government programs can always be cut and 3) economic growth must always be given priority over environmental concerns. Until the hurricane hit, House Republicans were all set to chop $876 million from the disaster relief budget for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). That reduction would not produce a savings for taxpayers since the expectation was that the money would go toward buying President Trump's border wall — the wall that Mexico, no matter what Trump claims, will never pay for. Now, reality has set in and the GOP congressmen realize there is a reason government needs to set money aside for disaster relief: Disasters always happen. It is wishful thinking, I know, but this moment really should provide a broader object lesson to Republicans. There is a deep flaw in the way they put together budgets both at the national and state levels. They start with the premise that any governmental function can get by on less — that national parks, for instance, will not be hurt by continuous reductions in funds for basic maintenance or that quality educators can be attracted to public schools even if salaries are kept so low that teachers become eligible for poverty programs (as has happened in Republican-ruled Oklahoma). Then, after trimming money for vital services, they cut taxes for big corporations and wealthy individuals on the theory that the economy will thereby be stimulated and eventually more tax revenue will pour in. As folks in places like super-red-state Kansas have learned, when you budget this way, the government begins to run out of money, government services grow shabby, the economy actually suffers and legislators are left with the choice of raising taxes or making even more draconian cuts. Or, on the national level, the federal debt keeps going up because even the deepest reductions to programs like food stamps and environmental protection and diplomacy and disaster relief will not be enough to balance the books as long as trillions of dollars are still being spent on the military, Social Security and Medicare — particularly if tax cuts for the rich are tossed into the mix. And, of course, sharply reducing taxes is currently at the top of the Republican agenda. They euphemistically call it tax “reform”. Trump went to Missouri a few days ago to sell the illusion that such reform will benefit workers and the middle class, but, in truth, it will simply give back even more federal dollars to big corporations and very wealthy people who already have more money than they know what to do with. One may ask where exactly does Trump plan to get the money for his wall and for a big infrastructure program and for a rebuilding plan for the hurricane-hammered region of Texas if these high-end tax cuts are enacted? Another lesson from Hurricane Harvey is that allowing decades of sprawling growth to pave over the landscape and subvert natural processes will, sooner or later, produce dire consequences. In Texas, folks do not like regulations. They do not like government telling them where to build a housing subdivision or a chemical plant or a highway. Houston has famously grown to be the fourth-largest city in the United States by dispensing with zoning laws as the metropolis expanded across the flat, clay soil plain with little regard for wetlands and bayous. You can see the result of those policies in all the photographs of Houston neighborhoods drowned in a vast lake of brown water. Now all those government-hating Texas libertarians expect the federal government to bail them out. Under the Obama administration, new rules were imposed that required federally supported rebuilding efforts to take into account the effects of climate change. In other words, hurricane-ravaged buildings and bridges and roads needed to be built to withstand the bigger floods and storms to come. But the Trump administration, operating on the prevailing Republican supposition that climate change can be denied or ignored, has revoked those rules. That means the infrastructure of Houston will be restored to the same old standards. The certain result is that, when the Gulf of Mexico warms even more in the years to come, the temperature rise will multiply the destructive power of future hurricanes and taxpayers will be stuck paying for yet another disaster that could have been mitigated if common sense, prudence and science had been followed. This kind of governance is idiotic but, sadly, it will take more than a monster storm to blow away the erroneous notions of today's Republican Party. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hurricane-lessons-20170903-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hurricane-lessons-20170903-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 10:07:19 am Didn't read the spam article. The picture is a typical stunt by the bullshit brigade lefty media. It's know as the straw man. Flood victims are calling for smaller government? Nope just the lefty bullshit brigade media using the propaganda techniques they learned from the soviets and the Nazis.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 10:13:11 am Advocates of less bloated govt bureaucracies want emergency services rendered ineffective? Nope. Just more lies from the lefty bullshit brigade media.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 11:47:02 am Meanwhile in the hot dry apocalypse known as Australia...
Record ski seasons and spring snow in low lying areas, yet again 😂 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 11:53:13 am (http://www.robotbutt.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Jack-Nicholson-Shining-240x240.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 03:55:19 pm Bullshit-brigade alarmist models vs observed reality....
(https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/christy_dec8.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 04:19:37 pm 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 posts in a row again. You really need to do something about your short-attention span (ie....think before you post and put it all in one post), or before we know it, this thread will be up to reply #749 and I will be posting that brilliant graph again to begin the next page of the thread with reply #750. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 04:42:33 pm Hey if you actually pay attention you'll notice I think about what I'm doing, as opposed to just mindlessly spamming out the same copy and paste shit over and over 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 05:29:33 pm One day KTJ all these graphs will sink in and you'll have light bulb moment of "actually the theory of catastrophic human caused global warming doesn't make sense and is most likely a crock of shit". I'm not holding my breath but maybe if you give the bong and the shrooms a rest 😁...
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 05:49:04 pm The vast majority of climate scientists don't agree with you. And they have plenty of peer-reviewed research on their side. Desperate people, such as YOU, drag out all sorts of dodgy science which hasn't been peer-reviewed and present it as gospel, because people like you don't give a stuff about trashing the planet. You don't care if you leave a scorched earth for your grandchildren and great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren, because basically you are selfish and live entirely in the here & now. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 06:12:59 pm Science isn't about consensus. Even it was, do you believe "the majority" of climate scientists believe humans are causing catastrophic warming because of some "97% consensus" meme you heard about?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 05, 2017, 06:14:05 pm Can you please tell me how to speed up global warming..I want to grow tomatoes in the winter😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 06:16:37 pm Unfortunately climate science has become like wimmins studies. A mad echo chamber where if you dare question their batty conclusions you'll be "no platformed". Sort of like nazi Germany or the soviet union.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 06:19:36 pm Donald just leave the lights on all night and drive a bigger car. Then you'll be in the tropics in a flash 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 06:25:29 pm "Peer review" is a quick check for obvious mistakes. Science climate science peer review has gone mad and been infected by green/left activism it can no longer be trusted.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 05, 2017, 06:41:54 pm And...."just leave the lights on all night and drive a bigger car. Then you'll be in the tropics in a flash 😁"
...I've been doing that for the past 5 years....to no evail...thinking about buying a couple of coal mines...yeah in China and India they have new coal fired power stations starting up every month😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 07:13:52 pm https://roaldjlarsen.wordpress.com/50-former-ipcc-experts/ (https://roaldjlarsen.wordpress.com/50-former-ipcc-experts/)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 07:24:25 pm Here's 50 climate profs actually appointed by the IPCC as climate experts. Think about it....
50 former IPCC experts 1. Dr Robert Balling: “The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” (This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers). 2. Dr. Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.” 3. Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.” 4. Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.” 5. Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.” 6. Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.” 7. Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers.” 8. Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996, the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3,000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernable human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.” 9. Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the longstanding claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.” 10. Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.” 11. Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.” 12. Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.” 13. Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.” 14. Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) concept until the furor started after [NASA’s James] Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980’s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting at first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.” 15. Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.” 16. Dr Vincent Gray: “The (IPCC) climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.” 17. Dr Kenneth Green: “We can expect the climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority.” 18. Dr Mike Hulme: “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous … The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen.” 19. Dr Kiminori Itoh: “There are many factors which cause climate change. Considering only greenhouse gases is nonsense and harmful. When people know what the truth is they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” 20. Dr Yuri Izrael: “There is no proven link between human activity and global warming. I think the panic over global warming is totally unjustified. There is no serious threat to the climate.” 21. Dr Steven Japar: “Temperature measurements show that the climate model-predicted mid-troposphere hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them.” 22. Dr Georg Kaser: “This number (of receding glaciers reported by the IPCC) is not just a little bit wrong, but far out of any order of magnitude … It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing,” 23. Dr Aynsley Kellow: “I’m not holding my breath for criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: there is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.” 24. Dr Madhav Khandekar: “I have carefully analysed adverse impacts of climate change as projected by the IPCC and have discounted these claims as exaggerated and lacking any supporting evidence.” 25. Dr Hans Labohm: “The alarmist passages in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers have been skewed through an elaborate and sophisticated process of spin-doctoring.” 26. Dr. Andrew Lacis: “There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department.” 27. Dr Chris Landsea: “I cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.” 28. Dr Richard Lindzen: “The IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. It uses summaries to misrepresent what scientists say and exploits public ignorance.” 29. Dr Harry Lins: “Surface temperature changes over the past century have been episodic and modest and there has been no net global warming for over a decade now. The case for alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated.” 30. Dr Philip Lloyd: “I am doing a detailed assessment of the IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science. I have found examples of a summary saying precisely the opposite of what the scientists said.” 31. Dr Martin Manning: “Some government delegates influencing the IPCC Summary for Policymakers misrepresent or contradict the lead authors.” 32. Stephen McIntyre: “The many references in the popular media to a “consensus of thousands of scientists” are both a great exaggeration and also misleading.” 33. Dr Patrick Michaels: “The rates of warming, on multiple time scales have now invalidated the suite of IPCC climate models. No, the science is not settled.” 34. Dr Nils-Axel Morner: “If you go around the globe, you find no sea level rise anywhere.” 35. Dr Johannes Oerlemans: “The IPCC has become too political. Many scientists have not been able to resist the siren call of fame, research funding and meetings in exotic places that awaits them if they are willing to compromise scientific principles and integrity in support of the man-made global-warming doctrine.” 36. Dr Roger Pielke: “All of my comments were ignored without even a rebuttal. At that point, I concluded that the IPCC Reports were actually intended to be advocacy documents designed to produce particular policy actions, but not as a true and honest assessment of the understanding of the climate system.” 37. Dr Jan Pretel: “It’s nonsense to drastically reduce emissions … predicting about the distant future-100 years can’t be predicted due to uncertainties.” 38. Dr Paul Reiter: “As far as the science being ‘settled,’ I think that is an obscenity. The fact is the science is being distorted by people who are not scientists.” 39. Dr Murray Salby: “I have an involuntary gag reflex whenever someone says the “science is settled. Anyone who thinks the science is settled on this topic is in fantasia.” 40. Dr Tom Segalstad: “The IPCC global warming model is not supported by the scientific data.” 41. Dr Fred Singer: “Isn’t it remarkable that the Policymakers Summary of the IPCC report avoids mentioning the satellite data altogether, or even the existence of satellites–probably because the data show a (slight) cooling over the last 18 years, in direct contradiction to the calculations from climate models?” 42. Dr Hajo Smit: “There is clear cut solar-climate coupling and a very strong natural variability of climate on all historical time scales. Currently I hardly believe anymore that there is any relevant relationship between human CO2 emissions and climate change.” 43. Dr Roy Spencer: “The IPCC is not a scientific organization and was formed to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Claims of human-cause global warming are only a means to that goal.” 44. Dr Richard Tol: “The IPCC attracted more people with political rather than academic motives. In AR4, green activists held key positions in the IPCC and they succeeded in excluding or neutralising opposite voices.” 45. Dr Tom Tripp: “There is so much of a natural variability in weather it makes it difficult to come to a scientifically valid conclusion that global warming is man made.” 46. Dr Robert Watson: “The (IPCC) mistakes all appear to have gone in the direction of making it seem like climate change is more serious by overstating the impact. That is worrying. The IPCC needs to look at this trend in the errors and ask why it happened.” 47. Dr Gerd-Rainer Weber: “Most of the extremist views about climate change have little or no scientific basis.” 48. Dr David Wojick: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” 49. Dr Miklos Zagoni: “I am positively convinced that the anthropogenic global warming theory is wrong.” 50. Dr. Eduardo Zorita: “Editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations, even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. By writing these lines… a few of my future studies will not see the light of publication.” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:57:16 pm Oooooooh.....goodie.....the message count is rapidly building up towards the next page. I'll be able to post my chart again. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:59:02 pm FIVE Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:59:12 pm FOUR Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:59:27 pm THREE Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:59:38 pm TWO Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 07:59:54 pm ONE Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 08:00:14 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 05, 2017, 08:17:10 pm Can ya please tell me how I can speed up global warming....I want to grow mangos😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 08:21:54 pm "I'll be able to post my chart again."
Picnic. Sandwich. Short. 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 08:34:51 pm Donald China and India will help watermelons grow very nicely by increasing Co2 in the atmosphere. See, plants evolved when Co2 levels were much higher than today so they love the extra co2😊
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 10:28:15 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Hurricane Harvey offers lessons Republicans will probably ignore By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Monday, September 04, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59ac9015/turbine/la-1504481295-8936s6q28a-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59ac9015/turbine/la-1504481295-8936s6q28a-snap-image) HURRICANE HARVEY has exposed the weakness of the three shibboleths that have been the guiding political philosophy for two generations of Republicans. Those three shaky imperatives are that 1) lowering taxes is always a good idea, 2) government programs can always be cut and 3) economic growth must always be given priority over environmental concerns. Until the hurricane hit, House Republicans were all set to chop $876 million from the disaster relief budget for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). That reduction would not produce a savings for taxpayers since the expectation was that the money would go toward buying President Trump's border wall — the wall that Mexico, no matter what Trump claims, will never pay for. Now, reality has set in and the GOP congressmen realize there is a reason government needs to set money aside for disaster relief: Disasters always happen. It is wishful thinking, I know, but this moment really should provide a broader object lesson to Republicans. There is a deep flaw in the way they put together budgets both at the national and state levels. They start with the premise that any governmental function can get by on less — that national parks, for instance, will not be hurt by continuous reductions in funds for basic maintenance or that quality educators can be attracted to public schools even if salaries are kept so low that teachers become eligible for poverty programs (as has happened in Republican-ruled Oklahoma). Then, after trimming money for vital services, they cut taxes for big corporations and wealthy individuals on the theory that the economy will thereby be stimulated and eventually more tax revenue will pour in. As folks in places like super-red-state Kansas have learned, when you budget this way, the government begins to run out of money, government services grow shabby, the economy actually suffers and legislators are left with the choice of raising taxes or making even more draconian cuts. Or, on the national level, the federal debt keeps going up because even the deepest reductions to programs like food stamps and environmental protection and diplomacy and disaster relief will not be enough to balance the books as long as trillions of dollars are still being spent on the military, Social Security and Medicare — particularly if tax cuts for the rich are tossed into the mix. And, of course, sharply reducing taxes is currently at the top of the Republican agenda. They euphemistically call it tax “reform”. Trump went to Missouri a few days ago to sell the illusion that such reform will benefit workers and the middle class, but, in truth, it will simply give back even more federal dollars to big corporations and very wealthy people who already have more money than they know what to do with. One may ask where exactly does Trump plan to get the money for his wall and for a big infrastructure program and for a rebuilding plan for the hurricane-hammered region of Texas if these high-end tax cuts are enacted? Another lesson from Hurricane Harvey is that allowing decades of sprawling growth to pave over the landscape and subvert natural processes will, sooner or later, produce dire consequences. In Texas, folks do not like regulations. They do not like government telling them where to build a housing subdivision or a chemical plant or a highway. Houston has famously grown to be the fourth-largest city in the United States by dispensing with zoning laws as the metropolis expanded across the flat, clay soil plain with little regard for wetlands and bayous. You can see the result of those policies in all the photographs of Houston neighborhoods drowned in a vast lake of brown water. Now all those government-hating Texas libertarians expect the federal government to bail them out. Under the Obama administration, new rules were imposed that required federally supported rebuilding efforts to take into account the effects of climate change. In other words, hurricane-ravaged buildings and bridges and roads needed to be built to withstand the bigger floods and storms to come. But the Trump administration, operating on the prevailing Republican supposition that climate change can be denied or ignored, has revoked those rules. That means the infrastructure of Houston will be restored to the same old standards. The certain result is that, when the Gulf of Mexico warms even more in the years to come, the temperature rise will multiply the destructive power of future hurricanes and taxpayers will be stuck paying for yet another disaster that could have been mitigated if common sense, prudence and science had been followed. This kind of governance is idiotic but, sadly, it will take more than a monster storm to blow away the erroneous notions of today's Republican Party. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hurricane-lessons-20170903-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hurricane-lessons-20170903-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 10:41:53 pm Hello? Knock knock. Anyone home in there? 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 05, 2017, 10:45:30 pm from The Washington Post.... In a changing Arctic, a lone Coast Guard icebreaker maneuvers through ice and geopolitics Once an unforgiving no man's land, the melting Arctic and its rich resources are now the focus of great power rivals. By DAN LAMOTHE | 10:00AM EDT - Monday, September 04, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3799_2copy_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3799_2copy_copy.JPG) Ice floes surround the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy in the Arctic Ocean on July 29th. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. ABOARD THE USCGC HEALY IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN — Coast Guard Ensign Ryan Carpenter peered north through a front window of this 420-foot-long ship, directing its bright-red hull through jagged chunks of ice hundreds of miles north of Alaska. It was only the second time that Carpenter, 23, had driven the 16,400-ton USCGC Healy, one of the U.S. military's two working polar icebreakers. He turned the ship slightly to the left in the sapphire-blue water, and a few seconds later, the ship's bow rumbled through the crusty white ice floe at about 10 mph. Metallic shudders rippled throughout the vessel, a feeling that Arctic rookies often find unnerving. Carpenter is part of an increasingly pointed U.S. strategy to prepare for competition — and possible conflict — in what was once a frosty no man's land. The warming climate has created Arctic waterways that are growing freer of ice, and with China and Russia increasingly looking toward the region for resources, the United States is studying how many new icebreakers to build, whether to arm them with cruise missiles, and how to deal with more commercial traffic in an area that is still unpredictable and deadly. Admiral Paul Zukunft, the Coast Guard commandant, recently warned that Russia and China are already encroaching on Arctic waters over the extended U.S. continental shelf. The region is about the size of Texas and rich with oil, minerals and other resources that could be extracted as technology improves. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard6805_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard6805_copy.JPG) Ensign Ryan Carpenter and Ensign Taylor Peace navigate the USCGC Healy on July 31st in the Arctic. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3113_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3113_copy.JPG) The Healy's route is recorded on a nautical chart on July 28th during a voyage to the Arctic Ocean. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Zukunft said last month (https://www.csis.org/events/us-coast-guard-priorities-future) in Washington that the situation in the Arctic could someday resemble the contentious disputes in the South China Sea, where China has built man-made islands and military installations over the objections of its neighbors. Russia already has made contested claims that stretch to the North Pole and possesses more than 25 icebreakers, with more on the way. The next generations of Russian icebreakers aren't being built just to transit polar ice but to fight in it. One kind of ship in the works, the 374-foot Project 23550-class, is designed to be nimble in this environment while carrying naval guns and cruise missiles. The Kremlin also has disclosed plans to build or expand numerous bases along the northeastern Russian coastline, north of the Arctic Circle, including on Wrangel Island, Kotelny Island and at Cape Schmidt. Meanwhile, China also has arrived in the Arctic, sailing research and exploration vessels while arguing that no nation has sovereignty over these waters and the natural resources below. Chinese military officials have said that sovereignty disputes in the Arctic could require the use of force, according to an assessment written for the Naval War College Review (https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/31708e41-a53c-45d3-a5e4-ccb5ad550815/Race-to-the-North--China-s-Arctic-Strategy-and-Its.aspx). The Obama administration proposed building new icebreakers in 2015, citing the warming seas and concerns about Russia's intentions. But the effort to do so has gained new attention in recent months. Despite President Trump's skepticism about climate change, he marveled at the power of polar icebreakers during a May 17th commencement speech at the Coast Guard Academy and promised his administration will build “many of them.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5511_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5511_copy.JPG) Coast Guard Petty Officer 3rd Class Brandon Arciello, a boatswain's mate, slings an anchor to tether a small boat during dive exercises on July 30th in the Arctic Ocean. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Zukunft said that a fleet comprising three new medium icebreakers and three heavy icebreakers would allow the service to retire its older ships and keep one icebreaker perpetually patrolling in both the Arctic and Antarctic. The Healy was commissioned in 1999, but the other working polar icebreaker, the USCGC Polar Star, is more than 40 years old. It deploys each year to Antarctica, but crew members have resorted to searching eBay for some parts because they are so hard to find, according to Healy crew members familiar with the sister ship. The cost of the new icebreakers is uncertain at this point. Estimates are often reported to be about $1 billion each because of the reinforced hull and robust engines needed to operate in ice, but Zukunft said he thinks it will be less. A report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=24834) published in July recommended that a single class of four heavy icebreakers be purchased in one block buy to save money and suggested that time is running out to do so. “The nation is ill-equipped to protect its interests and maintain leadership in these regions and has fallen behind other Arctic nations, which have mobilized to expand their access to ice-covered regions,” the report said. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5184_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5184_copy.JPG) Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer Randle Groves, center, participates in a joint Coast Guard-Navy dive operation July 30th off the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5702_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard5702_copy.JPG) Chief Petty Officer Chuck Ashmore, a Coast Guard diver, waits for his dive partner to enter the water to explore beneath the ocean's icy surface on July 30th. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Into the ice A Washington Post reporter and photographer sailed on the Healy from July 28th through to August 6th, arriving on a Coast Guard helicopter off Alaska's Cape Lisburne and departing on a small seacraft in the port of Nome, Alaska. In between, the ship meandered at least 230 miles northeast of Point Barrow, the northernmost point in the United States, before turning back. The Healy, which travels annually to the Arctic, deployed this year on June 27th from its home port in Seattle with about 85 Coast Guardsmen and 40 scientists. It will make several trips to and from the Arctic Circle this summer, with stops in Alaskan port cities such as Seward to swap out scientists and gather supplies. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_750w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/National-Security/Graphics/2300-ARCTIC0905.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/04/National-Security/Graphics/2300-ARCTIC0905.jpg) Missions on the Healy vary, based on what the scientists aboard need. On this trip, the ship carried members of the Coast Guard Research and Development Center as they tested unmanned boat systems among the ice floes, including an oil skimmer, a quadcopter and a 10-foot yellow vessel that was named the “Minion”, after the popular cartoon characters. Scot Tripp, the chief civilian scientist on the mission, said that when he started coming to the Arctic in 2012, there was ice nearly all the way south to Alaska's northern shores until June or July. That is no longer the case, prompting the service to evaluate what kind of new equipment it might need if a crisis emerges. “There was no need for the Coast Guard to be up here,” Tripp said. “This was frozen, and now it's not. So now there are waterways and cruise ships coming up, so you run into the possibility of disaster with one of those.” Even with the warming climate, the Arctic environment is unforgiving. The summer water and air temperatures are about 30 degrees Farenheit, and winds often howl at 30 to 40 mph. Coast Guard members work the decks in thick snowsuits, steel-toed boots and hard hats, and anyone leaving the Healy on a smaller seacraft used for exploration must wear a winter suit with a rubberized shell to extend how long they can survive if they fall in the water. Officers piloting the Healy said that they do their best to avoid ice, but in areas where it is inevitable, it is considered safer to use the reinforced front of the ship to punch straight through it, rather than “shouldering it” and taking a glancing blow. Even then, sticky situations still emerge. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3662_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard3662_copy.JPG) Drift ice floats past the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy on July 29th. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard6638_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard6638_copy.JPG) Navy and Coast Guard members play bingo July 30th on the USCGC Healy. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Ensign Taylor Peace, 23, who is on her second Arctic tour, said that last summer, the Healy spent four days wiggling out of an ice floe that wouldn't let go of the ship. “No one flipped out,” said Peace of Fairfax, Virginia. “You just keep trying. All you’re doing is waiting for the wind to change direction so it can relieve the pressure, or so you can at least make five inches in an hour.” The harsh environment was on full display July 29th, as the Healy carried out two consecutive missions on the water in a smaller sea craft. In the first, the Healy lowered a small landing craft carrying members of the scientific team to examine the usefulness of the Minion and other equipment as the drone boat bounced between craggy ice floes. The banana-yellow vessel, carrying solar panels and a camera, got stuck only after its battery died, prompting the crew to tow it back to the Healy. “This is a good chance to try it in a harsh environment, coming out here to work these vehicles,” said Jason Story, a Coast Guard naval architect who designed the Minion. Winds picked up and fog thickened during the second mission of the day as divers marked a return to something that had not occurred in the Arctic since August 17th, 2006: Coast Guard ice diving. The long hiatus followed the deaths of two Healy crew members — Lieutenant Jessica Hill, 31, and Petty Officer 2nd Class Steven Duque, 26 — during an ice dive that a service investigation found was poorly supervised. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard8266_copy_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard8266_copy_copy.JPG) A record of diving activity on a window August 1st in the Healy's bridge. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard8179_copy_copy.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/03/Others/Images/2017-08-11/coastguard8179_copy_copy.JPG) The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy navigates fog and ice on August 1st in the Arctic Ocean. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. The Coast Guard subsequently started its own ice-diving school and made diving a primary occupation, rather than a collateral duty. The divers can perform maintenance on the ship, assist other vessels that are in trouble or perform salvage operations involving ships that have sunk. “When we deploy to the Arctic, there is no bench strength nearby,” said Captain Greg Tlapa, the Healy's commanding officer. “No one is coming to save us. So, the more self-sufficient you are in terms of underwater inspection and hull repair, the less risk there is to a deployment.” On a bone-chilling afternoon, teams of two divers dove among the floes while a third diver sat ready in case his help was required. The sea craft was anchored to a hulking piece of ice on the ocean's surface. The divers marveled at the clearness of the water and the crystallized ice — about 85 percent of the sea ice floating in the Arctic is beneath the surface. “It's like diving in outer space,” said one of the divers, Chief Petty Officer Chuck Ashmore. “I think that's the closest comparison I could make. You're seeing some just incredible structures down there.” • Dan Lamothe covers national security for The Washington Post and anchors its military blog, Checkpoint (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint). https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-a-changing-arctic-a-lone-coast-guard-icebreaker-maneuvers-through-ice-and-geopolitics/2017/09/03/dfad84d4-7d12-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-a-changing-arctic-a-lone-coast-guard-icebreaker-maneuvers-through-ice-and-geopolitics/2017/09/03/dfad84d4-7d12-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 05, 2017, 11:21:25 pm As I've shown you, today's Arctic conditions are nothing new. All normal. Best not to blindly believe the braindead lefty media.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 06, 2017, 06:49:18 am It's summer in the arctic....ice is melting.....well there's a surprise😳
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 06, 2017, 10:29:44 am Yep....Tweedle DUMB and Tweedle DUMBER have been posting again. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 06, 2017, 10:47:15 am Meanwhile in Antarctica, steadily growing overall ice volumes.
Meanwhile in the ocean, sea level rise continuing as it did for the last roughly 12000 years. No dramas except in lefty propaganda land. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 06, 2017, 04:33:58 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... EDITORIAL: How President Trump and the EPA's Scott Pruitt are making America's environment deadly again “Trump's proposed EPA budget would cut 31% of the agency's funding, kill 3,200 of the agency's 15,000 jobs, and cut $129 million from federal enforcement.” By the LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | 4:00AM PDT - Tuesday, September, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59a9ef8f/turbine/la-1504309131-retrndk712-snap-image/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59a9ef8f/turbine/la-1504309131-retrndk712-snap-image) President Donald Trump shakes hands with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington on June 1st. — Photograph: Andrew Harnik/Associated Press. WHEN Donald Trump (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/donald-trump-PEBSL000163-topic.html) ran for president, one pledge he made repeatedly was to reduce regulations and limit the hurdles businesses face when trying to build, expand or operate — including when they affect the environment. You know, pollute. And there is a legitimate argument to be made that outdated, ineffective or counterproductive regulations should be amended or withdrawn; that's why every presidential candidate promises to do just that. But there is absolutely no persuasive argument to be made that the federal government should ignore its responsibility to enforce environmental regulations. But that appears to be just what is happening under Environmental Protection Agency (http://www.latimes.com/topic/environmental-issues/u.s.-environmental-protection-agency-ORGOV000048-topic.html) director Scott Pruitt (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/scott-pruitt-PEPLT005339-topic.html), whose coziness with the oil-and-gas industry (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/scott-pruitt-environmental-protection-agency.html) makes him among the least-appropriate people in the country to ensure the right balance is struck between promoting economic and industrial activity and preserving the environment. Pruitt stepped into the national political spotlight when, as attorney general for Oklahoma, he sued the EPA at least 14 times (http://www.edfaction.org/scott-pruitts-web-fundraising-and-lawsuits). Now he's in charge of it, and he has moved aggressively to undo or dismantle core aspects of EPA enforcement. In fact, the Environmental Integrity Project (https://www.environmentalintegrity.org) reports that the Trump administration collected 60% less in civil penalties from polluters through to July 31st than any of the previous three administrations collected over a similar time frame. Pruitt has filed only 26 civil actions to resolve violations, 30% fewer than the three previous administrations filed on average during the same time period. Pruitt also has targeted more than 30 rules and regulations for rescission or rollback (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/us/politics/trump-epa-chief-pruitt-regulations-climate-change.html), and, according to the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility advocacy group (https://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/epa-criminal-pollution-enforcement-withering-away.html), has significantly reduced enforcement of the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act — which provided the “most active dockets” under previous administrators. But his aim is broad. He overruled his own staff (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/29/trump-epa-declines-to-ban-pesticide-that-obama-had-proposed-outlawing) and refused to ban chlorpyrifos (https://www.nrdc.org/chlorpyrifos), a pesticide that mounting scientific evidence suggests can affect development of the brain and nervous systems in young children (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/apr/05/environmentalists-sue-epa-pesticide-chlorpyrifos). He dropped an Obama administration requirement that oil and gas drillers collect and report data on emissions (https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-industry/background-information-request-oil-and). He also tried to freeze an Obama rule restricting methane emissions from new oil and gas wells, but a federal appeals court held that Pruitt couldn't do so unilaterally (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/climate/court-blocks-epa-effort-to-suspend-obama-era-methane-rule.html) and must follow federal regulatory procedures — a decision that should hearten environmentalists who hope the courts will be the firewall against the administration's attack on environmental protections (http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-epas-dangerous-anti-regulatory-policies). And make no mistake — this is an attack. During the campaign, Trump said (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/15/epa-head-defends-white-houses-plan-for-massive-cuts-to-his-agency): “Environmental protection, what they do is a disgrace; every week they come out with new regulations.” His proposed budget (http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-energy/2017/03/massive-cuts-for-epa-in-trump-budget-219262), which Pruitt endorses (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/15/epa-head-defends-white-houses-plan-for-massive-cuts-to-his-agency), would cut 31% of the agency's funding, kill 3,200 of the agency's 15,000 jobs, and cut $129 million from federal enforcement and an additional $482 million in aid to states to support their enforcement efforts, among other environmental programs. The Republican-led Congress told Trump it will not go along with such a devastating budget (https://newrepublic.com/minutes/143360/republicans-arent-cool-trumps-extreme-epa-budget-cuts), but the spending plan still evinces how much value Trump places on environmental protection. Given the president's abject disinterest in the nuts-and-bolts of policy, Trump's priorities are by default set by Pruitt, a man who went to Washington planning to collapse from within an agency he had fought so hard from the outside. And Pruitt is doing it largely out of sight (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/us/politics/scott-pruitt-epa.html). Career employees say they rarely interact with him, and when they do, note-taking is not allowed, limiting creation of government records. Policy decisions — such as they are — are made in consultation with a coterie of political appointees and industry representatives, a practice that led several Senate Democrats on Thursday to accuse Pruitt of “taking deliberate steps to thwart transparency” (https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-08-31%20Oversight%20Letter%20to%20Pruitt%20re%20Transparency.pdf), including taking care not to leave a paper trail of the decision-making process. Tellingly, Pruitt moves through the EPA offices with a bodyguard detail, a message that he sees himself as treading in enemy territory. Not surprisingly, morale is toxic (https://news.vice.com/story/epa-staffers-are-being-forced-to-retire-or-face-massive-cuts) and career employees are looking for the exit — which, in fact, helps speed up the agency's decline. While it's true that any of the other Republican candidates for president last year likely would have targeted the EPA for some cuts, it's hard to imagine any of them doing it with this level of aggression. Congress has yet to set federal spending levels for the next fiscal year, so it's hard to tell what the EPA's budget ultimately will look like. But what is clear is that even if Congress appropriates money, Pruitt won't necessarily use it. Congress has an oversight role here, and it must ensure that Pruitt, left to his own devices, doesn't single-handedly dismantle the nation's strongest force for environmental protection. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-trump-epa-environment-pruitt-20170905-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-trump-epa-environment-pruitt-20170905-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 06, 2017, 04:48:45 pm Hey ktj....I'm trying to grow mangos in Northland but need it to be about 2 degrees warmer...you got any tips on how I can maximize global warming asap🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 06, 2017, 05:07:16 pm Trump draining the swamp of loony left ideologues as promised 🙆
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 06, 2017, 05:09:16 pm Word on the street is mangos love extra co2 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 06, 2017, 05:15:12 pm Adj..."Word on the street is mangos love extra co2 😁" ...really...just as well China and India are starting up new coal fired power stations every week😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 06, 2017, 11:01:55 pm And another BIG one.... from The Washington Post.... • Catastrophic Hurricane Irma — now a Category 5 — is on a collision course with Florida (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/05/catastrophic-hurricane-irma-now-a-cat-5-is-on-a-collision-course-with-florida) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/rb0-2.gif&w=720) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/rb0-2.gif&w=720) Infrared satellite image of Hurricane Irma as of 12:45 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. — Picture: NOAA. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 07, 2017, 12:12:02 am Yep it's a ripper. No evidence that it's related to the eco zealot creation that is the global climate apocalypse though. 😊
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 07, 2017, 12:31:40 am Yep should do those mangos a treat. All that yummy CO2 has already been shown to be significantly greening the planet. The alarmist moonbats are funnily enough always very quiet about that(or any good news).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 08, 2017, 01:41:48 pm (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/08/Interactivity/Images/irma-homepage.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/this-storm-has-the-potential-to-catastrophically-devastate-our-state/2017/09/07/3fedb8f2-93ff-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html) CLICK ON THE MAP TO READ THE LATEST INFO. And there's another HUGE hurricane tagging along right behind it. I wonder how the flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers explain away multiple 500-year storms in such a small period of time? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 08, 2017, 05:44:08 pm Can you please tell me how to speed up global warming...just that I am trying to grow mangos😜
...Started investing in companies who are developing new coal fired power stations in China....but is that really enough? ...is there more I could do🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 08, 2017, 06:08:13 pm KTJ the flat earther/deniers are those who deny the global storm records of the last approx 150 years. No rising trend for global storm/hurricane frequency or severity. Look it up yourself.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 08, 2017, 07:21:55 pm Tell that to the insurance companies who have looked at the peer-reviewed science and decided that human-caused global warming is a major issue for the human race. They will be looking at climate-change deniers like you are rolling their eyes, just like every intelligent person is. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 08, 2017, 09:18:19 pm Yeah right 😁
50 former IPCC experts... 1. Dr Robert Balling: “The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” (This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers). 2. Dr. Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.” 3. Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.” 4. Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.” 5. Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.” 6. Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.” 7. Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers.” 8. Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996, the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3,000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernable human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.” 9. Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the longstanding claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.” 10. Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.” 11. Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.” 12. Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.” 13. Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.” 14. Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) concept until the furor started after [NASA’s James] Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980’s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting at first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.” 15. Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.” 16. Dr Vincent Gray: “The (IPCC) climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.” 17. Dr Kenneth Green: “We can expect the climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority.” 18. Dr Mike Hulme: “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous … The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen.” 19. Dr Kiminori Itoh: “There are many factors which cause climate change. Considering only greenhouse gases is nonsense and harmful. When people know what the truth is they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” 20. Dr Yuri Izrael: “There is no proven link between human activity and global warming. I think the panic over global warming is totally unjustified. There is no serious threat to the climate.” 21. Dr Steven Japar: “Temperature measurements show that the climate model-predicted mid-troposphere hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them.” 22. Dr Georg Kaser: “This number (of receding glaciers reported by the IPCC) is not just a little bit wrong, but far out of any order of magnitude … It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing,” 23. Dr Aynsley Kellow: “I’m not holding my breath for criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: there is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.” 24. Dr Madhav Khandekar: “I have carefully analysed adverse impacts of climate change as projected by the IPCC and have discounted these claims as exaggerated and lacking any supporting evidence.” 25. Dr Hans Labohm: “The alarmist passages in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers have been skewed through an elaborate and sophisticated process of spin-doctoring.” 26. Dr. Andrew Lacis: “There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department.” 27. Dr Chris Landsea: “I cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.” 28. Dr Richard Lindzen: “The IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. It uses summaries to misrepresent what scientists say and exploits public ignorance.” 29. Dr Harry Lins: “Surface temperature changes over the past century have been episodic and modest and there has been no net global warming for over a decade now. The case for alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated.” 30. Dr Philip Lloyd: “I am doing a detailed assessment of the IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science. I have found examples of a summary saying precisely the opposite of what the scientists said.” 31. Dr Martin Manning: “Some government delegates influencing the IPCC Summary for Policymakers misrepresent or contradict the lead authors.” 32. Stephen McIntyre: “The many references in the popular media to a “consensus of thousands of scientists” are both a great exaggeration and also misleading.” 33. Dr Patrick Michaels: “The rates of warming, on multiple time scales have now invalidated the suite of IPCC climate models. No, the science is not settled.” 34. Dr Nils-Axel Morner: “If you go around the globe, you find no sea level rise anywhere.” 35. Dr Johannes Oerlemans: “The IPCC has become too political. Many scientists have not been able to resist the siren call of fame, research funding and meetings in exotic places that awaits them if they are willing to compromise scientific principles and integrity in support of the man-made global-warming doctrine.” 36. Dr Roger Pielke: “All of my comments were ignored without even a rebuttal. At that point, I concluded that the IPCC Reports were actually intended to be advocacy documents designed to produce particular policy actions, but not as a true and honest assessment of the understanding of the climate system.” 37. Dr Jan Pretel: “It’s nonsense to drastically reduce emissions … predicting about the distant future-100 years can’t be predicted due to uncertainties.” 38. Dr Paul Reiter: “As far as the science being ‘settled,’ I think that is an obscenity. The fact is the science is being distorted by people who are not scientists.” 39. Dr Murray Salby: “I have an involuntary gag reflex whenever someone says the “science is settled. Anyone who thinks the science is settled on this topic is in fantasia.” 40. Dr Tom Segalstad: “The IPCC global warming model is not supported by the scientific data.” 41. Dr Fred Singer: “Isn’t it remarkable that the Policymakers Summary of the IPCC report avoids mentioning the satellite data altogether, or even the existence of satellites–probably because the data show a (slight) cooling over the last 18 years, in direct contradiction to the calculations from climate models?” 42. Dr Hajo Smit: “There is clear cut solar-climate coupling and a very strong natural variability of climate on all historical time scales. Currently I hardly believe anymore that there is any relevant relationship between human CO2 emissions and climate change.” 43. Dr Roy Spencer: “The IPCC is not a scientific organization and was formed to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Claims of human-cause global warming are only a means to that goal.” 44. Dr Richard Tol: “The IPCC attracted more people with political rather than academic motives. In AR4, green activists held key positions in the IPCC and they succeeded in excluding or neutralising opposite voices.” 45. Dr Tom Tripp: “There is so much of a natural variability in weather it makes it difficult to come to a scientifically valid conclusion that global warming is man made.” 46. Dr Robert Watson: “The (IPCC) mistakes all appear to have gone in the direction of making it seem like climate change is more serious by overstating the impact. That is worrying. The IPCC needs to look at this trend in the errors and ask why it happened.” 47. Dr Gerd-Rainer Weber: “Most of the extremist views about climate change have little or no scientific basis.” 48. Dr David Wojick: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” 49. Dr Miklos Zagoni: “I am positively convinced that the anthropogenic global warming theory is wrong.” 50. Dr. Eduardo Zorita: “Editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations, even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. By writing these lines… a few of my future studies will not see the light of publication.” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 09, 2017, 07:21:48 am ....a lot of very very smart people there.....proves that global warming propaganda is global warming propaganda🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 09, 2017, 10:05:42 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 10:08:53 am Still haven't found that missing sandwich eh? 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 09, 2017, 10:36:31 am from the Los Angeles Tmes.... Hurricane Irma takes direct aim at Florida as time to evacuate is running out ‘Nuclear hurricane’ nears. By JOHN CHERWA and LES NEUHAUS | 2:25PM PDT - Friday, September 08, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b2b378/turbine/la-1504883573-x8rxntop5j-snap-image/1025) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b2b378/turbine/la-1504883573-x8rxntop5j-snap-image) HURRICANE IRMA continued its deadly sweep through the Caribbean on Friday as residents of Florida waited with frazzled nerves and growing fears over just how bad the storm will be. The Category 4 hurricane with a footprint as big as Texas is expected to make landfall early on Sunday morning and blow through central Florida with 150 mph winds, reaching Georgia by Monday morning. Mandatory evacuations were in place for most coastal areas, an area encompassing 650,000 people or more. Already, supplies of water, batteries, flashlights and plywood had disappeared from most stores throughout South Florida. Streams of fleeing evacuees, from the Florida Keys to Miami and further north, were creeping north on the state's two major north-south arterials, Interstates 75 and 95. Traffic tie-ups were reported as far north as Ocala, 80 miles northwest of Orlando. “All Floridians should be prepared to evacuate soon,” Governor Rick Scott said. “Remember Hurricane Andrew [in 1992] was one of the worst storms in the history of Florida. Irma is more devastating on its current path…. This is a catastrophic storm that our state has never seen.” Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine called it a “nuclear storm”. The National Weather Service in Key West even tweeted in capital letters: “This is as real as it gets. Nowhere in the Florida Keys will be safe. You still have time to evacuate.” Compared to Hurricane Harvey that hit southeast Texas, Irma will be faster moving, making it unlikely that Florida will see the kind of severe inland flooding that crippled Houston. However, for coastal cities such as Miami and Miami Beach, an anticipated storm surge of up to 10 feet could be catastrophic. The storm, which is forecast to make landfall near Miami, is expected to drop between 8 to 10 inches of rain — a fifth of what Harvey dumped in parts of Texas — and up to 20 inches in isolated spots. Florida has been under a state of emergency most of the week, with official hurricane warnings in effect as of 11 p.m. on Thursday for southern and central Florida. The outer bands of Irma were expected to creep over the state by Saturday morning, intensifying through the day. Scott ordered all schools closed on Friday. Many will serve as shelters. Some in the Miami area had already reached capacity by mid-day on Friday. Miami's homeless population of slightly more than 1,000 is being given the choice of going to a shelter or being taken involuntarily for a mental health evaluation, according to the Associated Press. Florida, Florida State, Central Florida and South Florida universities all canceled their football games. Scott also ordered the evacuation of seven cities near Lake Okeechobee. But not everyone has had the ability to leave. At a mobile home park in northwest Miami, just blocks from the Little River Canal, many of the mainly Haitian and Latin American immigrant residents said they would be forced to remain. Ernius Nonord, a 71-year-old Haitian, waved his hand defiantly and insisted he wasn't worried. “I believe that God will keep me safe,” he said. “But if I had big money, I would go stay in big house.” His neighbors, Leon and Muryada Noel, who have a 4-year-old daughter, also are staying. “It's going to be OK,” Leon Noel said, cradling his daughter in his lap and pointing to a level near his ankle. “The water only come to here,” he said. “Nothing's going to happen.” Federal Emergency Management Agency resources have been put into place to aid victims of the coming storm, and other resources were also on the way: The Navy has ordered the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, the amphibious assault ship Iwo Jima and the amphibious transport dock ship New York to join other Navy resources to deliver humanitarian relief if requested. The ships can provide medical support, medium- and heavy-lift air support and other services including security, route clearance and water purification. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b15d44/turbine/la-na-caribbean-hurricane-irma-pictures-012/1025) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b15d44/turbine/la-na-caribbean-hurricane-irma-pictures-012) An aerial photo shows the damage of Hurricane Irma in Philipsburg, St. Maarten. — Photograph: Gerben Van Es/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. As Florida prepared for the worst, many islands in the Caribbean already have experienced it. The death toll is at least 20 and is expected to rise, with Category 4 Hurricane Jose advancing right behind Irma. The Turks and Caicos Islands were dealing with Irma on Friday. The island of Barbuda was almost destroyed by the storm but remarkably had only one fatality. Many Americans were left stranded on some of the islands that populate that area of the Caribbean. It may be days before actual damage in some of the smaller islands is known. Puerto Rico was spared the worst part of the storm but still has more than 1 million people without power. Another hurricane is also in the wings: Katia, which is expected to soon have winds topping 110 mph, could bring serious weather misery to Mexico when it makes landfall on Saturday. It is slowly moving to the area between Tampico and Veracruz in the Gulf of Mexico. The area has been hard hit by rains recently and there is concern that flooding and landslides could be an inevitable result of the storm. In the path of Jose, which is churning in the Atlantic with winds of 150 mph, a hurricane watch is in effect for the storm-ravaged islands of Antigua, Barbuda and Anguilla, St. Martin and St. Barts. There is no danger that Jose will follow Irma to the United States, forecasters say, as it is expected to take a strong northerly turn after passing the islands and be a danger only to Bermuda and Atlantic shipping lanes. • L.A. Times staff writer W.J. Hennigan contributed to this story. • L.A. Times staff writer Halper and special correspondent Neuhaus reported from Miami. L.A. Times staff writer Cherwa reported from Orlando. • John Cherwa is deputy Sports editor at the Los Angeles Times. He started at the L.A. Times in 1980 and left in 1995 to be sports editor of the Chicago Tribune and Tribune Company Sports Coordinator in 2002. He rejoined the Los Angeles Times in 2009. He specializes in Olympic sports and has been bureau chief for every Olympics since 2000. He is also an adjunct professor on the business of sports media at the University of Central Florida. • Les Neuhaus is a freelance journalist who lives in the Tamp/St. Petersburg area in Florida. He writes articles for the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Agence France-Presse and other news organisations. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Once there was an island known as Barbuda. After Hurricane Irma, much of it is gone. (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hurricane-irma-barbuda-20170907-story.html) • How Hurricane Irma became the second-strongest Atlantic hurricane on record (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hurricane-irma-explained-20170906-htmlstory.html) • Thousands of cruise ship passengers dropped off in Miami ahead of Hurricane Irma (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-stranded-cruise-passengers-20170907-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-florida-irma-20170908-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-florida-irma-20170908-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 09, 2017, 10:39:25 am I guess you flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers can always take a leaf out of your hero Donald J. Trump's book and claim that photograph of Philipsburg, St. Maarten is FAKE NEWS, eh? Just to display your total & absolute heads-in-the-sand stupidity!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 11:18:07 am Nah, rather than chase your little red herring, I'd suggest look at the opinions I posted of 50 ***IPCC*** CLIMATE EXPERTS I posted. Hello? 💩
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 09, 2017, 11:36:50 am Guess what? To counter those 50 “fake scientists” and their desperate “fake news” there are tens of thousands of “real scientists” who have published a shitload of peer-reviewed scientific papers which tell the TRUTH instead of the snake-oil peddled by your “fake scientists” and their “fake news”. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 09, 2017, 11:56:16 am ..uhhhh..trying to grow mangos..need extra 2 degrees..$100 to the first person to tell me the best way to make it happen😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 12:08:39 pm Except they aren't "fake scientists". Why do you blindly buy such dumb bullshit?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 12:23:43 pm Donald sit back and wait for the temperatures to naturally rise sufficiently (if you are lucky)... in 100 years or so. If the sun cycle people have got things right, build yourself a greenhouse and a good source of heating (coal maybe 😁) because it's going to be cold for a few decades. Alternatively, stock up on dried mango from tropical countries 😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 12:57:26 pm Buy yourself a big supply of coal for heating then build yourself one of these Donald...
(http://www.yearofthedurian.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/housewithsnow-2-1024x768.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 09, 2017, 04:36:12 pm Yes, I use coal and native timber for heating...very cost effective😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 09, 2017, 10:36:18 pm (https://nuk-tnl-deck-prod-static.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/uploads/334a9c084c411e7c720f84e19ab87fb7.jpg) (https://nuk-tnl-deck-prod-static.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/uploads/334a9c084c411e7c720f84e19ab87fb7.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 10:41:41 pm Yep that's right. Nothing to do with the hysterical climate change religion. Just business as usual hurricanes. Next?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 09, 2017, 11:59:47 pm (https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/failed-climate-predictions.jpg)
😀 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 12:49:28 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Climate deniers play politics with looming natural disasters By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Monday, September 11, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b629a5/turbine/la-1505110431-tq63vutvsc-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b629a5/turbine/la-1505110431-tq63vutvsc-snap-image) WHEN the intensifying effect of climate change was brought into the news coverage of Hurricane Harvey, some conservatives objected. They said it was horrid that the “liberal media” was politicizing a disaster that had upended so many people's lives. Now, the same complaints will probably be raised in the wake of Hurricane Irma. Well, the climate change issue definitely has been politicized, but most of that exploitation for political purposes has been done by the fossil fuel industries, their mouthpieces in the right-wing media and their minions among Republican elected officials. The dreadful force of Irma has slammed into Florida and one would think everyone could agree on some basic science. Warmer ocean temperatures have a multiplying effect on hurricanes that increases their energy and size. At the same time, the destructive potential of hurricane-propelled storm surges is made greater by the rise in sea level. This warmer, higher water is the direct result of a global climate that is getting hotter, year after year. No, climate change is not the cause of hurricanes — nor wildfires, nor tornadoes — but, as scientists have predicted for some time now, swift alterations in our climate are magnifying the force of these natural events. In other words, there are worse disasters to come. That is not politics, that is science. Yet, climate change deniers from President Trump (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/donald-trump-PEBSL000163-topic.html) to Rush Limbaugh to Florida Governor Rick Scott (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/government/rick-scott-PEPLT00007609-topic.html) choose to believe that climate science is some kind of evil plot concocted by the Chinese or by a cabal of nefarious researchers in lab coats who are trying to subvert capitalism, Christianity and Mom's apple pie. They choose to see things this way because propagandists backed by big corporations that profit immensely from maintaining the status quo have given them reasons to deny what is so apparent to leaders in every other country on the planet. One of the reasons someone such as Scott chooses to think this way is that the special interests who bankroll his political career are pleased if he does. In Florida, the four biggest utilities — Duke Energy, Gulf Power, Florida Power & Light and Tampa Electric — have effectively blocked development of solar power (http://fcir.org/2015/04/03/in-sunshine-state-big-energy-blocks-solar-power) in that sunny state by dumping millions of dollars into the campaigns of compliant politicians, including well over $1 million given to Scott. Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Alex Jones and other opinionated entertainers on the right push the narrative that acting to mitigate the human causes of climate change by switching to alternative energy sources would bring the American economy crashing down. They conveniently ignore the fact that, while jobs in the withering coal industry are disappearing, employment in solar and wind enterprises is booming. Already, the number of people working in clean energy in California, alone, is as many as 10 times the total number of coal mining jobs (http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/jun/02/kevin-de-leon/does-california-have-10-times-many-clean-energy-jo) nationwide. The vast majority of the world's scientists are convinced that industrial activity and the emission of greenhouse gases are key drivers of the global temperature rise. Deniers contest that conclusion, but only the most extreme among them argue that climate change is not happening at all. While discounting the link to man-made sources of carbon pollution, even leading Republicans will acknowledge that seas are rising, the polar ice caps are melting, hurricanes are getting stronger and weather patterns are becoming more extreme. So, bickering over causality aside, is it not the duty of political leaders to take actions that will anticipate and mitigate future disasters? The answer is an unqualified yes. Nevertheless, even in Florida, where, in the not-too-distant future, beach communities will be inundated by the ocean, developers are allowed to continue building along doomed shorelines while the governor has ordered state officials and researchers not to use the terms global warming and climate change. And, in the nation's capital, the Trump administration is very busy killing an array of federal programs that either gather scientific data about the global warming phenomenon or make plans to deal with the looming problems that the climate shift will bring. That is what it means to politicize an issue. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-looming-disasters-20170910-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-looming-disasters-20170910-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 12, 2017, 04:49:25 am Ktj......"and don't forget climate change is a hoax"
...I wouldn't say that climate change is a hoax.....just propaganda😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 12, 2017, 10:27:07 am The climate changes, naturally. Huge storms happen, naturally. There is weak evidence of any significant human influence. This is based on models based based an eco religion. They are time and time again, wrong.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 12, 2017, 10:34:33 am Didn't read the left wing sophistry article but the headline should read..
CLIMATE RELIGIONISTS PLAY POLITICS WITH BUSINESS AS USUAL WEATHER EVENTS. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:15:46 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br4SQ-Jhmq8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br4SQ-Jhmq8) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:25:54 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52159cf6/turbine/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:29:07 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50b4794b/turbine/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:31:18 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50c99069/turbine/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:33:50 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50f8eaee/turbine/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:38:36 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-501a35ba/turbine/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:39:41 pm Yep....flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers are totally & absolutely “fucked-in-the-head” alright. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 03:40:23 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 07:56:28 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-501a35ba/turbine/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-skeptic-20120802-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 12, 2017, 08:19:36 pm Ktj....."global warming is a hoax"... tell me something I don't know🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 08:43:03 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50c99069/turbine/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-blind-faith-20121213-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 12, 2017, 09:10:46 pm ...jeeezzz...you been digging up your idols loony cartoons from 5 years ago....must be hard being so desperate🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 09:24:11 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50f8eaee/turbine/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-western-governor-20130117-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 12, 2017, 09:35:58 pm ..yeah...nah...that cartoon is very baldly done...no fulcrum under the lever....just no idea🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 12, 2017, 09:51:47 pm No boiled frogs. Co2 isn't cooking the climate 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 12, 2017, 10:29:28 pm Much more likely orbital patterns and solar cycles are the main drivers of climate than a trace gas that is only 0.04% of the atmosphere. Not known to many climate religion zealots is the fact that asbmore co2 builds in the atmosphere, the less of a heat trapping effect that it has.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 12, 2017, 11:42:15 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b708af/turbine/la-1505167530-x2vafiryu4-snap-image/1200) (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-western-fires-20170912-story.html) (click on the photograph to read the news story behind it) It's interesting that statistically, extreme weather events have increased twenty-fold compared to forty years ago, and also the intensity of those weather events have increased by a huge amount compared to forty years ago. I guess the flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-denyers have their heads buried deep into the sand, eh? Talk about stupid dumbarses....I know one shouldn't laugh at mentally-challenged people, so I won't....for now. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 13, 2017, 05:48:45 am Haven't got time to read the story....
..but yes...I agree....there are a lot more mad bastards around lighting fires these days..especially in the loony lefty states🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 05:59:16 am Every doubling of co2 adds about 1C effect. Think about that. It's fuck all and is swamped by far more powerful climate drivers.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:03:13 am Extreme weather "increasing twenty fold in the last forty years" sounds like total bullshit if you are talking globally (which is what matters). What is the source for that claim?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 13, 2017, 06:05:37 am Mmmmm...so how many trillion tons of coal would I have to burn to get 2 degrees warmer🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:10:39 am Warmunists are experts at hiding the truth in a web of obfuscation and statistical manipulation (adjustments) to suit their obsession. You have to ask "is this unprecedented?" Also ask "is this much different from the general noise of natural climate variability over significant timescales?"
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:15:38 am Alan Jones is a "shock jock" according to the faux outraged loony left media. He's not a scientist. However there are some podcasts of him grilling climate scientists and prominent warmunists with some very pertinent questions on climate change.Well worth a listen.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:26:53 am Lindzen is one of the grandfathers of atmospheric physics, has published over 200 peer reviewed papers starting from the mid 1960s. He was also chosen by the IPCC to be a lead expert. He says regarding co2 that it's unlikely a force that accounts for only roughly 2% of the earth's energy budget is driving the climate.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2017, 03:04:18 pm (http://www.trbimg.com/img-52159cf6/turbine/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-climate-change-deniers-20130821-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 13, 2017, 04:07:54 pm ..yup..that's usual for him...when you are going over his head....and he doesn't have the iq to debate, he starts the cartoons...as a weak defence...typical socialist..when the going gets tough..the socialists run and hide👀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2017, 04:44:35 pm Ooooooh, look....here's REALITY/DONALD and his stupid, dumb, slutty missus.... (http://www.trbimg.com/img-50b4794b/turbine/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126/1000) (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-global-warming-20121126-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 13, 2017, 05:27:06 pm ...now that's not a very nice thing to say....😤
...which missus are you talking about...there are a few😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:01:49 pm Wow, greenpiss type environmental scare cartoons. Very original.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 13, 2017, 06:06:46 pm (http://militantlibertarian.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/GlobalWarmingAlarmists.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 14, 2017, 12:50:28 am (http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/imageedit_5616_3454901650.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2017, 02:06:40 am Yet more WANK from the flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers. Just the usual piffle from the heads-in-the-sand brigade. Nothing to see folks.....move right along to the reality of human-induced global warming and the resultant climate change. The perpetually stupid will continue to be perpetually stupid. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2017, 02:07:19 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 14, 2017, 02:07:34 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Will humans wreck life on Earth before escaping to Mars and Saturn's moons? By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PDT - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b8c3a1/turbine/la-1505280923-unhzyepx88-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b8c3a1/turbine/la-1505280923-unhzyepx88-snap-image) ON Friday morning, scientists at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (http://www.latimes.com/topic/technology/jet-propulsion-laboratory-ORGOV000282-topic.html) in Pasadena will watch their Cassini spacecraft take a suicide dive into Saturn's atmosphere, thus ending two decades of spectacular exploration of the giant planet and its multiple moons. Cassini is about to run out of fuel and, though it could continue sending data back to Earth, the folks at JPL would no longer be able to steer its course. The decision was made to destroy the spacecraft now to avoid any chance that it might crash into Titan or Enceladus and contaminate the potentially life-sustaining environments of either of those moons. Those are magic words: life-sustaining. During its long trek around Saturn, Cassini discovered that Titan and Enceladus both contain elements that could allow life forms to develop and that habitability may not be out of the question. But don't pack your bags for a trip to Saturn yet. Ours is not a Star Wars galaxy where humans can hit warp drive and zip between an array of planets that are all equally hospitable. In the non-fictional universe, the tiny blue speck called Earth is the only known environment where human beings can survive and thrive without the aid of complex technology. In terms of meteorology and geology, Titan and Earth have many things in common. Cassini discovered liquid lakes on Titan — some as big as 20 miles across. They may not be conducive to water skiing, however, since they contain liquid methane or a combination of methane and ethane. Plus, it's not bikini weather on Titan, where the average temperature is minus 290 degrees Fahrenheit. If you are looking for waterfront property, Enceladus might be the place to go. The Cassini probe found strong signs that there are vast reservoirs of liquid water on that moon. The catch? This oceanic world is encased in ice that is many miles thick. Of course, no one is suggesting that the moons of Saturn will provide a place of refuge for human beings anytime soon. That is being said about Mars, though. NASA hopes to have a Mars colony established by the 2030s. Elon Musk (http://www.latimes.com/topic/business/elon-musk-PEBSL000988-topic.html), the brilliant billionaire behind Tesla and SpaceX, is even more ambitious. He believes a city of 1 million people “with iron foundries and pizza joints” can be achieved within 50 years. He wants to be one of those people and hopes to die on Mars, though, as he has stipulated, “not on impact”. According to an article in the London Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/06/21/elon-musk-create-city-mars-million-inhabitants), Musk envisions the trip to Mars, not as a cramped, long slog, but as something akin to a cruise ship in space with movies, restaurants, lectures and zero-gravity games. The serious challenges come once one arrives on the Red Planet. As anyone who saw Ridley Scott's 2015 movie “The Martian” knows, surviving on Mars is not the easiest task. Temperatures dip from a balmy 70 degrees to an unimaginably chilly minus 225. There is no vegetation to eat and no animals to hunt. Monumental sand storms dwarf our terrestrial hurricanes. There may be plentiful water, but no one has found it yet. And all of that is not nearly the worst of it. Gravity is a big problem (http://www.medicaldaily.com/life-mars-how-caustic-dust-atmospheric-pressure-and-low-gravity-may-alter-human-body-320170) — or the lack of it. Living in a place with 38% as much gravity as Earth, humans would quickly see their muscles shrink, their hearts grow weak and their bones deteriorate. Then there's the low atmospheric pressure that would make a walk in the pale Martian sunshine a bit unpleasant. All the water in a human body would quickly evaporate — tears, saliva, skin mucous, the water in the lungs. Death would not be immediate, but that is irrelevant since the lack of oxygen in the air would already have killed you. And did I mention deadly radiation? A space suit, of course, can offer protection and artificial environments may be able provide a place from which Mars colonists can escape all the perils of their new home. And Musk is right that, however harrowing life on other planets may be, humans need to become a multi-planet species if we want to avoid eventual extinction. The Earth will not last forever. In about 5 billion years or so, our sun will have become so enlarged that it will burn up the Earth (something that will happen to Mars, as well). Humans will be long gone by then because, in a billion years, the expanded sun will start boiling the oceans and human existence here will have become impossible. Or maybe a giant asteroid will take us out sooner than that, just as one wiped out the dinosaurs. A more immediate worry, though, is that we will do ourselves in. In much less than 1 billion years and maybe in as little as 100, humans could so contaminate our home planet and disrupt the Earth's climate that life — at least civilized life — would be unsustainable. That is why, as we dream of cities on Mars and as we explore distant moons, we should not be lulled into thinking we can quickly escape the mistakes we make here on Earth. Besides, why be in a rush to take leave of a planet with trees and birds and mammals and amphibians and fish and streams and lakes and seas and rain and snow and bright sunny days and food grown from the ground and air that we can actually breathe? This place has been good to us. We need to do a much better job of keeping it habitable while we still have the chance. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Climate deniers play politics with looming natural disasters (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-looming-disasters-20170910-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-mars-saturn-20170912-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-mars-saturn-20170912-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 14, 2017, 02:20:53 am No, humans won't destroy the earth. FFS🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 16, 2017, 09:43:55 pm QUESTION:What do you get when you combine human-caused global warming and climate change resulting in extreme weather events with “fuck-you, profit at all costs capitalist pigs” and a state run by stupid Trump-supporting rightie/Republican retards? ANSWER: Dead senior citizens. from The Washington Post.... Florida nursing home where eight died after Irma defends actions, says it called governor for help “Repeatedly, I was told that our case was being escalated to the highest level,” an executive said. By AARON C. DAVIS, KATIE ZEZIMA and MARK BERMAN | 8:07PM EDT - Friday, September 15, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/National-Enterprise/Images/Hurricane_Irma_30152-91e7c.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/National-Enterprise/Images/Hurricane_Irma_30152-91e7c.jpg) Janice Connelly sets up a makeshift memorial in Hollywood, Florida, in memory of the senior citizens who died at the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills. — Photograph: Carline Jean/South Florida Sun-Sentinel/Associated Press. THE night before Hurricane Irma began roaring over Florida, staffers at the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills locked the doors, shuttered the windows and turned the temperature down to about 67 degrees — a buffer, administrators thought, to keep the building cool in case the power went out. It wouldn't last long. About 3 p.m. on Sunday, the lights flickered, nursing-home executives say. The power stayed on, but a janitor soon noticed a problem: The massive chiller used to serve the 152-bed facility was spewing warm, muggy air. The following evening, Natasha Anderson, one of the executives, called a private phone number for Governor Rick Scott (Republican) seeking urgent help, Anderson said. It was the first of three such calls, she said, to a number that officials confirmed Scott gave out to nursing homes as an emergency backup in planning calls before the storm. “Repeatedly, I was told that our case was being escalated to the highest level,” Anderson said. Yet, she said, no one came — and nursing-home officials did not consider the crisis urgent enough to bring patients to the hospital across the road. By noon on Wednesday, eight residents were dead. Their deaths are being investigated as criminal homicides, and the nursing home has been closed. The account the nursing-home executives provided to The Washington Post offers new details of the deteriorating conditions inside the facility. But it also is contradicted by law enforcement and state officials on key points, including how aggressively the nursing home had sought assistance and precisely when staffers called 911 as a patient went into cardiac arrest. Attempts to assign blame abound. The Florida Department of Health said that “at no time” did the nursing home “report that conditions had become dangerous or that the health and safety of their patients was at risk.” “It's shocking that these trained medical professionals put patients' lives in needless jeopardy. The fact is that this facility never called 911,” said Mara Gambineri, a spokeswoman for the department. “The Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills is responsible for the health and safety of their patients.” The governor's communications director, John Tupps, wrote in an email that “Every call made to the Governor from facility management was referred to the Agency for Health Care Administration and the Florida Department of Health and quickly returned.” Tupps did not respond to a follow-up email asking if the governor's office had a record of the three calls in question from the nursing home. The tragedy at Hollywood Hills showed that for billions of dollars and countless hours spent preparing for Florida's next inevitable hurricane, the lifeline for one of the nation's largest concentrations of the elderly and disabled remained tenuous in the aftermath of Irma. The survival of residents at the home rested not just on the state's vaunted $3 billion “smart grid,” intended to limit power outages and target repair efforts, or on lists of critical infrastructure where restoring power is a top priority. Survival also depended on phone tag between nursing-home administrators, state officials and utility providers. Several executives of a limited liability corporation that controls the nursing home declined to comment, including the principal owner, Florida resident Jack Michel. But the nursing home made Anderson available for an hour-long interview, as well as a company official who spoke on the condition of anonymity under ground rules set by Hollywood Hills. The officials provided an internal timeline of attempts to reach state officials and its utility provider. “Nurses, doctors, administrators, staff — everyone was doing everything that they could,” Anderson said. “We were waiting and waiting for help that never came.” The nursing home and an adjoining psychiatric facility are connected to the power grid by two lines, the officials said. One provides electricity to most of the facility, including lights, oxygen machines, ventilators and the kitchen. The other supplies a central air-conditioning system. When the warm air began pouring out of vents on Sunday, executives contacted Florida Power and Light within 45 minutes, saying the line approaching the facility from the north appeared to have been down, according to their timeline. Anderson said the nursing home heard from the utility on Monday that it would be coming that day. It never did, she said. The nursing home provided ticket numbers for service requests that it had placed with FP&L beginning on Sunday. The Washington Post was able to confirm two of the requests using state records and the utility's website. The power company on Friday expressed “our deepest sympathies” but said in a statement that “we are limited in what we can say” due to the ongoing investigations. The company did not answer questions regarding the calls the nursing home said were made. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_900w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/13/National-Enterprise/Images/Hurricane_Irma_Nursing_Homes_01673-9bbc8.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/13/National-Enterprise/Images/Hurricane_Irma_Nursing_Homes_01673-9bbc8.jpg) Patients are evacuated at the Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills after a loss of air conditioning due to Hurricane Irma on September 13th. — Photograph: Amy Beth Bennett/Associated Press. Hollywood Hills had in the days before the storm obtained eight “spot chillers” that could be run using a generator. Each had two “armlike” funnels that direct cool air. An exhaust vent from each machine releasing warmer air was routed upward, to the drop ceiling on each floor. With the power otherwise still on at the nursing home, they were plugged into wall outlets. Staffers on Monday also went searching for portable fans and spent $900 to put one in each resident's room. After 5:30 p.m., more than 24 hours after the air conditioning stopped working and with forecasts for higher temperatures in the days ahead, Anderson said she first called the governor's cellphone and left a message: “162 patients, elderly, some on oxygen. We need the air conditioning restored.” Between then and 10 p.m. on Monday, Anderson said she received two return calls from state officials saying they were working on the request. On Tuesday, there was still no sign of an electric crew. Anderson said she continued making calls at about 10 a.m. Staffers and family members of patients, who by that time were beginning to worry, made calls to FP&L. Ellie Pina, daughter of Mirelle Pina, a 96-year-old resident at the facility, said she and others repeatedly called FP&L and were ignored. Pina said that by Tuesday at noon it was extremely hot. “It was like 110 degrees in there, it was unbearable. Not even the fans were helping them,” she said. “The heat was amazing.” “I told Florida Power and Light the generators were going to give up soon. And it happened. I told my husband people were going to die in there. And it happened,” she said, reciting her ticket number for service. Pina said the staff had put patients, clothed in as little as possible, in the hallways close to the cooling units. The company official who spoke on the condition of anonymity said that each of the chillers had a thermometer and that the readings upstairs showed temperatures in the low 80s — “82 or 83, it was holding steady,” the official said. Patients' temperatures were checked on each eight-hour shift, and for the last time on Tuesday evening by a physician assistant who made rounds. None of the people who gave accounts of the situation were present after 11 p.m. Tuesday night. According to the timeline provided by the nursing home, the first 911 call was placed at about 1:30 a.m. to report a patient in cardiac distress. In an email on Friday, officials with the city of Hollywood and its police department said the first 911 call came later, at 3:01 a.m. By 4:45 a.m., according to the timeline provided by the nursing home, five patients had been in cardiac arrest or respiratory distress and were treated by paramedics. Randy Katz, chairman of the department of medicine at Memorial Regional Hospital, across the street, said that around 6 a.m. one of the senior nurses walked over to Hollywood Hills. She made a call: These patients needed to be evacuated, immediately, he said. Patients looked to be in distress. The second floor was extremely hot. “There's no reason patients that age with chronic medical issues should be in a facility without air conditioning,” Katz said. The hospital activated what is called a mass-casualty event. Hospital staffers rushed to Hollywood Hills, looking for patients and getting them out as soon as possible. “Our staff literally went room to room and evacuated the building,” he said. The sickest patients were rolled to the emergency room across the street on stretchers, with some being treated for dehydration, respiratory issues including respiratory failure, heat exhaustion or infection and high fevers. “The temperatures during the day outside are in the mid-90s. I'm going to guess you can probably add another 10 degrees to that,” Katz said of the temperature inside. In a statement later in the day, Scott called the situation “unfathomable” and vowed that the state would hold accountable anyone not acting in the best interests of their patients. As nursing-home executives began arriving at the building later on Wednesday morning, they were instructed to stay behind a police line, saying the facility was a crime scene. By 2 p.m., Anderson said, with detectives the only ones remaining, the air conditioning was turned back on. • Aaron Davis is a reporter for The Washington Post's Investigative team. • Katie Zezima is a national correspondent at The Washington Post covering drugs, guns, gambling and vice in America. She covered the 2016 election and the Obama White House for The Post. • Mark Berman covers national news for The Washington Post and anchors Post Nation (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation), a destination for breaking news and stories from around the country. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Florida nursing home death toll rises (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/30fe4dea-99d4-11e7-af6a-6555caaeb8dc_video.html) • Power still out at dozens of Florida nursing homes as investigation continues into 8 deaths (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/09/14/florida-nursing-home-where-8-died-closed-to-residents-amid-investigation) • Eight dead after South Florida nursing home's air conditioning fails following Hurricane Irma (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/09/13/irma-death-toll-rises-as-5-dead-at-south-florida-nursing-home) https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/fla-nursing-home-defends-actions-says-it-called-governor/2017/09/15/9eebc198-9a3d-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/fla-nursing-home-defends-actions-says-it-called-governor/2017/09/15/9eebc198-9a3d-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 16, 2017, 10:11:59 pm Ahhhhhhaha....
Hang on....how do you Add 2+2 and get ............2,345,070,563,000...😳 ...is that they teach you at kiwirail labouring school? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 16, 2017, 10:23:35 pm What do you call a hysterical climate religion + a dumbass gullible left wing media?
Answer: A clusterfuck of misdirected and pointless mental energy. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 16, 2017, 10:26:19 pm (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Cartoons/20170914_Hubbard_NeedBrains_zpspll3prfu.jpg~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 16, 2017, 10:32:04 pm ..haha...you are the guy on the right...correct?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 16, 2017, 10:34:43 pm Errrrrrrrrrrrrrr.....if you aren't dumb, the sign the guy on the right is holding says it all. I guess this means you are DUMB. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 16, 2017, 10:37:10 pm ...I just thought he was a splitting image...unless you have a tein🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 16, 2017, 11:42:38 pm More American “trash the planet” GREED.... from The Washington Post.... Trump administration working toward renewed drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge A draft rule would remove obstacles that have blocked exploration for decades in this vast Alaska wilderness. By JULIET EILPERIN | 10:09PM EDT - Friday, September 15, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/arctic.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/arctic.JPG) Caribou traipse across the snow in June in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. — Photograph: The Asahi Shimbun/Getty Images. THE Trump administration is quietly moving to allow energy exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for the first time in more than 30 years, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post, with a draft rule that would lay the groundwork for drilling. Congress has sole authority to determine whether oil and gas drilling can take place within the refuge's 19.6 million acres. But seismic studies represent a necessary first step, and Interior Department officials are modifying a 1980s regulation to permit them. The effort represents a twist in a political fight that has raged for decades (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122102128.html). The remote and vast habitat, which serves as the main calving ground for one of North America's last large caribou herds and a stop for migrating birds from six continents, has served as a rallying cry for environmentalists and some of Alaska's native tribes. But state politicians and many Republicans in Washington have pressed to extract the billions of barrels of oil lying beneath the refuge's coastal plain. Democrats have managed to block them through votes in the Senate and, in one instance in 1995, by a presidential veto. In an August 11th memo (http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/aug-11-2018-memo-directing-regulatory-changes-to-allow-seismic-studies-in-the-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge/2551), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acting director James W. Kurth instructed the agency's Alaska regional director to update a rule that allowed exploratory drilling between October 1st, 1984, and May 31st, 1986, by striking those calendar constraints. Doing so would eliminate an obstacle that was the subject of a court battle as recently as two years ago. “When finalized, the new regulation will allow for applicants to [submit] requests for approval of new exploration plans,” Kurth wrote in the memo. If the rule is finalized after a public comment period, companies would have to bid on conducting the seismic studies. The U.S. Geological Survey estimated in a June 27th memo (http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/memo-outlining-the-interior-departments-plans-to-jump-start-energy-production-on-alaskas-north-slope/2552), obtained by Trustees for Alaska through a federal records request, that this work would cost about $3.6 million. With oil prices averaging around $50 per barrel, potentially too low to justify a significant investment in drilling in the refuge, it is unclear how much interest companies would have. Some might consider proceeding with those studies to get a better sense of the area's potential. The behind-the-scenes push to open up the refuge — often referred to by its acronym, ANWR — comes as long-time drilling proponents occupy key positions at the Interior Department. Its No.2 official, David Bernhardt, represented Alaska in its unsuccessful 2014 suit to force then-Interior Secretary Sally Jewell to allow exploratory drilling there. Joseph Balash, President Trump's nominee to serve as Interior assistant secretary for land and minerals management, asked federal officials to turn a portion of the refuge over to the state (http://juneauempire.com/state/2014-10-29/state-claims-20000-acres-edge-anwr) when he served as Alaska's natural resources commissioner. The state's plan was to offer the land for leasing. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/Refuge_Caribou.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/Refuge_Caribou.JPG) The coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, with the Brooks Range as a backdrop. — Photograph: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. During a stop in Anchorage on May 31st, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said he hoped to jump-start energy exploration on Alaska's North Slope in part by updating resource assessments of the refuge. “I'm a geologist. Science is a wonderful thing. It helps us understand what is going on deep below the surface of the Earth,” Zinke said at the time. “We need to use science to update our understanding of the [coastal plain] of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as Congress considers important legislation to responsibly develop there one day.” The Fish and Wildlife memo notes that the Interior Department asked it “to update the regulations concerning the geological and geophysical exploration” of that coastal area but does not identify who issued the directive. An Interior official said in an email on Friday that the department is “required by law — the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act — to allow for seismic surveys in wildlife refuges across Alaska.” “Hundreds of seismic surveys have been conducted on Alaska's north slope — many of them on ANWR’s borders,” the official added. Both the Clinton and Obama administrations concluded that the department was legally barred from permitting seismic studies in the refuge. And environmentalists have consistently opposed such activity, which sends shock waves underground (https://www.oilandgaslawyerblog.com/2009/04/how-do-seismic-surveys-work.html). They say it would disturb denning polar bears, which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, as well as musk oxen and other Arctic animals. An increasing number of polar bears are now denning onshore during the winter — when seismic studies would take place — due to diminishing sea ice, and a significant portion of the coastal plain is designated as critical habitat for the bears. The August 11th memo directs the Fish and Wildlife Service's regional director to conduct an environmental assessment as part of the proposed rule change because the Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to show that their actions will not jeopardize or adversely modify critical habitat of a listed species. “The administration is very stealthily trying to move forward with drilling on the Arctic's coastal plain,” said Defenders of Wildlife President Jamie Rappaport Clark, who led the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Bill Clinton. “This is a complete about-face from decades of practice.” Environmental groups would be likely to challenge any decision to conduct seismic work in the refuge in federal court. Alaska officials have been working for several years to restart seismic studies on the coastal plain. They say the initial ones, conducted in the winters of 1984 and 1985, were done with outdated technology and do not reflect the area's true potential. The Geological Survey, which reanalyzed that data nearly 15 years later, estimated that 7.7 billion barrels of “technically recoverable oil” lie under the coastal plain. The June 27th memo, sent to Zinke's energy policy counselor Vincent DeVito, said the department could either assume the existing seismic data is acceptable, re-examine that data with “state-of-the-art” technology or conduct new studies with modern, 3-D technology. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/AP_17052861316196.JPG) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Others/Images/2017-09-15/AP_17052861316196.JPG) Herds of caribou dot the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. — Photograph: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Associated Press. In an interview on Thursday, Alaska Natural Resources Commissioner Andy Mack said that recent oil discoveries near the refuge's western edge suggest there may be more oil there than federal officials identified three decades ago. “Alaska's always had an abiding interest in resource development, particularly in oil,” Mack said. “We're not discounting the existing data, but it's old, and it's relatively limited.” The question of whether Interior can restart the seismic work is a subject of legal dispute. The 1980s studies, which took place along 1,400 miles of survey lines and were financed by private oil firms, were aimed at gathering information for a report the interior secretary submitted to Congress in 1987. In 2001, Interior solicitor John Leshy issued a formal opinion concluding that the 1983 rule was “a time-limited authorization for exploratory activities in the coastal plain.” Twelve years later, Alaska sought permission from the Fish and Wildlife Service to launch a new exploration program; Obama administration officials rejected the request, and the state sued. On July 21st, 2015, U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason ruled against the state. “Whether the statute authorizes or requires the Secretary to approve additional exploration after the submission of the 1987 report is ambiguous,” she wrote, but Jewell's interpretation that she no longer had authority to allow it “is based on a permissible and reasonable construction of the statute.” Mack said he was not sure whether companies would want to drill in the refuge, but they now are more interested in the potential on land than offshore. ConocoPhillips, for one, is “actively exploring and focused on new development opportunities” within the neighboring National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, according to spokesman Daren Beaudo. “If ANWR was opened, we'd consider it within our portfolio of opportunities … and it would have to compete with other regions for our exploration dollars,” he said. Yet Pavel Molchanov, an energy analyst at Raymond James & Associates, predicted “very little interest” in drilling in the refuge for the foreseeable future. “The number of companies that would be open to a meaningful bet on ANWR we could realistically count on one hand, and that would be generous,” Molchanov said. • Juliet Eilperin is The Washington Post's senior national affairs correspondent, covering how the new administration is transforming a range of U.S. policies and the federal government itself. She is the author of two books — one on sharks (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0375425128), and another on Congress (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0742551180), not to be confused with each other — and has worked for The Post since 1998. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • In push to deliver on Trump's energy pledge, Interior looms large (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-the-push-to-deliver-on-campaign-promises-interiors-energy-drive-looms-large/2017/07/19/63e6503c-6319-11e7-84a1-a26b75ad39fe_story.html) • Trump signs executive order on offshore drilling: ‘We're opening it up.’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/trump-signs-executive-order-to-expand-offshore-drilling-and-analyze-marine-sanctuaries-oil-and-gas-potential) https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-administration-working-toward-renewed-drilling-in-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge/2017/09/15/bfa5765e-97ea-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-administration-working-toward-renewed-drilling-in-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge/2017/09/15/bfa5765e-97ea-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 17, 2017, 12:02:25 am ...great idea...more jobs😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 12:04:04 am Yeah, trash the environment for future generations in the name of GREED. Too bad about the wildlife who live there, eh? It would be the equivalent of me burning your house down with you inside it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 17, 2017, 12:11:20 am North America is a big place...there will still be room for wildlife😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 12:43:39 am Oh well, I guess if I burnt your house down, there'd still be plenty of room for you elsewhere in the country, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 12:45:48 am Wind and solar can't power modern civilisation. That is the truth. That is why Germany is building coal plants. They tried the utopian fantasy of wind and solar and realised they would go down the toilet if they continued. At the moment it's fossil fuels, hydro or nuclear. Wind and solar is just wankfest window dressing.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 12:58:36 am Wind and solar can't power modern civilisation. That is the truth. That is why Germany is building coal plants. They tried the utopian fantasy of wind and solar and realised they would go down the toilet if they continued. At the moment it's fossil fuels, hydro or nuclear. Wind and solar is just wankfest window dressing. Another thread @ XNC2.... • Freedom from the National Grid (http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,10054.0.html) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Miscellaneous/Egg_On_Face_zpsw2onkul7.jpg~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 01:00:27 am The cleanest fossil fuels option is gas. That is the best medium term transition fuel until a green fuel can be developed that is as cheap as fossil fuels. China is already starting to build advanced molten salt nuclear reactors. The US would be too if it wasn't hampered by green tape courtesy of Luddite green knobs.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 01:10:16 am Show me a country with cities running on 100% wind and solar.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 02:07:10 am I've got a mate in Gisborne who removed himself from the national grid way back in 1999. He uses a combination of solar, wind and hydro to generate all of his own electricity requirements. And it's a shitload cheaper to do it now than when he did it way back then 18 years ago. And he doesn't pour greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from his electricity generation. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 02:26:09 am You do realise ALL Co2 in the atmosphere accounts for 0.04% of the atmosphere and 97% of that 0.04% is natural? You do realise that the greenhouse effect is limited? It's like painting a barn red. The first coat changes the colour. Subsequent coats make no difference. For every DOUBLING of Co2 in the atmosphere you get a theoretical increase in temp of about 1C. Negligible. So what did the obsessive warmunists do? They made up theories about how "feedbacks" (such as increased water vapour) would supposedly "amplify" this minuscule effect. Guess what? Their models and the predictions are continuously proven wrong. So they keep dodging and weaving with new theories of what "could" and "might" happen. A bit like those infomercials for bullshit remedies 😁 Pill X "may" help with hair loss 😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 02:32:01 am And high-capacity battery storage is getting cheaper all the time too. The new NiCad battery cell packs which have been developed for electric cars are only a fraction of the price of lead-acid batteries which have been used up until now. And there is a new generation of electric cars which have a range of considerably more than 400km, including use on steep hills. That sort of technology is flowing into power storage for home solar and wind generation systems. The big joke is eventually going to be on consumers paying an every-increasing share of electricity distribution networks as smart, astute folks abandon the national grid altogether and switch to home-generated clean, green electrical energy, just like my mate in Gizzy did 18 years ago. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 17, 2017, 06:29:02 am Ktj...."just like my mate in Gizzy...."
...now I know you are talking shit...there's no way a goon like you would have mates...🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 12:17:31 pm Here's the reality about grid scale battery storage...
In short the costs are in eye watering and staggering territory... https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 12:22:52 pm Nicad is old technology. Cadmium is a highly toxic heavy metal. Next idea?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 12:33:43 pm Bang for buck, and weighing costs and benefits, my money is on molten salt nuclear power generation. China isn't constrained by shouty kidults who live in a pampered fantasy world (hysterical "green" ignoramuses). That's why it's powering head with this winning technology.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 17, 2017, 12:41:48 pm i am very sure by now we could all have free energy all over the planet but that might upset the system and it's not in the interest of our owners ;)
hows that ice doing ktj has it all melted yet ? lol Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 01:05:52 pm Welcome back sexy. You been on holiday? 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 01:09:50 pm Another cool thing about gen-4 molten salt nuclear is it can actually use old stored nuclear waste as fuel! What more can you ask.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 01:13:09 pm The main thing holding up nuclear in the US is greenie hysteria and green tape voted in by ignorant numb nuts. Fossil fuel companies have enough money to diversify into this field if they have any brains. Another big problem is poll-whoring coward pollies like Key and Jacynda. We need more Trump and Farage like figures.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 17, 2017, 02:10:30 pm you're so right aDjUsToR the media seem to have gone insane lol
only problem is trump is surrounded by enemies in both parties he's got a hard road they all want to kill him i hope they don't he was talking about unleashing all the secret technologies they have been withholding from the world which i believe some of it must be free energy i think they have held back a lot because they are all being bribed and blackmailed. time will tell ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 17, 2017, 02:20:27 pm i didn't really go anywhere i been following twitter it has some great echo chambers for both right and left and it's good fun
I thought i better check in here to see if ktj has joined that alt left terrorist group ANTIFA Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 02:36:49 pm I doubt there is "free" energy, but there is cheaper and cleaner energy per kWh (factoring in all life cycle costs) in the form of molten salt nuclear. Weight for weight uranium, plutonium or thorium has about a million times more available energy than coal.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 02:50:21 pm Talking about echo chambers, have you ever read the comments section of The Guardian? Talk about mentally unstable moonbats of the loony left!!!😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 02:53:06 pm Thorium is extremely plentiful in the earth's crust.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 02:56:44 pm There could be a win win solutions between born-again climate-change dingbats and hard core energy realists. It's called molten salt nuclear. Zero emissions and very safe. Pissing around with wind and solar is just pissing big money against the wall and delaying the inevitable need to go nuclear.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 17, 2017, 03:02:09 pm i think that
Thorium reactor type was an old idea but they they couldn't make nukes with it? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 03:04:33 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 17, 2017, 03:41:17 pm global warming is a conspiracy theory ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 17, 2017, 04:21:35 pm ...yes...I agree....
..and even if it isn't... Why worry....there are other issues which will finish the human race..a long time before the climate🙄 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 09:58:45 pm from The Washington Post.... Harvey and Irma are the new normal. It's time to move away from the coasts. Climate change is rendering once idyllic lands inhospitable to life. By ELIZABETH RUSH | 11:55PM EDT - Friday, September 15, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_900w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Outlook/Images/PHO-10May25-226884-0350.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/15/Outlook/Images/PHO-10May25-226884-0350.jpg) The Roseate Spoonbill, left, has taken to higher ground. We should follow its lead. — Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images. WHEN Hurricane Irma made landfall in the United States last weekend, it first brought its fury to the Florida Keys. For much of the past century the roseate spoonbill — that funky, pink shorebird with a bill shaped like a serving utensil — has called this island chain home. But about a decade ago, researchers observed a remarkable and unprecedented shift: Spoonbills were abandoning their historic nesting grounds (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article139196198.html) in staggering numbers, aiming instead for somewhere higher and drier on the mainland. If spoonbills can't find adequately shallow water, they can't feed; and if they can't feed themselves, they can't feed their chicks. Adding several centimeters of water into the wetlands where spoonbills traditionally bred (as has occurred over the past 10 years (http://media.miamiherald.com/static/media/projects/2017/graphics/03-18-SeaRise2.svg) in the Florida Bay, thanks to wetter winters and higher tides) significantly changed the landscape, eliminating the habitats where these gangly waders had long found dinner. When the spoonbills realized it was no longer possible to live on the Florida Keys, they left. It's time for humans to learn from them. That two storms of Harvey and Irma's caliber would make landfall in the United States during the same swampy fortnight seemed exceptional at first — and then, of course, it didn't. That's because surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic, where many hurricanes are born, are between 0.5 degrees Celsius and 1 degree Celsius above average (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06092017/hurricane-irma-harvey-climate-change-warm-atlantic-ocean-questions) this year. Warmer seas, combined with higher atmospheric temperatures, feed storms, helping turn average hurricanes into spectacularly destructive events. Add accelerated sea level rise into the mix, and you get large swaths of North American coastline inundated in previously unimaginable amounts of water. Many living in Louisiana, New York, on the edges of the Olympic Peninsula and all along the coast of Alaska have recently found themselves in the same difficult position as those recovering from Harvey and Irma, weighing the same limited choices. Irma killed about 30 people (http://abcnews.go.com/US/fema-90-percent-homes-florida-keys-damaged-hurricane/story?id=49814367) in three states, wrought extensive damage on Florida's economy (http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/09/12/550404709/floridas-veggie-farmers-look-at-irmas-damage-probably-the-worst-weve-seen) and, combined with Hurricane Harvey, racked up costs already estimated to surpass those of Hurricane Katrina (http://time.com/money/4935684/hurricane-irma-harvey-economic-cost). Retreat or rebuild? Some have followed the spoonbill's example and headed for higher ground. But legal and regulatory conditions don't make moving away from increasingly dangerous coastal areas easy. If we're going to adapt to climate change without loss of life and unnecessary financial hardship in Harvey- and Irma-like storms, federal, state and local governments need to start financing and encouraging relocation. In late 2012, just a few weeks after Hurricane Sandy inundated more than 400,000 New Yorkers, an unexpected cry started rising from the edges of Staten Island. Along the eastern shore, residents were banding together and asking the state to pay pre-storm prices for their flood-prone homes. Instead of returning and rebuilding, they decided they would rather relocate. Some posted signs on their lawns that read “Mother Nature wants her land back” (https://superstormresearchlab.org/2014/04/29/fighting-for-retreat-after-sandy-the-ocean-breeze-buyout-tent-on-staten-island/#jp-carousel-1333) or “Buy out wanted, buy out needed” (http://media.silive.com/latest_news/photo/buyoutjpg-f1e17aa3c67109f0.jpg). Nine grass-roots buyout committees formed in the storm's wake. Members went door to door, gauging interest, raising awareness and mapping the areas where they no longer felt safe living. Rather than viewing retreat as further evidence of the systemic marginalization of their borough, many working-class Staten Islanders began to see it as a chance to finally move away from the flooding and long-term neglect that contributed to their vulnerability. It was an opportunity for a fresh start. Eventually, residents brought their case directly to New York's governor, who praised them for coming together to make a difficult decision. In January 2013, he announced that he would use federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds (made available after major storms to help communities address recurrent issues) to purchase homes in three areas. Then those homes would be knocked down, giving the wetlands a chance to return so they might provide a buffer against storms to come. Some 500 residents have applied for buyouts (https://ny.curbed.com/2015/10/29/9905926/three-years-after-sandy-returning-staten-island-to-nature) since Sandy, and entire neighborhoods are now being demolished along the island’s shore. Already, in the weeks after Harvey (http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/houston/article/Harris-County-seeks-FEMA-help-on-home-buyouts-12193177.php), more than 1,000 residents across Harris County, where Houston is located, have expressed interest in being bought out (https://www.hcfcd.org/our-programs/property-acquisition-program/voluntary-acquisition/voluntary-home-buyout) like their counterparts in New York. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_975w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/14/Outlook/Images/APTOPIX_Hurricane_Irma_33363-0fdc1-0352.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/14/Outlook/Images/APTOPIX_Hurricane_Irma_33363-0fdc1-0352.jpg) A house in Ponte Verde Beach, Florida, slides into the Atlantic Ocean after Hurricane Irma. In Florida, this kind of thing almost seems normal. — Photograph: Gary Lloyd Mccullough/Associated Press. Retreat is slowly gaining traction as a climate change adaptation strategy. Simple enough on the surface, it amounts to relocating or demolishing structures that are threatened by erosion or regular flooding. But while the process may be straightforward, the politics surrounding it are less so: Not only is it difficult to get a group of people to agree to leave en masse, it is even more difficult to require them to stay in the area. Otherwise, local governments are faced with a significant loss in tax revenue and in some cases the devaluation of nearby properties. But there are ways to address these downsides. In New York, for instance, residents were offered a 5 percent bonus on closing (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/nyregion/cuomo-seeking-home-buyouts-in-flood-zones.html) if they could prove that they would use the money to purchase another home within the county. I was teaching on Staten Island when Sandy swirled ashore. And I would visit the buyout area often in the year after the money was allocated, speaking with residents as they prepared to move. Some didn't go far. After losing her brother in the storm, Patti Snyder relocated a mile inland, to higher ground; others, like Danielle Mancuso, went farther afield. “There's no ocean in Goshen,” she told me the day I called, saying she was headed upstate. For the most part, folks who received buyouts (not everyone who wanted one got one) were pleased, not only because they had finally received the help they felt they'd long deserved, but also because they had come together to demand what each on their own could not. The storm that eventually broke the community apart had, if only momentarily, also brought it closer together. For now, significant barriers remain to considering retreat as a form of recovery. For one, if you carry a National Flood Insurance Program policy, you are required by law to rebuild on your land (https://www.fema.gov/news-release/2017/09/04/femas-national-flood-insurance-program-enhances-flood-claims-process-and), even if it has repeatedly flooded. There is even a term for structures that have been inundated and rebuilt more than 10 times: “Severe Repetitive Loss properties.” Many of them are located, perhaps not surprisingly, in Houston and South Florida. They account for roughly 0.5 percent of the flood insurance program's portfolio (https://www.nrdc.org/experts/rob-moore/flood-rebuild-repeat-need-flood-insurance-reforms) and more than 10 percent of its spending. A recent study by the Natural Resources Defense Council found that, in most cases, it is less expensive to buy out these homes than it is to cover the cost of repairing and rebuilding after ever-more-common floods. When Congress votes on whether to reauthorize the deeply indebted flood program this month, it could remove the regulation that those who file claims must rebuild near the wrack line. Instead, the program could offer discounted flood insurance to homeowners in the highest-risk areas, with a caveat: In return for lower premiums, those homeowners would agree to accept buyouts if their properties were damaged during a flood. This would help keep insurance rates affordable for low- and middle-income homeowners (a daunting task given that the program is both federally subsidized and tens of billions of dollars in debt) while encouraging folks to move out of harm's way. Meanwhile, in the wake of Irma and Harvey, local floodplain managers can pursue buyouts where the cost of mitigation may eclipse the cost of retreat. And those who are faced with the difficult task of recovery can ask whether they want to return. If the answer is no, then the community can band together and seek money to relocate through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The superlatives used to describe Irma and Harvey, and Sandy and Katrina before them, are starting to sound eerily familiar: “unprecedented” (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2017/08/hurricane_harvey_could_produce_winds_and_unprecedented_flooding_and_trump.html), “record-breaking” (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/30/us/sandy-records/index.html), “game changer” (http://www.nola.com/300/2017/08/hurricane_katrina_new_orleans.html). But the game hasn't actually changed much: We continue to backfill and build atop our buffering wetlands, and we continue to be shocked when those places flood. We continue to rely on flood insurance rate maps (http://elizabethrush.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Harpers_Stormy-Waters.pdf) that use models generated from the past to predict present and future risk. But as polar ice caps melt, sea levels rise and storms intensify, the past is proving to be an increasingly unreliable guide. We have the emotional resources to make the move, to walk away from the places that have long defined us, especially when those places are changing irrevocably. What we need now, more than ever, is to realize that our collective well-being — of the human and non-human communities along the water's edge — hinges upon how good we get at demanding that relocation be considered a form of adaptation and funded as such. Those with the most resources will be able to make the transition with relative ease, but what about those with less? For them, only good policy choices aimed at encouraging and supporting relocation can ensure a stable future. All around us, the landmarks by which we have long navigated are beginning to slip beneath the surface of the water. Like the spoonbill, it's time to aim for higher ground. • Elizabeth Rush, the author of “Rising: The Unsettling of the American Shore” (to be published by Milkweed Editions (https://milkweed.org) in 1918), teaches creative writing at Brown University. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Hurricane Jose and Tropical Storm Maria could dance the Fujiwara! (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/16/hurricane-jose-and-tropical-storm-maria-could-dance-the-fujiwara) • Why do Floridians keep telling ourselves we can beat nature? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/why-do-floridians-keep-telling-ourselves-we-can-beat-nature/2017/09/14/461eb9d4-9976-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/irma-and-harvey-are-the-new-normal-its-time-to-move-away-from-the-coasts/2017/09/15/4ff2a61e-9971-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/irma-and-harvey-are-the-new-normal-its-time-to-move-away-from-the-coasts/2017/09/15/4ff2a61e-9971-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 11:16:21 pm Geez what a load of mentally unhinged tosh.😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 17, 2017, 11:28:07 pm Yes it is a smart idea to move out of flood and storm prone areas.
No there is no evidence the minuscule amount of the trace gas Co2 is causing an increase in storm severity or frequency. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 17, 2017, 11:58:46 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Trump may be reconsidering his opposition to Paris climate accord By TRACY WILKINSON | 4:55PM PDT - Saturday, September 16, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59bdabf3/turbine/la-1505602544-63mo3f8e8b-snap-image/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59bdabf3/turbine/la-1505602544-63mo3f8e8b-snap-image) Japan's environmental minister, Naomi Tokashiki, arrives at a meeting Saturday in Montreal to discuss the Paris climate accord. The U.S. participated only as an observer. — Photograph: Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. A EUROPEAN OFFICIAL said on Saturday that the Trump administration has softened its opposition to the landmark Paris climate accord (http://www.latimes.com/topic/environmental-issues/paris-climate-accord-EVGAP00096-topic.html) and may not completely withdraw after all. If true, this would mark another reversal of one of President Trump (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/donald-trump-PEBSL000163-topic.html)'s key campaign promises, one of the most controversial. But the White House (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/government/white-house-PLCUL000110-topic.html) quickly sought to rebut the report, which was first reported by The Wall Street Journal. “There has been no change in the United States' position on the Paris agreement,” said Lindsay Walters, a presidential spokeswoman. “As the president has made abundantly clear, the United States is withdrawing unless we can reenter on terms that are more favorable to our country.” Later, White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote on Twitter, “Our position on the Paris agreement has not changed. @POTUS (https://twitter.com/POTUS) has been clear, US withdrawing unless we get pro-America terms.” At a ministerial summit of 30 countries in Montreal, where the United States participated as an observer, the European Union (http://www.latimes.com/topic/business/economy/european-union-ORGOV000067-topic.html)'s top climate official said the Trump administration had backed away from its declaration in June that it was abandoning the historic 2015 agreement. The U.S. “stated that they will not renegotiate the Paris accord, but they will try to review the terms on which they could be engaged under this agreement,” Miguel Arias Canete said, according to wire reports. Arias said he and other officials involved with the Paris agreement would meet on the margins of this week's United Nations General Assembly in New York to determine what the “real U.S. position” was. But, he added, “it's a message which is quite different to the one we heard from President Trump in the past.” It was not immediately clear how much, if anything, had changed in the U.S. position. Under the agreement’s terms, Trump's decision to withdraw cannot fully take effect for almost four years. In the interim, Trump has said he hopes to renegotiate an accord “on terms that are fair to the United States.” Some experts have suggested that left Trump with a bit of wiggle room, where he could declare he had withdrawn, only to renegotiate terms that he would portray as being more favorable to the U.S. The meeting in Montreal stood out for the lack of a high-level U.S. presence. Other countries asserted their commitments to fighting global warming. “The Paris agreement should not be renegotiated,” said Xie Zhenhua, China's special representative for climate change affairs. Washington has indicated it will continue to participate in these meetings, albeit at a lower level. “We continue to engage them,” Canada's environment minister Catherine McKenna said. “We continue to make the case that like the United States, we want to create jobs, we want to create economic growth.” When Trump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) announced his decision to withdraw from the accord, he was adamant that the U.S. would ignore voluntary goals on limiting greenhouse-gas emissions and other elements believed to contribute to global warming. Trump argued the agreement was bad for U.S. businesses and that it made Washington pay too much for pollution caused by other countries. Global warming has renewed political currency in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, which caused epic floods in Houston, and Hurricane Irma, which devastated parts of the Caribbean and left millions of people in Florida without electricity. Scientists say warmer waters may have intensified the monster storms' force. Two more storms, Jose and Maria, are churning off the East Coast. Environmental activists said they saw no sign that the storms would change Trump's claims that climate change is a hoax. “For anyone who had any hope that two historically devastating storms striking our nation would wake up the Trump administration to the reality of the climate crisis, think again,” the Sierra Club said in a statement on Saturday, noting that the White House had quickly denied claims out of Montreal. Trump was criticized in environmental circles and European capitals when he announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris accord, a hard-fought agreement that brought together almost every country in the world to confront climate change. It was a signature achievement of the Obama administration and rare diplomatic agreement for the United States and China, the world's two largest economies and the two largest producers of carbon-gas emissions. Other countries, and many U.S. states, including California, said they would forge ahead with meeting the goals of the climate agreement despite Trump's plan to withdraw. In June, Trump argued that the deal would “undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty … and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world,” he said. “It is time to exit the Paris accord.” • Tracy Wilkinson reported from Washington D.C. • Tracy Wilkinson has covered wars, crises and daily life on three continents. Her career began with United Press International, where she covered the Contra war in Nicaragua. She moved to the Los Angeles Times in 1987, first as a writer on the Metro staff, then as a foreign correspondent based in San Salvador. In 1995, she moved to Vienna, where she covered the war in the Balkans, winning the George Polk Award in 1999, and then to Jerusalem. From there, she went to Rome, where she covered two popes and did several stints in Iraq. In 2008, she became Mexico bureau chief, where her coverage was part of a team Overseas Press Club Award and a Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Award. Wilkinson was also the 2014 winner of the Maria Moors Cabot Award for coverage of Latin America. She earned her bachelor's degree from Vanderbilt University. Her book “The Vatican's Exorcists: Driving Out the Devil in the 21st Century” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0446578851) has been translated into a dozen languages. She joined the L.A. Times' Washington, D.C., bureau in 2015 to cover foreign affairs. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-trump-climate-20170916-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-trump-climate-20170916-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 18, 2017, 12:00:13 am Yes it is a smart idea to move out of flood and storm prone areas. No there is no evidence the minuscule amount of the trace gas Co2 is causing an increase in storm severity or frequency. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b629a5/turbine/la-1505110431-tq63vutvsc-snap-image/1200) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59b629a5/turbine/la-1505110431-tq63vutvsc-snap-image) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 18, 2017, 01:40:35 am A hysterical lefty media cartoon doesn't really help your case 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 18, 2017, 06:32:51 am I'm beginning to wonder if ktj sees cartoons as being real.....unable to distinguish between REALITY and fiction....probably a god botherer as well🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 18, 2017, 11:51:46 am ....so says the idiot who is too STUPID to see the science, so chooses to bury his head in the sand instead. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 18, 2017, 12:26:08 pm KTJ to be a good scientist you need to have a good sceptical mind. Being a dumb lemming follower type person just makes you a quasi religious clown. If you bothered to look, you'd see that that dozens(if not hundreds) of very prominent climate scientists who are sceptical have stellar credentials in their fields.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 18, 2017, 03:26:08 pm Adj..."Being a dumb lemming follower type person just makes you a quasi religious clown. "
...yes...very accurate description of the rail labourer I would say😉 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 18, 2017, 06:50:16 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Why the wiring of our brains makes it hard to stop climate change “Humans aren't wired to act on complex statistical risks very well. We care a lot more about the tangible present than the distant future.” By DAVID G. VICTOR, NICK OBRADOVICH and DILLON AMAYA | 4:00AM PDT - Sunday, September 17, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59bc4abf/turbine/la-1505512122-5lspjyhuj1-snap-image/1075) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59bc4abf/turbine/la-1505512122-5lspjyhuj1-snap-image) Pedestrians walk in a flooded street as Tropical Storm Irma hits Charleston, South Carolina on September 11th. — Photograph: Mic Smith/Associated Press. HOUSTON has barely begun to dry out from Hurricane Harvey, and Florida faces a massive rebuilding effort after the Irma catastrophe. These two storms, among the most powerful in American history, are typical of the extreme weather events that are likely to become more common as the planet warms. A third hurricane, Jose, waits offshore and the storm season is far from done. So why isn't the public heeding scientists and demanding climate action by politicians that could help deal with these destructive extremes? You can point fingers at the influence of fossil fuel companies, at misinformation from climate deniers and at political obstructionism, notably from a fragmented Republican party. But a much deeper force is also at work: the way our brains function. Humans aren't well wired to act on complex statistical risks. We care a lot more about the tangible present than the distant future. Many of us do that to the extreme — what behavioral scientists call hyperbolic discounting — which makes it particularly hard to grapple with something like climate change, where the biggest dangers are yet to come. Our mental space is limited and we aren't primed to focus on abstruse topics. Except for a small fraction that are highly motivated, most voters know little about the ins and outs of climate change, or the policy options relating to it. Instead, voters' opinions about such things derive from heuristics such as political party affiliation and basic ideology. It isn't surprising, then, that most people don't process information about extreme events the way scientists do. And they don't do a good job of holding politicians accountable when the effects of political inaction are far removed from the policy failures that cause them. The arrival of extreme events — hurricanes, wildfires, drought and torrential deluges — is not proof to many people that scientists are right and that a complete rethinking of climate policy is overdue. Instead, voters see these shocks more as evidence that things are out of whack. Change is needed, and voters deliver that verdict not by reevaluating policy but by casting politicians out of office. Political scientists call such decision-making retrospective voting, and it too is rooted in how the brain deals with complex topics. It seems less than rational, but for busy voters, focusing on immediate, visible results and situations is a practical way to assess politicians, even if those results and situations are many steps removed from elected leaders' actual responsibilities. When it comes to climate change, this sort of brain-driven behavior tends to create churn in political leadership rather than the continuity needed for long-term planning. It ejects whoever happens to be in office, rather than the real culprits. It doesn't help that when politicians know they are at risk of losing office due to disasters, they may pursue quick payoffs, neglecting longer-term policies like those needed for emissions mitigation and climate adaptation. California's climate actions prove there can be exceptions to these rules. But what matters for global warming is ultimately what happens across the nation and the planet. Overall, the politics of controlling emissions, especially given the time horizons we face, will continue to bring out the worst in how we make important policy decisions. Quick, deep cuts in emissions would impose high costs on existing well-organized interest groups for benefits that will be diffused across all nations and that will accrue mainly in the distant future. Failing at emissions control, we will have to grapple with the politics of adaptation — abandoning vulnerable regions and subsidizing the construction of various forms of protection, like sea walls to deal with worsening storm surges. Voters consistently report being worried about climate change. But asked to rank their priorities, they rarely put climate policy high on the list. Nor does the public indicate that it is willing to spend what is needed to address the problem. What voters know is mixed, muddled and sparse. This grim analysis explains why political systems will always be playing catch-up. Even with the conspicuous signals of regular extreme events, public support for the policies needed to stop global warming will be fleeting. But that realization can also inspire new policy strategies that are better wired for our political brains. First, investments in technology can help immensely because they lower the cost of reducing emissions, making change appear less costly and easier to adopt. New energy technologies also create new interest groups that can help keep policy makers focused on controlling emissions when voters’ minds drift. Second, we're likely to do better with policies that generate immediate and tangible benefits. A good example is efforts to control soot — a potent warming pollutant and also a central ingredient in noxious local air pollution. Even countries and societies that care little about global goals find it in their self-interest to protect the air their citizens breathe. Third, our political institutions can help people focus on the long view by surveying climate impacts on a regular basis, so that each extreme storm is less a novel event and more a part of a pattern that needs sustained policy attention. One model is California's program of localized climate assessments that inform decisions about land-use planning and development. Another is the Obama administration's regular, nationwide assessments, which are at risk of termination under President Trump. Our brains are unfortunately not wired to tackle problems like climate change. With some help we can build policies that enable us to do better. What the storms in the Gulf and Atlantic are reminding the public — for now, if not for long— is that the consequences of failure are big. • David G. Victor is a professor at UC San Diego's School of Global Policy & Strategy and codirector of the Initiative on Energy and Climate at the Brookings Institution. • Nick Obradovich is a research scientist at MIT's Media Laboratory. • Dillon J. Amaya is a PhD student at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-victor-amaya-obradovich-why-our-brains-make-it-hard-to-stop-global-warming-20170917-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-victor-amaya-obradovich-why-our-brains-make-it-hard-to-stop-global-warming-20170917-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 18, 2017, 06:52:34 pm Actually, that article applies mostly to DUMB & STUPID people. Intelligent people (with longer-term attention spans) have the nouse to see what the problem is. The DUMB & STUPID people (with short-term attention spans) desperately look for bogus science. Also, those DUMBARSES are basically selfish wankers who don't give a fuck about destroying the planet for their grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren. There's three of those despicable types posting at this group, including in this thread. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 18, 2017, 08:56:19 pm ...yeah...nah...sounds like a lot of lefty bullshit to me🙄
...why is that not a surprise😳 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 18, 2017, 09:44:42 pm Anybody who states "climate science is settled" is waving a huge flag that tells you they are either idiot lefties or sycophantic govt troughers, or naive idiots
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 18, 2017, 10:01:13 pm KTJ the real dumbasses are those who don't realise that committing societal and economic suicide by deindustrialising will literally be condemning the poor to early deaths. And for what? A theory that is full of holes. The greatest scam in the history of science.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 18, 2017, 11:23:44 pm Here's a goody...
https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg Not perfect but does give reason for pause. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 19, 2017, 01:40:16 am from The Washington Post.... Hurricanes Harvey and Irma offer sobering lessons in the power of nature The astonishing storms of 2017 — so far — show how Americans respond when calm blue skies turn a violent gray. By JOEL CHENBACH, ABIGAIL HAUSLOHNER and PATRICIA SULLIVAN | 9:14PM EDT - Sunday, September 17, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/17/National-Enterprise/Images/Harvey_91145-aa2b5.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/09/17/National-Enterprise/Images/Harvey_91145-aa2b5.jpg) Paul England pilots his boat through floodwaters in Port Arthur, Texas, in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey on September 2nd. — Photograph: Gerald Herbert/Associated Press. MIAMI — The astonishing hurricanes of 2017, Harvey and Irma, have provided a sobering lesson in the power of nature, along with some modest reassurance about how Americans respond when calm blue skies turn a violent gray. The next test could come sooner than anyone wants. This stormy hurricane season is a long way from over, and there are ominous stirrings in the Atlantic, which has a history of brewing tropical cyclones that spin toward the United States. Hurricane Jose has been loitering in the Atlantic and might be preparing a run toward the East Coast this week. And Hurricane Maria is expected to hit the Leeward Islands in the Caribbean on Monday. While Texas and the Southeast pick up after significant wind and flood damage, the welcome news from the Harvey and Irma hurricanes is that, in a crisis, neighbors help neighbors. The government did not stumble and bumble as it did initially during the Hurricane Katrina disaster of 2005. Improved storm track forecasts gave millions of people and civic leaders time to prepare for tornadic winds and biblical flooding. But the storms were not without moments of confusion and chaos, as well as tragic mistakes. In Texas, first responders were overwhelmed, leaving many flood-related rescues to a nomadic corps of volunteers with boats. In Sarasota, Florida, the American Red Cross struggled to staff emergency shelters because many of its local volunteers are snowbirds who don't arrive in Florida until October or later, said Jacqueline Fellhauer, who manages one of the Red Cross shelters. “We were just trying to grab people out of the sky,” she said. Perhaps the biggest lesson from the storms was driven home by the shocking images of flooded nursing homes in Texas and eight deaths at a facility for the elderly in Florida last week: In emergencies, communities and their government officials need to be much more effective in protecting the most-fragile members of society. The episode in South Florida, where the facility grew dangerously hot after losing air conditioning in the storm — along with multiple instances in Texas where entire residential populations of the infirm and wheelchair-bound required boat rescues — has prompted advocates and state authorities to finger-point and soul-search. Advocates argued that all nursing homes should be marked as top priorities in both state evacuation and emergency response strategies. Better enforcement of existing codes — such as ensuring that generators are functional and up to date — might also be necessary. “The lesson learned is, when you lose power you have to get the frail elderly out of the nursing homes,” an outraged Senator Bill Nelson (Democrat-Florida) said in a telephone interview, remarking on the deaths at a Hollywood, Florida, facility. “The nursing home is right across the street from the hospital.” In Houston, scores of people died in flooding that, although historic in scale, was predicted by meteorologists many days in advance. Harvey would strike the Gulf Coast and then inundate Southeast Texas with days of rain, they warned. Yet many residents were unprepared to see their homes and belongings lost suddenly to floodwater, and thousands needed to be rescued from the tops of homes or cars, sometimes after making ill-advised ventures out into the fast-flowing current. A number of observers have applauded Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner's decision not to evacuate the city. The flooding, in the end, caused fewer deaths than the evacuation of Houston ahead of Hurricane Rita in 2005. But the days before the storm were filled with conflicting official messages, stirring elements of panic, confusion and hand-wringing among Texans. Governor Greg Abbott (Republican), for example, encouraged coastal evacuations, while Turner (Democrat) told residents to shelter in place. In the aftermath of the storm, the state's highly decentralized system of government meant that casualties were slow to tally and the desperate needs of local jurisdictions — like Beaumont, a city that languished without running water for days — appeared to get lost in the morass of competing cries for help. “You never have one clear distinctive voice,” said retired Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, who helped prop up the federal response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. By contrast, Allen said, Florida benefited from the clear leadership of Governor Rick Scott (Republican): “The governor was out front, he was the voice of the state, he was transparent, he was credible, he emoted.” The volunteers who flocked to the rescue efforts in Houston were a source of pride for many Texans, and an illustration, many said, of what went right during the crisis. But the citizen heroes of Houston learned some lessons as well. The flooded streets of the city and its suburbs contained dips and hills, deep water, shallow water and dangerously rushing water, and the amateur rescuers were sometimes woefully ill-equipped. Air boats and john boats were good for city rescues but often became treacherous in strong currents, they found. Bigger boats could handle the current, but were useless in shallower water, and problematic when curbs, cars, mailboxes and other obstacles got in the way. Charitable efforts after the storms also saw a tide of donations mismatched to needs: too many clothes and would-be rescuers, and too few cleaning supplies and ready laborers to help with the unglamorous task of dragging moldy furniture out of wrecked homes, local church leaders said. Rising coastal populations Hurricanes expose the flaws in infrastructure. And in some instances, the airing of those flaws has sounded like a broken record. Earlier warnings against Houston's unchecked building explosion have come back to haunt it yet again, environmentalists and civil engineers said this month, attributing part of the flooding to the city's lack of adequate drainage and excessive building in areas of known risk. Old sewage systems in flat landscapes that require the pumping of wastewater need backup plans when the power gets knocked out and the facilities flood, as much of Central Florida has discovered. The power grid turned out to be so vulnerable to windstorms that 16 million people (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/12/16-million-power-outages-and-142-mph-winds-hurricane-irma-by-the-numbers) across the southeastern United States, most of them in Florida, lost power from Hurricane Irma, a U.S. record. Some still haven't gotten it back. And then there are the basic needs that come with the basic facts of living on or near a coast. “We need better generators, we need to require generators at shelters, and they need to be beefy enough to sustain lights, food service, and a semblance of air-conditioning and fans,” said Sarasota City Manager Tom Barwin. There were “glitches” in the shelter plan in Miami-Dade County, Mayor Carlos Gimenez admitted as the storm roared toward Florida. He had insisted that the county open enough space for 100,000 people. But the Red Cross had trouble mustering volunteers amid difficult travel conditions, and many shelters were short-staffed. In 1960, when Hurricane Donna rode up Florida, a peninsula that juts directly into Hurricane Alley, the state had fewer than 5 million residents (https://www.bebr.ufl.edu/sites/default/files/FloridaPop2005_0.pdf). Today it has more than 20 million, and an average of roughly 1,000 people move to the state every day. The Houston metropolitan area's population, estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau to be about 6.6 million, has similarly boomed during the past few decades, adding more than 100,000 people from 2014 to 2015 alone. Along the packed U.S. coastlines, these waves of humanity are meeting a rising sea. Climate change intensifies deluges, and warmer water can supercharge a hurricane. But trying to stop the population growth would be unrealistic, experts and officials say. “People are going to come to Florida,” Senator Nelson said. “So we have to use the best scientific evidence about hurricanes and wind speeds and drainage and water and so forth, so that we have smart growth, not irresponsible growth.” Robert Gilbert, a professor and the chair of the civil, architectural and environmental engineering department at the University of Texas at Austin, echoed that view for geographical “bathtubs” like Houston and New Orleans. Instead of rebuilding homes with the kind of materials that will require the large-scale stripping of drywall every time there’s a flood, communities should build with the reality of floods in mind, Gilbert and other experts said. They recommended using materials that hold up better in water and considering drainage. For example, in many frequently wet parts of the world, homes are made of concrete, he said. “Saying we're not going to let people move there is naive,” Gilbert said. “Maybe a better way of looking at it is how to build better, so that people can get wet but not lose their houses and not lose their jobs.” And instead of offering flood insurance to only those in arbitrarily marked flood zones, face up to the reality that flooding is a pervasive risk that warrants broad protection in the United States, he added. “The way we deal with flood insurance in the United States is broken.” Others think it might be better to throw in the towel in some spots. In Houston, Mayor Turner said Thursday that rebuilding low-income apartment complexes in areas like Greenspoint, a frequent flood zone on the north side of the city, might not be wise. “Quite frankly, we've already had a conversation with FEMA because it may not be the best thing to rebuild in those locations,” he said at a news conference. “Otherwise we'll find ourselves in those conditions again.” In Bonita Springs, in Southwest Florida, flooding from a late August storm had not dried up by the time Hurricane Irma hit last week, submerging the area in four feet of water a few days later. The low-lying city has been involved in a years-long legal battle over whether to allow development on its east side. It's vacant now and absorbs rainwater during major storms. Mayor Peter Simmons thinks it's time to consider buying out dozens of homeowners and letting the river do what it wants to do, an idea he said he discussed this week with Governor Scott. “No matter what you do, Mother Nature is always going to win,” Simmons said. William “Brock” Long, the FEMA administrator, has had two epic storms in his first three months on the job, and what he's seen affirms his philosophy that the United States needs a fundamental change in disaster preparedness. “We don't seem to learn the lessons over and over again from past hurricanes,” he said. He cited the many people who refused to evacuate from storm-surge zones, “which blows my mind.” He said he believes the 10,000 people who didn't evacuate the Florida Keys “got lucky, and don't realize that a shift of that storm track, just a few miles west or east, could have had devastating impact.” Likewise, a slightly different path could have sent storm surge rampaging into Tampa Bay, or widespread devastation along Florida's Gulf Coast. Americans need to save money, Long said. They need to recognize that disasters will happen. “We need a true culture of preparedness,” he said. Senator Marco Rubio (Republican-Florida) echoed that sentiment after touring damage from Irma. “You live in the tropics, you live in South Florida, you're never more than 10 days away from a hurricane,” Rubio said. In Miami, where authorities have yet to finish clearing thousands of downed palm trees and power lines, humorist Dave Barry — who lived through Hurricane Andrew in 1992 — offered his own lesson learned from Irma: “Never fall into the trap of thinking it won't happen again. But also never fall into the trap of thinking, while it's happening, that you should have moved to Oklahoma. No offense to Oklahoma, there's a reason you live in Florida. And in the end, it's worth it.” • Patricia Sullivan reported from Houston and Bonita Springs, Florida, and Abigail Hauslohner reported from Houston. Roy Furchgott in Sarasota, Florida, contributed to this report. • Joel Achenbach covers science and politics for the National Desk at The Washington Post. Achenbach also helms the “Achenblog” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/achenblog). • Abigail Hauslohner is a national reporter who covers Islam, Arab affairs and America for The Washington Post. Before coming to Washington in 2015, she spent seven years covering war, politics and religion in the Middle East, and served as The Post's Cairo bureau chief. She has also covered District politics and government. • Patricia Sullivan covers government, politics and other regional issues in Arlington County and Alexandria for The Washington Post. She worked in Illinois, Florida, Montana and California before joining The Post in November 2001. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Signs of life after Hurricane Irma hit the Florida Keys (https://www.washingtonpost.com/signs-of-life-after-hurricane-irma-hit-the-florida-keys/2017/09/16/24e63518-9aec-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_gallery.html) • ‘Waiting for help that never came’: Eight died in Florida nursing home (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/fla-nursing-home-defends-actions-says-it-called-governor/2017/09/15/9eebc198-9a3d-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) • As hurricanes approach, fear is in the water, spreading with new and viral efficiency (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/as-irma-approaches-fear-is-in-the-water-spreading-with-new-and-viral-efficiency/2017/09/09/797e7d3c-94c1-11e7-aace-04b862b2b3f3_story.html) • Recovering from Harvey when ‘you already live a disaster every day of your life’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/recovering-from-harvey-when-you-already-live-a-disaster-every-day-of-your-life/2017/09/05/40a07e10-9247-11e7-8754-d478688d23b4_story.html) • Storm flooding destroyed hundreds of thousands of cars in a city that relies heavily on them (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/storm-flooding-destroyed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-cars-in-a-city-that-relies-heavily-on-them/2017/09/03/1dd22680-90b8-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html) • An adrenaline-driven mission on the dark, waters streets of Texas (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/an-adrenaline-driven-mission-on-the-watery-streets-of-texas/2017/08/31/b177da92-8e6f-11e7-84c0-02cc069f2c37_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hurricanes-harvey-and-irma-offer-sobering-lessons-in-the-power-of-nature/2017/09/17/b6ac46e6-9951-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hurricanes-harvey-and-irma-offer-sobering-lessons-in-the-power-of-nature/2017/09/17/b6ac46e6-9951-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 19, 2017, 06:40:09 am Hey ktj.....it's Bloody freezing up here , we need it to be at least 2 degrees warmer...I am investing in developing coal fired power stations, but have you got any tips as to how I can help warm the planet faster?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 19, 2017, 10:09:13 am Harvey and Irma offer powerful lesson to climate religion lunatics...
America has a hurricane season, every year 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 19, 2017, 12:34:26 pm It's great that California's Governor Jerry Brown has stepped up to take over leadership on so many issues from the idiot Donald J. Trump at various world forums. Who needs the “clown president” at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington D.C. when there are esteemed statesmen like Governor Brown to do the job the Prez should be doing? THREE CHEERS for California Governor Jerry Brown....a highly-intelligent politician who is full of wisdom & logic, unlike that stupid RETARD in Washington D.C. from the Los Angeles Times.... Trump is riding a ‘dead horse’ on climate issue, Governor Brown says at New York conference By ANN M. SIMMONS | 4:45PM PDT - Monday, September 18, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59c00fa1/turbine/la-1505759132-tc6e098z1r-snap-image/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59c00fa1/turbine/la-1505759132-tc6e098z1r-snap-image) California Governor Jerry Brown discusses the passage of a pair of climate change measures at a news conference in Sacramento in this July 17th file photo. — Photograph: Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press. CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR Jerry Brown (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/jerry-brown-PEPLT007547-topic.html) on Monday touted steps the state has taken toward a healthier climate, but warned that powerful forces he called “climate deniers” are resisting technologies and policies designed to improve conditions. “I like all the optimism around here, but I don't want to minimize the steep hill that we have to climb,” Brown said at the start of a gathering of international leaders called Climate Week NYC. “Decarbonizing the economy when the economy depends so totally on carbon is not child's play. It's quite daunting.” Hosted by the Climate Group, an international nonprofit organization that works with business and government to promote clean technologies and policies, the event brought together high-profile governors, along with leaders of Fortune 500 companies and multinational businesses this week to share their strategies and leadership in tackling climate change. The discussions come amid concerns about global warming and after Hurricanes Harvey and Irma caused devastating flooding (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-irma-sg-storygallery.html) in Texas, Florida and across parts of the Caribbean. Some scientists believe warmer ocean waters caused by climate change are creating stronger storms. President Trump (http://www.latimes.com/topic/politics-government/donald-trump-PEBSL000163-topic.html) this year announced the U.S. withdrawal (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-paris-20170601-story.html) from the groundbreaking Paris climate agreement. Trump has expressed doubt about climate change and indicated that he sees the landmark international accord to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to U.S. sovereignty. The president has argued that the deal is detrimental to U.S. businesses and unfair because Washington was being made to pay more than its fair share. Trump is pushing for more “pro-America terms”, according to White House officials. Brown said California has taken steps toward advancing climate action. In July, the governor signed legislation to extend California's cap-and-trade program, which requires companies to buy permits to release greenhouse gas emissions, essentially giving them a financial incentive to pollute less. It is the only such initiative of its kind in the U.S. and is widely considered an international model for using financial pressure to prod industry to reduce emissions. The revenue generated from the program is expected to go toward building the bullet train from Los Angeles to San Francisco. Brown noted that the legislation was passed with bipartisan support, including eight Republican votes. “It's the first time that I know of where Republican representatives have voted for a climate action explicitly by the name ‘climate action’,” Brown said. “That's real crack in the armor of Republican climate denial, and I think that’s going to spread to other parts of the party.” California uses around 30% renewable energy and would be at 50% in the next seven years, Brown said. In 2015, California's Air Resources Board voted to re-adopt its low-carbon fuel standard, which requires the state to achieve at least a 10% cut in the carbon intensity of transportation fuels by 2020 (http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-0925-carbon-fuels-20150925-story.html). The state has also called for zero-emission cars to represent 15% of sales by 2025. The standards have come under fire from the auto industry that has criticized the rules as too stringent. But sales of electric vehicles rose 91% in the first quarter of 2017 (http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-ev-sales-california-20170519-story.html) from the same period last year, the Los Angeles Times reported in May. Emissions fell by a third of a percent in 2015, which regulators said was equivalent to removing 300,000 vehicles (https://www.google.com/search?q=Greenhouse+emissions+fall+for+another+year+in+California+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8) from state roads for a year, according to a June report in the L.A. Times. Other initiatives California is pushing include eco-friendly building standards. Brown was joined onstage at Morgan Library and Museum in Manhattan by Governors Jay Inslee of Washington and David Ige of Hawaii, Philippe Couillard, the premier of Quebec, and Stephen Badger, chairman of the board of Mars Incorporated. The chocolate giant has pledged to invest $1 billion in its “Sustainable in a Generation” plan (http://www.mars.com/docs/default-source/Press-Releases/sig-press-release-final.pdf?sfvrsn=4), which aims to fight climate change by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions in its production markets by 67% by 2050 and tackling poverty through promoting sustainable farming. “We're committed,” Brown said. At a later event on Monday, the governor joined mayors and business leaders from around the world at a conference organized by C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group to emphasize the role that states, cities and regions can play in addressing climate issues. “Cities and states can make a profound difference,” Brown said during a moderated conversation with Tom Steyer, president and founder of NextGen, an environmental advocacy nonprofit organization. The billionaire environmentalist and potential candidate for governor of California has gained a reputation as a champion for clean energy policies. On Monday, Steyer announced that he had taken out a full-page ad in the New York Post describing Trump's failure to act on climate change as being even more dangerous than a Category 4 hurricane, according to information released by his company. The ad, scheduled to publish on Tuesday, the same day Trump is to address the United Nations General Assembly, warns that the president's lack of climate action would endanger even more American lives. “The most dangerous part of a hurricane isn't the wind or the surge,” reads the ad. “It's a President who fails to act on climate change.” “It would be better to have the president [on board], but the president is temporarily AWOL on this issue,” Brown said. Trump's ideology on the climate change issue — he has questioned the science suggesting a man-made role in raising overall global temperatures and has in the past pushed a narrative that climate change is a deliberate hoax created by China—has prompted some people to be more outspoken and committed in supporting action to tackle the climate issue, Brown said. “He is not going to be successful in the direction he's going,” Brown said. “He’s riding a very dead horse [on] climate denial … He is accelerating the reversal through his own absurdity.” The governor's comments came as a new report published on Monday found that the impact from the U.S. decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement could be significantly mitigated “thanks to the determined action demonstrated by U.S. states, cities and businesses.” Authored by NewClimate Institute and The Climate Group, the analysis in “States, cities and businesses leading the way: a first look at decentralized climate commitments in the US” (https://www.theclimategroup.org/news/us-states-cities-and-businesses-keep-us-climate-action-track), shows that the U.S. could already meet half of its climate commitments under the Paris agreement (http://www.latimes.com/topic/environmental-issues/paris-climate-accord-EVGAP00096-topic.html) by 2025, if 22 states, 54 cities and 250 businesses headquartered in the U.S. continue to implement more than 300 obligations to reduce greenhouse emissions. “There's a lot of uncertainty at the federal level,” Helen Clarkson, CEO of The Climate Group, told the L.A. Times. “But what the report says is that there is plenty of action happening already. There are commitments.” These commitments include a pledge by more than 100 businesses — including Google, Facebook and General Motors — to go to 100% renewable electricity, within various time frames, Clarkson said. Other companies have promised to bring their fleets of vehicles to 100% electric. Los Angeles has committed to 1,000 charging stations, the highest of any city. Britain, India and France are among several countries that have announced a phase-out of internal combustion engines by 2030/2040, Clarkson said. Under the current scenario and if all commitments are fulfilled, greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced 12% to 14% below the 2005 level by 2025, the analysis found. Brown this week is expected to undertake a flurry of other activities, including announcing new details regarding the September 2018 Global Climate Action Summit that is scheduled to take place in San Francisco. • Los Angeles Times staff writers Tony Barboza in Los Angeles and Chris Megerian and Russ Mitchell in San Francisco contributed to this report. • Ann M. Simmons is a global development writer/editor on the foreign desk of the Los Angeles Times, where she covers global sustainability issues. In her most recent role she served as a video and multimedia journalist. She has worked as a metro reporter and national and foreign correspondent. She has been based in Russia, Kenya and South Africa and has reported from Iraq and several other countries across the globe. Originally from the UK, Simmons holds a double honors bachelor's degree in Russian and Norwegian from the University of Anglia in Norwich, England, and a master's degree from Columbia University's Graduate School Journalism. She was a Nieman fellow at Harvard in 2003. • Ann M. Simmons reported from New York. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Governor Jerry Brown, America's unofficial climate change ambassador in the Trump era, heads to China (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-jerry-brown-china-trip-20170601-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-un-brown-climate-change-20170918-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-un-brown-climate-change-20170918-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 19, 2017, 04:57:57 pm Ktj..."It's great that California's Governor Jerry Brown has stepped up to take over leadership on so many issues from the idiot Donald J. Trump at various world forums"
...so many issues...could you please list them here? ...could you give us an update on how he is showing leadership on important things like the North Korea issue? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 19, 2017, 05:45:55 pm from The Washington Post.... Category 5 Hurricane Maria is a severe threat to the Caribbean and Puerto Rico; Jose to scrape Northeast coast Maria makes landfall on Dominica as a Category 5 hurricane as storm heads toward St. Croix and Puerto Rico. Meanwhile, another storm, Jose, could scrape part of the Northeastern U.S. in the coming days. By JASON SAMENOW | 9:40PM EDT - Monday, September 18, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/DKBZLFyXkAAj1va.jpg&w=1100) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/DKBZLFyXkAAj1va.jpg&w=2500) THE wicked 2017 hurricane season is set to deliver its next two punishing blows from Hurricanes Maria and Jose. In both the Caribbean and along the Atlantic coast of the Northeast United States, conditions are set to deteriorate rapidly through Wednesday as these storms arrive. Of the two storms, however, Maria is the much more serious hurricane — upgraded to Category 5, the most extreme level, on Monday evening. The “potentially catastrophic storm” with 160 mph winds has the potential to cause widespread destruction along its path from the central Lesser Antilles through Puerto Rico. “Maria is likely to affect Puerto Rico as an extremely dangerous major hurricane, and a hurricane warning is in effect for that island,” the National Hurricane Center said on Monday. While Jose is capable of producing coastal flooding and pockets of damaging wind from eastern Long Island to coastal Massachusetts, its effects are most likely to resemble those of a strong Nor'easter — rather than a devastating hurricane. Hurricane Maria (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/Capture-cat4-maria.png&w=800) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/Capture-cat4-maria.png&w=1484) This storm has rapidly intensified which is a potentially disastrous scenario for the islands it will sweep across. At 9:35 p.m. on Monday, the storm made landfall in Dominica (https://twitter.com/capitalweather/status/909955364921184256), as it plowed west-northwest at 10 mph. It is the first Category 5 storm to strike Dominica in recorded history (https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/909934942326366208). The Hurricane Center said some additional strengthening is possible during Monday night and, while fluctuations in intensity are possible over the next 36 hours, the storm could strike St. Croix and Puerto Rico as a Category 5 on Wednesday. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/205325_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png&w=800) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/205325_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png&w=1484) On Monday, the storm cut across not only Dominica but also Martinique, French Guadeloupe and St. Lucia, where hurricane warnings were in effect. It was also passing close to and affecting St. Kitts, Nevis, and Montserrat, under hurricane warnings, but perhaps positioned far enough north of the storm to miss its brunt. The worst part of the storm was likely to pass a good deal south of beleaguered Barbuda and Antigua, reeling from Hurricane Irma, but they could still get brushed by some strong wind gusts and heavy showers. On Tuesday, Maria is predicted to mostly pass through a patch of the Caribbean free of islands before potentially closing in on St. Croix, now under a hurricane warning, late in the day or at night. This island was one of the few U.S. Virgin Islands that was spared Irma's wrath, but may well get hammered by Maria. The other U.S. Virgin Islands as well as the British Virgin Islands will also need to carefully monitor and prepare for Maria. While they may remain north of its most severe effects, they could easily face hurricane conditions. By Wednesday, the storm is likely to pass very close to or directly affect Puerto Rico from southeast to northwest. A hurricane has not made landfall in Puerto Rico since Georges in 1998 (https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/909796017662341120). Just one Category 5 hurricane has hit Puerto Rico once in recorded history (https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/909805027405025280); and Maria could become the second if it does not lose strength. The last Category 4 storm to strike the island occurred in 1932 (https://twitter.com/EricBlake12/status/909797701897859073). The islands directly affected by the storm's core face the likelihood of destructive winds of 120 to 150 mph and 6 to 12 inches of rain (with isolated totals of 20-25 inches, especially in high terrain), which will cause life-threatening flash floods and mudslides. A devastating storm surge of at least 6 to 9 feet above normally dry ground is likely to target coastlines positioned just north-northeast of the storm center — which could include the south shores of St. Croix and southeast Puerto Rico. On Friday, the hurricane may come close to the Turks and Caicos and southeast Bahamas, which were ravaged by Irma. Beyond that point, Maria's path becomes more uncertain. Some models suggest it could find an escape route out to sea, remaining offshore from the U.S. East Coast, but it is way too early to sound the all-clear. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/Capture-maria-escape.png&w=825) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/Capture-maria-escape.png&w=1484) Group of simulations from American (blue) and European (red) computer models from early Monday for Hurricane Maria. Each color strand represents a different model simulation with slight tweaks to initial conditions. Note that the strands are clustered together where the forecast track is most confident but they diverge where the course of the storm is less certain. The bold red line is the average of all of the European model simulations, while the blue is the average of all the American model simulations. — Graphic: StormVistaWxModels.com. With Maria, the 2017 hurricane season has already featured four Category 4 or stronger storms; this has only happened four previous times by September 18th (https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/909882547445784577). “2017 joins 1932, 1933, 1961, 2005, and 2007 as only years with multiple Cat 5s; likely to join 2007 as the only with multiple Cat 5 landfalls,” tweeted MDA Federal (https://twitter.com/MDA_Weather/status/909933215183450112), a meteorological consulting firm. 2017 is the first hurricane season with two Category 5 storms since 2007 (https://twitter.com/philklotzbach/status/909928509157531648). Hurricane Jose (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/GOES15522017261glpOGI.jpg&w=800) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/GOES15522017261glpOGI.jpg&w=1484) Jose, which is losing some of its tropical characteristics, is expected to behave like a strong nor’easter along the coast of the Northeast, from near Long Island to eastern Massachusetts. The tropical storm watch was upgraded to a warning for coastal Rhode Island and eastern Massachusetts, the areas most likely to be substantially impacted by Jose. A tropical storm watch continues for areas to the south down to eastern Long Island. Farther south, along the New Jersey and Delaware coastline, the tropical storm watch was dropped. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png&w=800) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png&w=1484) The storm, positioned 250 miles east of Cape Hatteras, was headed north at 9 mph at 5 p.m. on Monday. The storm's peak winds were around 75 mph and expected to remain at that intensity through Wednesday. The Hurricane Center said tropical storm-force winds could begin in coastal sections of the Northeast as soon as Tuesday and Tuesday night. Moderate coastal flooding is expected with water rising up to one to three feet above normally dry land at high tide. Because the storm is a slow-mover, beaches will be assaulted for an extended duration, leading to the prospect of severe erosion. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920_earliest_reasonable_toa_no_wsp_34.png&w=800) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920_earliest_reasonable_toa_no_wsp_34.png&w=1484) The worst conditions are likely from eastern Long Island to eastern Massachusetts on Wednesday when these areas may get battered by the combination of heavy rain, damaging wind gusts to hurricane-force, and coastal flooding. “Total [rain] accumulations of 3 to 5 inches are expected over eastern Long Island, southeast Connecticut, southern Rhode Island, and southeast Massachusetts, including Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket,” the Hurricane Center said. Links: Local hurricane statements for Delmarva/New Jersey shore (https://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=phi&wwa=hurricane%20local%20statement) | New York/Long Island coastal areas (https://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=okx&wwa=hurricane%20local%20statement) | eastern New England (https://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=box&wwa=hurricane%20local%20statement). (https://img.washingtonpost.com/pbox.php?url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920WPCQPF_sm.gif&op=noop) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/pbox.php?url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2017/09/204920WPCQPF_sm.gif&op=noop) It's important to note that small changes in Jose's track could increase or decrease the intensity of effects and how far they expand inland. “Any deviation to the left of the Hurricane Center forecast track would increase the likelihood and magnitude of impacts elsewhere along the U.S. east coast from Delaware to southern New England,” the Hurricane Center said. Irrespective of its track, dangerous surf and rip currents are expected along the East Coast through much of the week. • Jason Samenow is The Washington Post's weather editor and Capital Weather Gang (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang)'s chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Hurricane season isn't over. Here's what you need to know about Hurricanes Maria and Jose. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/_video.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/18/intensifying-hurricane-maria-is-a-severe-threat-to-caribbean-and-puerto-rico-jose-to-scrape-northeast-coast (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/18/intensifying-hurricane-maria-is-a-severe-threat-to-caribbean-and-puerto-rico-jose-to-scrape-northeast-coast) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 19, 2017, 05:59:43 pm Yeah..we had a nasty cold shower up here today to...can't wait for global warming😜
..is there any way I can speed it up by a few hundred years? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 19, 2017, 08:38:59 pm yeah it's too damn cold still waiting for some warm weather and sea level rise so i can have the beach nearer to my door step
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 19, 2017, 08:51:15 pm Haha...ahhh yes ..they will be the days...great to have something to look forward to😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 19, 2017, 09:17:42 pm Meanwhile China and India which don't take any notice of Western idiot hippies are going gang busters building coal power stations.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 19, 2017, 09:20:52 pm (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4046/4667456407_e80d4af2e5.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 19, 2017, 09:30:50 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GKVFGYcCy0
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 20, 2017, 01:20:36 pm The US Military “gets it” about climate change. The Neanderthals, flat-earthers, anti-warmalists and climate-change deniers at this group most definitely “don't get it!” I guess this makes them considerably stupider and dumber than the US Military, eh? from The Washington Post.... National Guard chief cites ‘bigger, larger, more violent’ hurricanes as possible evidence of climate change “I do think that the climate is changing, and I do think that it is becoming more severe.” By DAN LAMOTHE | 2:34PM EDT - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-09-05/Getty/843073810.jpg&w=975) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-09-05/Getty/843073810.jpg&w=1484) Members of the Texas National Guard drive through the streets of Orange, Texas, on September 5th after flooding from Hurricane Harvey devastated much of the state. — Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images. — THE National Guard Bureau's top officer says he believes the world's climate is changing, and that this year's deadly and destructive hurricane season underscores the importance of keeping Guardsmen dispersed across the United States so they can respond quickly to natural disasters. “I do think that the climate is changing, and I do think that it is becoming more severe,” Air Force General Joseph L. Lengyel said on Tuesday. “I do think that storms are becoming bigger, larger, more violent. You know, I never know if this one speck of time is an anomaly or not, but, you know, we've all seen now three Category-5 storms that popped out in a period of a month.” Lengyel's comments aren't quite accurate. While hurricanes Irma and Maria reached Category-5 strength, hurricanes Harvey and Jose topped out as Category-4 storms. But they illustrate, nonetheless, the general's concern now and in the future. They are worries that senior Pentagon officials, including Defense Secretary Jim Mattis also have expressed for years, but break with President Trump, who has questioned whether climate change is a hoax. Lengyel, speaking with reporters in Washington, said the National Guard will continue responding to natural disasters as a part of its “job jar” and preparing for them alongside local first-responders across the country. To do so, he added, the National Guard must keep people and equipment staged in areas where mega storms and other environmental catastrophes are likely to put people and property at risk. The general's comments come amid a review that could consolidate some National Guard installations across the country. Lengyel acknowledged on Tuesday that there is room for some consolidation in areas where population has diminished, but advocated keeping Guardsmen dispersed. “Whether that's in Oklahoma where you have a lot of tornadoes, or whether that's in the Northwest where you have a lot of fires, or whether it's in the gulf or on the East Coast, we need force structure that is in all 54 states, territories and the District of Columbia so we can respond,” he said. “It doesn't work for me to put all of our forces on one base in any particular state.” In recent weeks, the National Guard has activated thousands of members to respond to Harvey, which made landfall in Texas on August 25th, and Irma, which devastated islands in the Caribbean beginning on September 6th and came ashore in Florida on September 10th. Lengyel said that Guardsmen and women, and their equipment, already are being prepared to respond to Hurricane Maria. The storm devastated Dominica, an island commonwealth located in the Lesser Antilles, on Monday, and is expected to reach Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, by Thursday. “Once the storm passes, we can move them in, and that's what we do,” the general said. The Pentagon has called climate change a global security threat, saying it could degrade living conditions, jeopardize human safety and undermine nations' ability to meet the basic needs of their citizens. A changing climate will have real impacts on our military and the way it executes its missions,” according to a 2014 assessment conducted by defense officials in the Obama administration. “The military could be called upon more often to support civil authorities, and provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in the face of more frequent and more intense natural disasters.” Mattis and other members of the Trump administration, such as Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer, have adhered to that point of view. Mattis, responding in testimony to questions posed by the Senate Armed Services Committee after his confirmation, wrote that climate change (https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-defense-secretary-cites-climate-change-national-security-challenge) is “impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today” and that it is appropriate for American military commanders worldwide to incorporate such “drivers of instability” into their planning. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has said that while it is too soon to say definitively that human activities have caused an increase in hurricanes, they may already have done so. Regardless, global warming is expected to cause an increase in tropical cyclones in the future. “Anthropogenic warming by the end of the 21st century will likely cause tropical cyclones globally to be more intense on average” by 2 to 11 percent, according to a NOAA assessment (https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes). “This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size.” Lengyel, asked on Tuesday if the National Guard needs more boats, high-water vehicles or other equipment to prepare for climate change, said that the military officials consider that, but he continues to make sure that anything they buy “first and foremost” can be used in combat. “I look at equipment that works for both the war-fight piece and the homeland piece,” he said. “It's rare that we have a domestic-only capability.” • Dan Lamothe covers national security for The Washington Post and anchors its military blog, Checkpoint (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Category 5 Hurricane Maria is a disaster scenario for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/09/19/category-5-hurricane-maria-is-a-disaster-scenario-for-puerto-rico-and-virgin-islands-jose-to-brush-by-new-england) • The Coast Guard makes sense of its grueling response to Hurricane Harvey (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/09/05/as-hurricane-irma-bears-down-the-coast-guard-makes-sense-of-its-grueling-response-to-harvey) • In a changing Arctic, a lone Coast Guard icebreaker maneuvers through ice and geopolitics (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-a-changing-arctic-a-lone-coast-guard-icebreaker-maneuvers-through-ice-and-geopolitics/2017/09/03/dfad84d4-7d12-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) • Climate change threatens national security, Pentagon says (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/10/13/climate-change-threatens-national-security-pentagon-says) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/09/19/national-guard-chief-cites-bigger-larger-more-violent-hurricanes-as-possible-evidence-of-climate-change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/09/19/national-guard-chief-cites-bigger-larger-more-violent-hurricanes-as-possible-evidence-of-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on September 20, 2017, 01:48:19 pm I'm sure our civil defence are also very......dedicated 😉
...let's be very clear about this...they are public servants doing their best and you will know as well as anyone....a public servant doing their best is often quite feeble compared to the real world where there is no long term trough😳 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 20, 2017, 02:00:42 pm So what are you saying here? That the US Military is full-of-shit? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 20, 2017, 03:03:36 pm The US military simply parrots whatever the official govt line is on side political issues like the climate change religion or say disabled tranny bathrooms 😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 20, 2017, 03:05:38 pm If the govt says tranny commandos are all go, the military will simply officially parrot that tranny commandos are all go.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 20, 2017, 03:08:16 pm Well....either the US military is telling the truth about climate change, or the US military is full-of-shit. So which is it? Can't you answer a simple question? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 20, 2017, 03:14:36 pm For them it's a side issue which they most likely don't give a shit about. In public the will just say whatever the govt says is the official line.
The loony left will of course scour the earth for this or that military individual who will say what the left wants to hear. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 20, 2017, 03:15:24 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 20, 2017, 03:16:57 pm For them it's a side issue which they most likely don't give a shit about. In public the will just say whatever the govt says is the official line. The loony left will of course scour the earth for this or that military individual who will say what the left wants to hear. Okay, so we can take it from that piece of wisdom that the US military are full-of-shit because the generals don't have a mind of their own. Thank you for clarifying that the US military, as I have always suspected, is full-of-shit. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 20, 2017, 09:08:25 pm I'd highly recommend logic 101. It's a valuable paper 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 20, 2017, 09:14:52 pm Why do you keep posting the same shit?🤔
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 03, 2017, 07:26:47 pm Why do you keep posting the same shit?🤔 Well, I keep posting that brilliant chart at the top of every fresh page on this thread so you flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers keep getting reminded of how you are idiots with your heads buried deep in the sand as you desperately look for “fake science” in a vain attempt to debunk what conventional science is telling humans about the way they have been trashing their planet. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 03, 2017, 07:29:20 pm from The Washington Post.... Death of gas and diesel begins as GM announces plans for ‘all-electric future’ The announcement comes on the heels of the Chevy Bolt's success. By PETER HOLLEY | 2:53PM EDT - Monday, October 02, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/files/2017/10/cq5dam.web_.1280.1280.jpeg&w=975) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/files/2017/10/cq5dam.web_.1280.1280.jpeg&w=1484) A Chevrolet Bolt is ringed by electric and fuel cell vehicles covered by tarps. On October 2nd, General Motors announced that it will produce two new electric models on the Bolt underpinnings in the next 18 months and 20 electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles by 2023. — Photograph: General Motors/Associated Press. AFTER nearly a century of building vehicles powered by fossil fuels, General Motors — one of the world's largest automakers — announced on Monday that the end of GM producing internal combustion engines is fast approaching. The acceleration to an all-electric future will begin almost immediately, with GM releasing two new electric models next year and an additional 18 by 2023. At a media event at GM's technical campus in Warren, Michigan, on Monday, Mark Reuss, the company's chief of global product development, said the transition will take time, but the course has been set. “General Motors believes in an all-electric future,” Reuss said. “Although that future won't happen overnight, GM is committed to driving increased usage and acceptance of electric vehicles.” Reuss avoided naming the year when the auto giant will cease producing gas and diesel vehicles, noting that the company is too large to make such an estimate, according to USA Today (https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/10/02/gm-electric-vehicles/722896001). GM finished 2016 as the world's third-largest auto-seller, breaking previous company records with 10 million vehicles sold, the company said in a news release (http://www.gm.com/mol/m-2017-oct-1002-electric.html). The automaker said that arriving at a “zero emissions future” will require a two-pronged approach: battery electric and hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles. At Monday's event, Fast Company reported (https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2017/10/02/gm-plots-all-electric-future-with-20-new-evs-and-fuel-cell-vehicles-coming-by-2023/#e18859176ecf), officials unveiled three concepts for reporters: “a sporty crossover, a larger wagon or SUV and a tall, boxy pod car that looked like a people-mover for cities”. GM also introduced a fuel-cell-powered heavy-duty truck with two electric motors known as Surus, or “silent utility rover universal superstructure”. GM's foray into the electric marketplace has already resulted in resounding success, with the Chevrolet Bolt being named Motor Trend's 2017 Car of the Year (http://www.motortrend.com/news/chevrolet-bolt-ev-2017-car-of-the-year/) and the 2017 North American Car of the Year (http://media.chevrolet.com/media/us/en/chevrolet/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2017/jan/naias/0109-bolt.html). The Bolt boasts a 240-mile battery range on a single charge and costs $37,500 before tax incentives. That range places the vehicle well above the Nissan Leaf (up to 107 miles on a single charge) and slightly above Tesla's Model 3 (up to 220 miles on a single charge for a standard battery). As GM commits to electric innovation, the company will compete in an increasingly crowded marketplace. In recent months, Tesla unveiled the company's first mass market electric vehicle, joining companies such as Ford, Volvo (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/07/05/volvo-says-it-will-abandon-traditional-engines-by-2019), Nissan, Aston Martin and Jaguar Land Rover, all of whom are vying for market space. On Monday, Ford announced plans to create a group known as “Team Edison” that is to be tasked with developing fully electric cars. Sherif Marakby, Ford's head of electrification and autonomous vehicles, told Automotive News (http://www.autonews.com/article/20171002/OEM05/171009948/ford-to-increase-its-fully-electric-vehicle-offerings) that the company is on pace to produce 13 electrified vehicles over the next five years. “We see an inflection point in the major markets toward battery electric vehicles,” Marakby said. “We feel it's important to have a cross-functional team all the way from defining the strategy plans and implementation to advanced marketing.” • Peter Holley is a technology reporter at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Take a ride in Chevy's Bolt EV, the car that wants to take down Tesla (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/66292cca-8002-11e6-ad0e-ab0d12c779b1_video.html) • VIDEO: How to Adult: How to buy a car (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/5d913dd0-995d-11e7-af6a-6555caaeb8dc_video.html) • ‘We understand what needs to be fixed’, Tesla says after missing Model 3 production goals (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/10/02/we-understand-what-needs-to-be-fixed-tesla-says-after-bungling-model-3-production-goals) • Tesla's Model 3 has ‘mass appeal’. That doesn't mean you can afford it. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/07/28/teslas-model-3-has-mass-appeal-that-doesnt-mean-you-can-afford-it) • Volvo says it will abandon traditional engines by 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/07/05/volvo-says-it-will-abandon-traditional-engines-by-2019) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/10/02/death-of-diesel-begins-as-gm-announces-plans-for-all-electric-future (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/10/02/death-of-diesel-begins-as-gm-announces-plans-for-all-electric-future) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 03, 2017, 08:50:48 pm $60000+ for an electric Mr Bean cart?😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 03, 2017, 08:52:52 pm Um, I didn't notice any signs of the death of fossil fuel cars on the freeway this evening.😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 04, 2017, 04:18:34 am how will they produce the electricity to power these milk cartons on wheels?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on October 04, 2017, 09:16:58 am BURN MORE COAL?😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 04, 2017, 09:18:59 am KTJs dream car...
(http://1funny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/bubble-car.jpg) 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on October 04, 2017, 09:31:08 am ...wonder what safety rating t big would have...looks suicidal😳 Haha....can't wait to him on the road in my 5 litre V8😜 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 04, 2017, 09:35:51 am The end goal of lefty watermelons is to piss off motorists. They are driven by internal knee-jerk hatred rather than rational analysis.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 04, 2017, 09:39:21 am Ditto almost any issue they are involved in. Rational analysis enrages them. That's because of their unresolved mental issues to do with the inability to deal with the world as it really is (basically not growing up) , without going off on childish knee-jerk abuse and anger.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 04, 2017, 11:37:54 am how will they produce the electricity to power these milk cartons on wheels? Put solar panels on your roof. No more paying money to greedy oil companies. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 04, 2017, 11:39:49 am KTJs dream car... Well, actually, no. If I purchased an EV, it would most likely be a Renault ZOE. I'd go for the Signature Nav version....400km range between charges. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 04, 2017, 11:42:30 am Haha....can't wait to him on the road in my 5 litre V8 Even a Nissan Leaf would leave your 5-litre V8 choking in the dust at the traffic lights. Don't you know that electric motors develop maximum torque and horsepower right from the time they start rotating? Why do you think diesel-electric locomotives can walk away with a train weighing thousands of tonnes coupled onto the rear drawgear? It's those electric traction motors. Fuck, you're thick & stupid....DUMBARSE!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Donald on October 04, 2017, 12:06:08 pm ..haha...I was talking about in opposite directions😜
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 10, 2017, 01:19:07 pm from The Washington Post.... There's enough wind energy over the oceans to power human civilization, scientists say Wind energy over the open oceans could provide tremendous amounts of power, if we find a way to capture it. By CHRIS MOONEY | 3:12PM EDT - Monday, October 09, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/22/Editorial-Opinion/Advance/Images/2017-08-01T092048Z_1553736086_RC1E74D58350_RTRMADP_3_OIL-MAJORS-OFFSHORE-WIND-2347.jpg&w=975) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/22/Editorial-Opinion/Advance/Images/2017-08-01T092048Z_1553736086_RC1E74D58350_RTRMADP_3_OIL-MAJORS-OFFSHORE-WIND-2347.jpg&w=1484) An offshore wind farm stands in the water near the Danish island of Samso, May 19th, 2008. — Photograph: Bob Strong/Reuters. NEW RESEARCH published on Monday (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1705710114) finds there is so much wind energy potential over oceans that it could theoretically be used to generate “civilization scale power” — assuming, that is, that we are willing to cover enormous stretches of the sea with turbines, and can come up with ways to install and maintain them in often extreme ocean environments. It's very unlikely that we would ever build out open ocean turbines on anything like that scale — indeed, doing so could even alter the planet's climate, the research finds. But the more modest message is that wind energy over the open oceans has large potential — reinforcing the idea that floating wind farms, over very deep waters, could be the next major step for wind energy technology. “I would look at this as kind of a greenlight for that industry from a geophysical point of view,” said Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California. The study, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was led by Carnegie researcher Anna Possner, who worked in collaboration with Caldeira. The study takes, as its outset, prior research that has found that there's probably an upper limit to the amount of energy that can be generated by a wind farm that's located on land. The limit arises both because natural and human structures on land create friction that slows down the wind speed, but also because each individual wind turbine extracts some of the energy of the wind and transforms it into power that we can use — leaving less wind energy for other turbines to collect. “If each turbine removes something like half the energy flowing through it, by the time you get to the second row, you've only got a quarter of the energy, and so on,” explained Caldeira. The ocean is different. First, wind speeds can be as much as 70 percent higher than on land. But a bigger deal is what you might call wind replenishment. The new research found that over the mid-latitude oceans, storms regularly transfer powerful wind energy down to the surface from higher altitudes, meaning that the upper limit here for how much energy you can capture with turbines is considerably higher. “Over land, the turbines are just sort of scraping the kinetic energy out of the lowest part of the atmosphere, whereas over the ocean, it's depleting the kinetic energy out of most of the troposphere, or the lower part of the atmosphere,” said Caldeira. The study compares a theoretical wind farm of nearly 2 million square kilometers located either over the U.S. (centered on Kansas) or in the open Atlantic. And it finds that covering much of the central U.S. with wind farms would still be insufficient to power the U.S. and China, which would require a generating capacity of some 7 terawatts annually (a terawatt is equivalent to a trillion watts). But the North Atlantic could theoretically power those two countries and then some. The potential energy that can be extracted over the ocean, given the same area, is “at least three times as high.” It would take an even larger, 3 million square kilometer wind installation over the ocean to provide humanity's current power needs, or 18 terawatts, the study found. That's an area even larger than Greenland. Hence, the study concludes that “on an annual mean basis, the wind power available in the North Atlantic could be sufficient to power the world.” But it's critical to emphasize that these are purely theoretical calculations. They are thwarted by many practical factors, including the fact that the winds aren't equally strong in all seasons, and that the technologies to capture their energy at such a scale, much less transfer it to shore, do not currently exist. Oh, and then there's another large problem: Modeling simulations performed in the study suggest that extracting this much wind energy from nature would have planetary-scale effects, including cooling down parts of the Arctic by as much as 13 degrees Celsius. “Trying to get civilization scale power out of wind is a bit asking for trouble,” Caldeira said. But he said the climate effect would be smaller if the amount of energy being tapped was reduced down from these extremely high numbers, and if the wind farms were more spaced out across the globe. “I think it lends itself to the idea that we're going to want to use a portfolio of technologies, and not rely on this only,” said Caldeira. Energy gurus have long said (http://www.sandia.gov/~jytsao/Solar%20FAQs.pdf) that among renewable sources, solar energy has the greatest potential to scale up and generate terawatt-scale power, enough to satisfy large parts of human energy demand. Caldeira doesn't dispute that. But his study suggests that at least if open ocean wind becomes accessible someday, it may have considerable potential too. Alexander Slocum, an MIT mechanical engineering professor who has focused on offshore wind and its potential, and who was not involved in the research, said he considered the paper a “very good study” and that it didn't seem biased. “The conclusion implied by the paper that open ocean wind energy farms can provide most of our energy needs is also supported history: as a technology gets becomes constrained (e.g., horse drawn carriages) or monopolized (OPEC), a motivation arises to look around for alternatives,” Slocum continued by email. “The automobile did it to horses, the U.S. did it to OPEC with fracking, and now renewables are doing it to the hydrocarbon industry.” “The authors do acknowledge that considerable technical challenges come into play in actually harvesting energy from these far off-shore sites, but I appreciate their focus on the magnitude of the resource,” added Julie Lundquist, a wind energy researcher at the University of Colorado, Boulder. “I hope this work will stimulate further interest in deep water wind energy.” Underscoring the theoretical nature of the calculations, Lundquist added by email that “current and foreseeable wind turbine deployments both on- and off-shore are much smaller than would be required to reach the atmospheric energy limitations that this work and others are concerned with.” The research points to a kind of third act for wind energy. On land, turbines are very well established and more are being installed every year. Offshore, meanwhile, coastal areas are now also seeing more and more turbine installations, but still in relatively shallow waters. But to get out over the open ocean, where the sea is often well over a mile deep, is expected to require yet another technology — likely a floating turbine that extends above the water and sits atop some kind of very large submerged floating structure, accompanied by cables that anchor the entire turbine to the seafloor. Experimentation with the technology is already happening: Statoil is moving to build a large floating wind farm off the coast of Scotland (https://www.statoil.com/en/what-we-do/hywind-where-the-wind-takes-us.html), which will be located in waters around 100 meters deep and have 15 megawatts (million watts) of electricity generating capacity. The turbines are 253 meters tall, but 78 meters of that length refers to the floating part below the sea surface. “The things that we're describing are likely not going to be economic today, but once you have an industry that's starting in that direction, should provide incentive for that industry to develop,” said Caldeira. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • EPA chief Scott Pruitt tells coal miners he will repeal power-plan rule on Tuesday: ‘The war against coal is over’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/09/pruitt-tells-coal-miners-he-will-repeal-power-plan-rule-tuesday-the-war-on-coal-is-over) • One of the oldest climate change experiments has led to a troubling conclusion (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/05/one-of-the-oldest-climate-change-experiments-has-led-to-a-troubling-conclusion) • Scientists mapping Greenland have produced some surprising — and worrying — results (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/04/scientists-mapping-greenland-have-produced-some-surprising-and-worrying-results) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/09/theres-enough-wind-energy-over-the-oceans-to-power-human-civilization-scientists-say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/09/theres-enough-wind-energy-over-the-oceans-to-power-human-civilization-scientists-say) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 10, 2017, 06:46:51 pm from The Washington Post.... At least 10 dead, tens of thousands evacuated as wildfires ravage Northern California's wine country Tens of thousands of acres are burning in Napa and Sonoma, where homes — and some wineries — have been destroyed. By BREENA KERR, ALISSA GREENBERG, CARA STRICKLAND, SCOTT WILSON and HERMAN WONG | 9:57PM EDT - Monday, October 09, 2017 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/BGn7cLPD7qT2BmpjZRBM0TKLytI=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4QBL3JIHEUZAXL7M7XH6YTXUM4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/BGn7cLPD7qT2BmpjZRBM0TKLytI=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4QBL3JIHEUZAXL7M7XH6YTXUM4.jpg) SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA — Fires pushed by warm winds and fueled by dry ground swept through California wine country on Monday, killing at least 10 people, injuring numerous others, and torching more than 2,000 homes and businesses. State fire officials warned that the conditions, particularly winds that at times exceeded 50 miles per hour, would probably exacerbate the fires in the days ahead. At least 14 separate blazes burned in eight Northern California counties, prompting evacuations of more than 20,000 frightened residents, including patients in threatened hospitals. “This is really serious; it's moving fast,” Governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) said during a news conference in which he declared an emergency in seven counties. “The heat, the lack of humidity and the winds are all driving a very dangerous situation and making it worse. It's not under control by any means. But we're on it in the best way we know how.” Later in the day, Brown wrote a five-page letter to President Trump (https://www.gov.ca.gov/docs/10.9.17_Presidential_Major_Disaster_Declaration_Request.pdf) seeking federal emergency aid. A vocal critic of Trump's politics, Brown wrote that he has “determined that this incident is of such severity and magnitude that an effective response is beyond the capabilities of the State and affected local governments and supplemental federal assistance is necessary.” The fires, which whipped up overnight on Sunday, added to what has already been a severe fire season in the West. More than 8 million acres have burned in at least four states, raising questions from across the political spectrum about the connection to climate change and forest management practices. The current wildfires had burned more than 70,000 acres in Northern California by late Monday afternoon, nearly all of those in Sonoma and Napa counties, the heartland of the state's renowned wine industry. A smaller but fast-moving fire in Mendocino County to the north killed one person, according to Jonathan Cox, a battalion chief and spokesman for Cal Fire. The sheriff of Sonoma County confirmed seven additional deaths there, and Cal Fire confirmed two deaths in the Atlas Fire in Napa County. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/wn4oZrL3owA1kqX9xt2rZN8zYN0=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/Q22POJ22UQZFRGKYXJSZIKPUCA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/wn4oZrL3owA1kqX9xt2rZN8zYN0=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/Q22POJ22UQZFRGKYXJSZIKPUCA.jpg) A firefighter covers his eyes as he walks past a burning hillside in Santa Rosa on Monday. — Photograph: Jeff Chiu/Associated Press. The pace of the burn took firefighters by surprise: The fires charred 20,000 acres in about 12 hours, which Cox called “a phenomenal rate of growth.” He said firefighters had “zero percent” containment and warned that, while winds had weakened slightly over the course of the day, “because of heat and low humidity, fire growth is still likely.” The situation in Santa Rosa, the largest city in Sonoma County, appeared dire. The Tubbs Fire, as the blaze in Sonoma is known, sped southwest from Calistoga in Napa Valley, jumped Highway 101 and entered Santa Rosa. Cal Fire officials said the cause is under investigation. A resident, Ron Dodds, told TV station KTVU that “people are running red lights, there is chaos ensuing.” “It's a scary time,” Dodds said. “It looks like Armageddon.” The city imposed a curfew Monday, running from 6:45 p.m. until sunrise on Tuesday, to prevent looting in the evacuation zone, according to the Los Angeles Times (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-napa-fires-20171009-story.html). Kaiser Permanente evacuated about 130 patients from the Santa Rosa Medical Center by ambulance and private bus early on Monday morning, according to Jenny Mack, the health system’s public relations director for Northern California. The patients were taken to Kaiser Permanente in San Rafael, in Marin County, and to other hospitals and evacuation sites. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/rm0rE3ZF6Dh1vcOBLMlgobNJzOE=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BDAV5OMXNY5RZOGBSPTLSE3AJM.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/rm0rE3ZF6Dh1vcOBLMlgobNJzOE=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BDAV5OMXNY5RZOGBSPTLSE3AJM.jpg) Fire glows on a hillside in Napa. — Photograph: Josh Edelson/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. Sutter Santa Rosa Regional Hospital also evacuated all of its patients. By Monday afternoon, the hospital was inaccessible because of road closures. Will Powers, a Cal Fire representative, said the California Highway Patrol was evacuating some people by helicopter in rural areas of Sonoma, Napa and Lake counties. The vineyards of Napa and Sonoma counties are the source of some of the country's best wines, and the scores of tasting rooms are among the state's most popular tourism destinations. Witness accounts on Monday suggested that damage to the industry could be significant, especially if the fires continue to burn in the days ahead. “It looks like a bombing run,” Joe Nielsen, the winemaker at Donelan Family Wines in Sonoma County, said in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle. “Just chimneys and burned-out cars and cooked trees.” Evacuations began at about 11 p.m. on Sunday evening and continued through Monday. Some people left burning homes for evacuation centers, only to find those centers threatened by fire a few hours later. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/do60R0GibCReKyO1qz34uzR59cY=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/VRIJRYCTT45E7BYW4JU62J736I.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/do60R0GibCReKyO1qz34uzR59cY=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/VRIJRYCTT45E7BYW4JU62J736I.jpg) A firefighter walks near a pool as a neighboring home burns in the Napa wine region in California on Monday, as multiple wind-driven fires continue to whip through the region. — Photograph: Josh Edelson/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. In Rincon Valley, on the northeast outskirts of Santa Rosa, pastor Andy VomSteeg opened his New Vintage Church to those fleeing the fire. By Monday afternoon, more than 400 people, many of them elderly, had taken refuge inside. “I left without my clothes,” said Nell Magnuson, a resident of the luxury retirement home Villa Capri. She wore only a maroon robe. “We had to get out in a hurry,” she said. “When we left, the flames were in the second floor.” Magnuson, who was worried about where she would sleep Monday night, said that “our whole lives have turned upside down. We don't have a clue what’s going to happen. It's just losing everything. All the pictures, my whole life.” But before her concerns could be addressed, the fire began to threaten the church. “You caught us just in time,” Magnuson said as she headed for the exit. “We're being evacuated again.” Thick smoke hung over Sonoma County, and ash rained down in some towns. People wore masks on the streets, and businesses shut down. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/fdyvTQfoeFQjeCKSZ9Az0frEdDw=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HSVW7BW6TY7IPKAVHCFJHVOZIE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/fdyvTQfoeFQjeCKSZ9Az0frEdDw=/1484x0/https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HSVW7BW6TY7IPKAVHCFJHVOZIE.jpg) The entrance to the fire-ravaged Signorello Estate winery is seen on Monday in Napa. — Photograph: Marcio Jose Sanchez/Associated Press. In Healdsburg, a town nearly circled by fire 16 miles north of Santa Rosa, exhausted evacuees bought supplies, fueled up and looked for a place to stay for the night. Cindy Luzzi, who was visiting her son and his family in Santa Rosa, said her daughter-in-law got a call from a neighbor at about 2:30 a.m., telling them to evacuate. “At first we didn't think it was anything to worry about. Then we went downstairs, opened our front door and looked towards the center of town,” Luzzi said. “It was just red, nothing but red.” Luzzi and her daughter-in-law and two young grandchildren took refuge at the Francis Ford Coppola Winery in nearby Geyserville from 3 a.m. until 8 a.m., waiting for her son to join them. They were then able to book a room at the Best Western in town. But by 2 p.m., the hotel had filled up. Shortages of rooms, bottled water and fuel were affecting surrounding towns as well. “We're almost out of gas,” said Hardeep Gill, who owns a filling station in downtown Healdsburg, just off Highway 101. Gill, who came into work because his employees couldn't get there, said he had lost a commercial building he owned worth about $9 million. “I got a call around 3 a.m. because the fire sprinklers were going off,” he said. “That's when I knew it was a total loss.” • Alissa Greenberg reported from Berkeley, California, and Breena Kerr from Healdsburg. Scott Wilson and Herman Wong reported from Washington D.C. Mary Hui in Washington contributed to this report. • Breena Kerr is a freelance journalist in the San Francisco Bay Area. • Alissa Greenberg is a multimedia journalist whose features examine immigrant issues, international affairs, culture, travel, and community ties, with a generous dose of quirk. • Cara Strickland is a freelance writer focusing on food and drink, singleness and faith. • Scott Wilson is a senior national correspondent for The Washington Post, covering California and the west. He has previously served as The Post's national editor, chief White House correspondent, deputy Assistant Managing Editor/Foreign News and as a correspondent in Latin America and in the Middle East. • Herman Wong is a deputy editor on the general assignment news desk for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • These images show the devastation caused by California's deadly wine-country fires (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/10/09/these-images-show-the-devastation-caused-by-californias-deadly-wine-country-fires) • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: The scene as wildfires devastate Northern California's wine region (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/wildfires-ravage-northern-california/2017/10/09/ba4ce30e-ad34-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_gallery.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/10/09/fast-moving-wildfires-ravage-northern-californias-wine-country (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/10/09/fast-moving-wildfires-ravage-northern-californias-wine-country) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 10, 2017, 07:59:41 pm "There's enough wind energy over the oceans to power
human civilization, scientists say". Yeah and if we harness all the snails in the world, put them on a giant treadmill chained together and replace them as they die off, there is unlimited energy there to power the world!! 😁 When you here these kinds of gormless eco-evangelist claims, remember to ask.. AT WHAT COST??? When you factor in storage and grid modification, not to mention enormous land use, these things are shit. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 10, 2017, 08:31:41 pm Coal is energy from the sun turned into vegetation which has spent millions of years beneath the ground turning into coal. Only a stupid moron would want to dig up coal when they can use the sun's rays directly to produce energy. Also, only a stupid moron would block their mind to using FREE wind energy. Idiots like that must still be living in the dark-ages, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 10, 2017, 09:57:59 pm Only an idiot refuses to look at all the facts. Converting to wind and solar is converting to piss-poor very expensive energy. That puts a huge cost on everything because our current civilisation runs on affordable energy. Wind and solar can not power cities. Wake the fuck up!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 10, 2017, 10:16:54 pm Look up LCOE of different forms of energy. Don't be conned by figures on wind and solar. They are intermittent and require expensive backup and storage to supply baseload power (what cities and industry needs 24/7).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 11, 2017, 02:03:06 am global warming is a conspiracy theory
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 12, 2017, 08:25:21 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 03:57:50 am (http://www.climatereview.net/Movie%20Screenshots/High%20Res/600%20Million%20Years%20of%20CO2.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 09:38:33 am Any pennies dropping yet? ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 13, 2017, 09:52:27 am And so the “fake science” gets trotted out. Funny, that.... Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 13, 2017, 12:00:44 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... How NASA tracks carbon emissions from space to better understand — and deal with — climate change By AMINA KHAN | 12:40PM PDT - Thursday, October 12, 2017 FIRES, drought and warmer temperatures were to blame for excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere during the 2015-2016 El Niño, scientists with NASA (http://www.latimes.com/topic/science/space/nasa-ORGOV000098-topic.html)'s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 say. The findings, part of five papers published in the journal Science, shed light on the mechanisms through which Earth “breathes” carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas, and reveal how those mechanisms affect climate change. Global temperatures have been on the rise, thanks largely to the human-driven increase in greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. But not all of the carbon dioxide produced each year ends up in the atmosphere. Some of it ends up trapped in the ocean, or locked on land thanks to plants that use the gas during photosynthesis. “We know how much we're emitting when we burn fossil fuel, and we see that about half of it stays in the atmosphere and the other half appears to go get absorbed into the land and the ocean,” said Jet Propulsion Laboratory atmospheric scientist Annmarie Eldering (https://science.jpl.nasa.gov/people/Eldering), the mission's deputy project scientist. “But there are still these questions of which parts of the land are doing that.” (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59de9a31/turbine/la-1507760685-zuzidmgzhr-snap-image/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59de9a31/turbine/la-1507760685-zuzidmgzhr-snap-image) This graphic depicts the unusually high levels of carbon dioxide release from three tropical continents during the 2015 El Niño. — Graphic: NASA-JPL/Caltech. And on top of that, the amount that gets pulled out of the atmosphere shifts dramatically from year to year, from about as little as 20% to as much as 80%. “Why is it that there's a lot of variability from year to year?” Eldering said. “We didn't understand why that was.” Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2, or OCO-2, was launched in July 2014 to help discover those mechanisms and solve that mystery. Because the spacecraft was launched prior to the 2015-2016 El Niño season, it allowed the scientists to get a glimpse of the effect that the weather pattern had on the Earth's ability to store carbon. “You can think of it as like a big natural experiment where you had a lot of heat and a lot of drought,” Eldering said. “So we could start investigating, how do plants respond when these conditions happen?” OCO-2's near-infrared sensors revealed that normal carbon sinks — forests in tropical South America, tropical Africa and Indonesia — weren't pulling as much carbon down as they had in the past. But they were all doing so for different reasons. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59de9fce/turbine/la-1507762121-wiw73e1rhk-snap-image/900) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59de9fce/turbine/la-1507762121-wiw73e1rhk-snap-image) An illustration of NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite at work in Earth's orbit. — Picture: NASA-JPL/Caltech. In South America, a long drought was slowing down the growth of trees and other plants, which meant they were taking up carbon dioxide more slowly. In Africa, temperatures were higher, which could mean that dead plant matter was decomposing faster than usual, allowing carbon dioxide to escape. And in Indonesia, a rash of wildfires burned through trees, releasing their stored carbon, while also leaving fewer plants to pull that carbon down. “Now we can see that the tropical forest and plants didn't absorb as much carbon as they usually do and that's what caused this big increase in that time period,” Eldering said. Drought and higher temperatures have been linked to the climate change fueled by greenhouse gases. Now, it seems that there could be a vicious cycle at work. “The projections of climate suggest there will be more heat and there will be more drought in the future,” Eldering said. “This would suggest that with more warmth and more heat, we'll have more carbon left in the atmosphere, so that would even accelerate the growth rate of carbon dioxide.” The results should help experts develop more effective strategies to deal with climate change in the future, Eldering said. “If you want to make a good plan, you've got to have some good information,” she said. “This is going to add to that information, and hopefully be reflected in a better plan down the road.” The findings come a few months after President Trump’s budget plan proposed to cut OCO-3 (http://lat.ms/2yHnrI6), a follow-up mission that would continue OCO-2's work. • Amina Khan is a science writer covering a broad range of topics, from Mars rovers to linguistics to bio-inspired engineering — but she's perhaps best known for her repeated and brutal attacks on the office snack table. She surfs and snowboards in her spare time. http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-nasa-carbon-observatory-20171012-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-nasa-carbon-observatory-20171012-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 13, 2017, 12:02:21 pm Donald Trump and his partners in crime (stupid Republican righties) don't like organisations like NASA who do the scientific research, then publish the results, because it gives the lie to the desperate bullshit spouted by Trump, Republicans & co., so that is why they are planning to pull funding from organisations who carry out scientific research into the TRUTH, because the TRUTH disturbs their greedy, selfish, fucked-up minds. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 04:50:44 pm You think the graph I just posted is "fake"? Do tell.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 05:58:21 pm "The truth" hey? That sounds like some religious nut going off😁
CAGW(catastrophic anthropogenic global warming) is a theory. It's only a few decades old so a relatively new field. All the disaster scenarios that "might happen" are based on the theory that the tiny amount of Co2 in the atmosphere (and therefore tiny influence on warming) might somehow trigger runaway heating of the planet. Mostly this has been promoted by green/left zealots who got involved with this field. The main driver is politics (of the green/left variety). They use models (garbage in, in the form of a mere theory, and garbage out, in the form of dozens of failed predictions and pretending they have a crystal ball to feed an eager green/left media with a steady stream of "might happen" sensational crap (which grabs eyeballs and sells advertising... Hence why the media loves this shit). Meanwhile you have dozens of eminent scientists appointed by the IPCC as lead authors and experts speaking out and stating "hang on this is all absolute crap!" That alone should stop any thinking person in their tracks. There is more. Lots more. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 06:15:43 pm NASA and many universities are now in the hands of the green/left PC thought police. Anyone who thinks differently is screamed at, silenced, vilified (eg called a denier). It's all about Orwellian control. CAGW is so beloved of the green left because it provides a huge gravy train of government funding and is the ultimate idiological weapon for increasing neo-marxist and loony green policies.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 13, 2017, 06:18:31 pm Meanwhile in the world of real science, no fucked up by green /left fascists, the science is in, fossil fuels have provided enormous net benefit to humankind, freeing people from hand to mouth drudgery, disease and early death.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 14, 2017, 11:20:00 am Fossil fuels are finite. The sun's rays and the wind will last for a few more million years before the sun burns up and takes the earth with it. DUMBARSE!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 14, 2017, 02:37:56 pm Yes *sounds* nice doesn't it. However, the current "renewables" designs are intermittent and piss weak therefore require expensive backup generators (gas, hydro) and/or expensive energy storage (insanely expensive batteries) .If you want the cost of EVERYTHING to massively increase, then use these dumb inefficient power generation methods!
Fossil fuels still have probably a hundred or so years to run. Coal can be gasified and burned very cleanly and efficiently. It's just dumb to throw away cheap energy. It's not going to happen anyway. Human wellbeing will demand it's continuation. Fantasy schemes will be short lived and the parties supporting them will be quickly booted after huge power prices and blackouts severely fuck people off. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 15, 2017, 03:30:32 pm i have read according to NASA sea levels have been getting lower lol i wonder how that fits into the global warming fairy story ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 15, 2017, 04:22:56 pm There has been a non spectacular trend of sea level rise since the end of the last ice age about 12,000 years ago. That unspectacular trend continues as it has for the last 12000 years. Talk of "acceleration" due to humans is pure bullshit.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 15, 2017, 10:49:51 pm Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah....we know where you're at. Mr Selfish Twat who doesn't give a stuff about fucking up the planet for the next generations. Yep....your kind stand out like a sore tooth. Stick your head back in the sand and pretend your offspring and their offspring and their offspring don't matter, because you are a selfish twat. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 15, 2017, 11:21:04 pm Nah you've got it all wrong. There probably are a few jerk who "don't care about the planet". The vast majority of people want clean air, oceans, waterways and soil,etc etc.
Not agreeing with the catastrophic climate change religion just means you see the climate change religion as a green left political agenda that's got out of control. That doesn't mean you want pollution. Get it? 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 15, 2017, 11:24:09 pm The trouble with the loony left is they think name calling is an argument.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 16, 2017, 09:28:37 am So if 50+ leading climate scientists who where actually appointed by the IPCC as experts call bullshit on the theory of catastrophic man-made warmung, that doesn't make you think "maybe there's a problem here" KTJ? Hello???
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 16, 2017, 09:32:17 am If numerous energy economists tell you that the "solution" will actually kill vastly more people than the alleged problem, that doesn't make you think "um, maybe I should check that out"???
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 16, 2017, 09:39:52 am The "you hate your grandchildren" rhetorical trick, is just like talking to fundy Christians when they tell you "yer goin' to hell for angering God" when you are trying to explain "but wait, first you need to prove your God exists" 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 19, 2017, 02:37:04 pm from Fairfax NZ.... Some New Zealand climate change impacts may already be irreversible, Government report says By CHARLIE MITCHELL and GED CANN | 2:05PM - Thursday, 19 October 2017 https://vimeo.com/238677734 (https://vimeo.com/238677734) CLIMATE CHANGE may have already had an irreversible impact on New Zealand's natural systems and the effects are likely to worsen, a new Government report says. Data showed conclusively that temperatures had already risen by one degree in New Zealand, which would have an impact on the economy, extreme weather events, biodiversity and health. The Our Climate and Atmosphere 2017 report (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/our-atmosphere-and-climate-2017), released by the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Statistics New Zealand on Thursday, revealed the country's glaciers had lost nearly a quarter of their ice since 1977, and sea levels had risen between 14 centimetres and 22 centimetres at four main ports since 1916. Meanwhile, our contribution to global greenhouse emissions had increased and sea level and temperature rises were forecast to gain momentum. Soils in some areas had become drier and both the acidity and the temperature of the ocean had risen. Last year was the country's warmest year since records began and the five warmest years on record had occurred in the last 20 years. The number of extreme weather events had increased, as had the insurance cost of those events, Insurance Council of New Zealand data showed. New Zealand had the fifth-highest emission levels per person in the OECD, the report said. Since 1990, gross emissions increased 24 percent, while net emissions increased 64 percent. Net emissions accounted for carbon stored in forests, which was released when they were cut down. Our high rate of emissions was attributed to an unusually large share of agriculture emissions and high car-ownership rates. “While New Zealand is not a large contributor of emissions globally, we are certainly affected locally and we need to act on what that means for us,” secretary for the environment Vicky Robertson said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) Flooding in Canterbury this year. Such events are likely to become more frequent due to climate change. — Photograph: Alden Williams. The scope of the report did not include recommendations for tackling emissions and Robertson said the purpose was to open the conversation. “We are working quite significantly to bring together all the public services towards advising collectively and consistently around what government could do to create a pathway to our 2030 targets.” Current targets were to reduce greenhouse emissions to 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The document singles out transport as a key driver of increased emissions, which had jumped 78 percent since 1990 and now equated to 18 percent overall. However, agriculture emissions sat far higher, constituting just under half of overall emissions and had also climbed significantly in the same period. Robertson said the report had not sought to downplay agriculture's impact and she would not be shying away from it in policy advice. While New Zealand's emissions had continued to climb, the United Kingdom reduced its emissions by 26 percent from 1990 to 2013, Sweden by 25 percent, and France by 11 percent. Robertson refused to give New Zealand a scorecard on its performance to-date, but said now was the time to make changes. “The future impacts of climate change on our lives all depend on how fast global emissions are reduced and the extent to which our communities can adapt to change.” University of Otago environmental epidemiologist Simon Hales said the main takeaway was that the country was not living up to its international obligations on climate change. “We require a much better, more quantitative understanding of the likely adverse impacts of climate change on human health than the brief, vague statements in the MfE report.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/g/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/g/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) Fox Glacier in 2014. Our shrinking glaciers are a sign of a warming climate. — Photograph: Ian Fuller. Climate change would likely have an impact on our already struggling biodiversity. Research showed there was already a growing imbalance in the gender split of tuatara. Warmer temperatures in tuatara nests were more likely to produce male offspring; on North Brother Island in the Cook Strait, the ratio of male to female tuatara had increased from 1:66 to 2:36 in recent decades. Warmer temperatures also increased the wasp population in beech forests, which resulted in less food for native species, and the frequency of masts (tree seed dropping), creating food for rodents, which attract predators. “We can expect to face possibly costly decisions around how we manage the effects of a changing climate for our unique and celebrated native biodiversity,” the report said. Climate change would also affect the economy and our physical and mental health, although the extent for both was not yet clear. Rising sea levels and increasing extreme weather events would affect coastal communities, likely requiring some communities to move. An earlier risk census determined around $19 billion worth of buildings were at risk of rising sea levels (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/96503854). Drier conditions in some areas would have an impact on agriculture and the rates of some diseases may increase, as well as exposure to heat waves, flooding and fires. The report also determined the atmosphere's "ozone hole", which was attributed to high levels of melanoma in Australia and New Zealand, was shrinking. It had decreased 21 percent from its largest size, which was reached in 2006, and may no longer exist mid-way through the century. It was largely due to a global effort to reduce the usage of ozone depleting substances, such as those in refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. NIWA atmospheric researcher Richard McKenzie said the report was heartening, but the country still had to be vigilant. “The situation is delicate at present and we remain at risk from possible effects from future volcanic eruptions.” • Download the “Our Atmosphere and Climate 2017” report. (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/our-atmosphere-and-climate-2017-at-a-glance-final.pdf) (348KB PDF document) • Download the accompanying Media Release. (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Report%20confirms%20increasing%20emissions%20impacting%20New%20Zealand.pdf) (80KB PDF document) __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The seaside town being eaten alive (https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2017/04/eaten-alive) • Climate change could spell ‘extreme poverty’ in coastal NZ towns (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/91778352) • Sea level rise could swamp some New Zealand cities (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/90657833) https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 19, 2017, 07:46:35 pm The usual "the sky *may* be falling in" BS to try to keep the scam alive then?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 20, 2017, 11:01:14 am Explain to me how Judith Curry, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer and dozens of other highly credentialed, experienced and published scientists like them are "fake scientists".
You can't. You are just parroting empty warmunist slogans like a nodding zombie. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 20, 2017, 11:15:50 am From wankopedia...
"Richard Siegmund Lindzen (born February 8, 1940) is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. From 1983[1] until his retirement in 2013, he was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[2] He was a lead author of Chapter 7, "Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks," of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report on climate change. He has criticized the scientific consensus about climate change[3] and what he has called "climate alarmism."[4] Now please tell where in there it says he's a "fake scientist"? Stop making shit up. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 21, 2017, 10:34:40 am And again from loony left Wankerpedia..
On Prof Judith Curry.. Curry was a Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology; she held the latter position from 2002 to 2013.[8] Curry serves on NASA Advisory Council Earth Science Subcommittee whose mission is to provide advice and recommendations to NASA on issues of program priorities and policy. She is a recent member of the NOAA Climate Working Group[8][9] and a former member of the National Academies Space Studies Board and Climate Research Group.[8][10] Curry is a former professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado-Boulder and has held faculty positions at Penn State University, Purdue, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.[8][10] Curry has been active in researching possible connections between hurricane intensity and global warming.[11][12] Her research group has also done research linking the size of hurricanes and resulting damage that showed that, among other things, the size of the hurricanes was an important factor in determining the number of tornadoes spawned by the system.[13] Curry is the co-author of Thermodynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans (1999),[14] and co-editor of Encyclopedia of Atmospheric Sciences (2002).[15] Curry has published over 130 scientific peer reviewed papers.[16] Among her awards is the Henry G. Houghton Research Award from the American Meteorological Society in 1992.[16] Climate change Edit Judith Curry has argued that climatologists should be more accommodating of those skeptical of the scientific consensus on climate change.[17] Curry has stated she is troubled by what she calls the "tribal nature" of parts of the climate-science community, and what she sees as stonewalling over the release of data and its analysis for independent review.[17] In February 2010 Curry published an essay called "On the Credibility of Climate Change, Towards Rebuilding Trust" on Watts Up With That? and other blogs.[18] Writing in The New York Times, Andrew Revkin calls the essay a message to young scientists who may have been disheartened by the November 2009 climate change controversy known as "Climategate".[17] In September 2010, she created Climate Etc., a blog related to climate change and hosted by Curry. She wrote that "Climate Etc. provides a forum for climate researchers, academics and technical experts from other fields, citizen scientists, and the interested public to engage in a discussion on topics related to climate science and the science-policy interface."[8] She wrote: "I have a total of 12,000 citations of my publications (since my first publication in 1983). Climate Etc. gets on average about 12,000 ‘hits’ per day, and 300-400 comments." She gets " zero academic credit or incentives for my blogging and tweeting," but hopes that " social media and the associated skill set [will become] better recognized within the academic system."[19] Curry testified before the US House Subcommittee on Environment in 2013,[20] remarking on the many large uncertainties in forecasting future climate.[21] In October 2014, Curry wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal [22] where she argued that human-caused warming near the end of the 21st century should be less than the 2-degrees-Celsius “danger” level for all but the IPCC’s most extreme emission scenario, which is far later than the IPCC prediction of a 2-degrees-Celsius warming before 2040. In April 2015 Curry gave evidence to the House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology Hearing on the President’s UN Climate Pledge. She summed up her evidence - The definition of ‘dangerous’ climate change is ambiguous, and hypothesized catastrophic tipping points are regarded as very or extremely unlikely in the 21st century. Efforts to link dangerous impacts of extreme weather events to human-caused warming are misleading and unsupported by evidence. Climate change is a ‘wicked problem’ and ill-suited to a ‘command and control’ solution. It has been estimated that the U.S. national commitments to the UN to reduce emissions by 28% will prevent three hundredths of a degree centigrade in warming by 2100... The articulation of a preferred policy option in the early 1990’s by the United Nations has marginalized research on broader issues surrounding climate variability and change and has stifled the development of a broader range of policy options. We need to push the reset button in our deliberations about how we should respond to climate change. We should expand the frameworks for thinking about climate policy and provide a wider choice of options in addressing the risks from climate change. As an example of alternative options, pragmatic solutions have been proposed based on efforts to accelerate energy innovation, build resilience to extreme weather, and pursue no regrets pollution reduction. Each of these measures has justifications independent of their benefits for climate mitigation and adaptation. Robust policy options that can be justified by associated policy reasons whether or not human caused climate change is dangerous avoids the hubris of pretending to know what will happen with the 21st century climate.[23] Now please tell where in there it says she's a "fake scientist"? Stop making shit up. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 21, 2017, 11:22:39 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 21, 2017, 11:23:42 am from Fairfax NZ.... Houses will be ‘red-zoned’ due to climate change — Environment Commissioner Report warns of “big social issues”, with 44,000 New Zealand homes at risk if high tide rises reach 150cm. By ROSANNA PRICE | 4:03PM - Thursday, 31 March 2016 (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160331_1459393385557sa_zpsumpwbwl6.jpg) (http://) Dr Jan Wright's report presented to local government and the environment select committee warns of “big social issues” as a result of climate change. CLIMATE CHANGE is coming, and with it communities may have to be abandoned or left to deal with major financial costs. Environment Commissioner Jan Wright (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/about-us/the-commissioner) said the country would face some “big social issues” because of climate change, identified in a report presented to the local government and environment select committee. She urged central and local government to improve their planning and have national guidelines. The report identified 44,000 homes would be affected by flooding when the high-tide rise reached 150 centimetres. An additional 24,000 buildings would also be affected. It would cost $20 billion to replace them — and the figure did not include any infrastructure or telecommunications. When considering a 50cm high-tide rise, 9,000 homes would be affected with an additional 4,000 buildings. This would equate to a $3b cost for replacement. Wright had been in talks with insurance companies and banks about the effects. “If a particular property is subject to this kind of risk, then insurance companies will start to look at whether they insure it or not,” she said. “So you might see premiums go up, you might see the co-payments go up. Eventually a house would become uninsurable — probably a lot before it became uninhabitable.” She said insurance companies “would take themselves quietly out of the picture”. There could be mortgage holders in the “sad” situation of dealing with negative equity, where their mortgage would be bigger than the value of the house. “It's kind of like a slowly unfolding red-zone in Christchurch.” (http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo92/RasputinDude/News%20Story%20Pix%202016/20160331_1459393385557sb_zpsudegufl2.jpg) (http://) The report claims that 44,000 homes would be affected by flooding when sea level rises reached 150 centimetres. — Photograph: Asleigh Stewart/Fairfax NZ. The cost of sea-level rise of 50cm would be affect a similar number of houses in Christchurch's evacuated red-zone within the next couple of decades, she said. Climate Change Minister Paula Bennett said every time you learn a bit more about the science “it is a little more frightening”. “I worry about future insurance costs for every day households if they're having to deal with those sorts of flooding events,” she said. “I do think we can put more into the kinds of technology and adaptation that would make a difference.” However, the advice she had received about Kiwis locked into negative equity was that it would not be the case in the “near future”, but was still an “unknown” in decades to come. Bennett was confident she could pull together a longer term plan that was not just Government-run, but led across communities. Finance Minister Bill English said the Government would not budget for the costs of rising sea levels (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/74206646) when the report was released in November. The report includes maps by region of risk areas for flooding, erosion and groundwater issues. Those are available online (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/regional-land-elevation-maps). The UN's climate body had predicted up to a one-metre rise by the year 2100. However, it may be a two-metre rise at the current rate of carbon emissions, according to a study in the journal Nature which took into account Antarctic ice sheets that are melting faster than previously thought. __________________________________________________________________________ Read more on this topic.... • Preparing New Zealand for rising seas: Certainty and Uncertainty (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/preparing-new-zealand-for-rising-seas-certainty-and-uncertainty) http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78407260 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78407260) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 21, 2017, 11:24:02 am from Fairfax NZ.... Intensifying sun and increased CO² a ‘double-whammy’ for climate change By GED CANN | 11:57AM - Thursday, 06 April 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/g/u/c/l/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1iaqpz.png/1491436655294.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/g/u/c/l/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1iaqpz.png/1491436655294.jpg) The burning of fossil fuels is releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide, sucked from the atmosphere over millions of years by plants. — Photograph: Lukas Schulze/Getty Images. THE SUN is getting stronger and Earth has only escaped a frying because plants sucked up the extra carbon dioxide, reducing the heat caught in the atmosphere. But that's all changing as the burning of fossil fuels ramps concentrations of CO² back up. A new study, published in Nature Communications (http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2017/170404/ncomms14845/full/ncomms14845.html), traced how atmospheric CO² changed over the past 420 million years, providing researchers a key clue as to how Earth's delicate heat balance was maintained. A leading Kiwi researcher said humans had already wound back the clock on CO² by three to four million years, with current estimates at 400 parts-per-million, effectively creating a double-whammy for global warming. “At that time, temperatures were a couple of degrees or so higher than now, but sea levels were around 10 metres higher than present, worldwide,” Victoria University climate scientist James Renwick said. Reversal of CO² trends could eventually result in warming of up to 10 degrees Celcius, he said. “If we keep burning the oil and coal, we would eventually put atmospheric CO² back where it was several hundred million years ago — when the sun was a lot dimmer. With today's intensity of sunlight, the earth could get very warm,” he said. “Our burning of fossil fuels is emitting, in the space of a century or two, huge quantities of carbon laid down over millions of years. The rate of release is hundreds of times faster than anything we know of from the past.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/e/6/c/8/k/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1iaqpz.png/1491436655294.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/e/6/c/8/k/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1iaqpz.png/1491436655294.jpg) Victoria University climate scientist James Renwick says human have already turned back the clock on CO² by up to 4 million years. The new study predicting a failure to curb fossil fuel emissions could see atmospheric CO² levels reach concentration not experienced for 50 million years by the end of the century. Renwick said that could equate to temperatures between 7°C and 8°C higher than present, with sea level rise of 50 metres or more higher than present, a state we would be locked into for several hundred years. “Essentially all the ice on Antarctica and Greenland would melt,” he said. “The issue is that tens of metres of sea levels rise, plus wholesale changes in rainfall patterns and heat extremes means that billions of people would be displaced and global food production would fall to a small fraction of what it is at present. That is, many billions of lives would be put at risk.” Otago University climate scientist Jim Salinger said inaction from the likes of the United States, Australia and New Zealand was creating a dim outlook for the planet. “There is potential for a runaway effect if we don't curb emissions quickly.” Salinger said to lock the same CO² back into the ground would likely take hundreds of years, with the need to grow trees, chop them down, and bury them. “We are going into uncharted territory in terms of human existance.” __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Sea level rise could swamp some New Zealand cities (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/90657833) • Editorial: Doubting climate change science is no joke (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/90297113) • Climate change education missing in New Zealand schools (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/86740965) • Eating the shore: New Zealand's shrinking coastline (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/80441421) http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/91200455 (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/91200455) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 21, 2017, 11:24:20 am from Fairfax NZ.... Some New Zealand climate change impacts may already be irreversible, Government report says By CHARLIE MITCHELL and GED CANN | 2:05PM - Thursday, 19 October 2017 https://vimeo.com/238677734 (https://vimeo.com/238677734) CLIMATE CHANGE may have already had an irreversible impact on New Zealand's natural systems and the effects are likely to worsen, a new Government report says. Data showed conclusively that temperatures had already risen by one degree in New Zealand, which would have an impact on the economy, extreme weather events, biodiversity and health. The Our Climate and Atmosphere 2017 report (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/our-atmosphere-and-climate-2017), released by the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Statistics New Zealand on Thursday, revealed the country's glaciers had lost nearly a quarter of their ice since 1977, and sea levels had risen between 14 centimetres and 22 centimetres at four main ports since 1916. Meanwhile, our contribution to global greenhouse emissions had increased and sea level and temperature rises were forecast to gain momentum. Soils in some areas had become drier and both the acidity and the temperature of the ocean had risen. Last year was the country's warmest year since records began and the five warmest years on record had occurred in the last 20 years. The number of extreme weather events had increased, as had the insurance cost of those events, Insurance Council of New Zealand data showed. New Zealand had the fifth-highest emission levels per person in the OECD, the report said. Since 1990, gross emissions increased 24 percent, while net emissions increased 64 percent. Net emissions accounted for carbon stored in forests, which was released when they were cut down. Our high rate of emissions was attributed to an unusually large share of agriculture emissions and high car-ownership rates. “While New Zealand is not a large contributor of emissions globally, we are certainly affected locally and we need to act on what that means for us,” secretary for the environment Vicky Robertson said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) Flooding in Canterbury this year. Such events are likely to become more frequent due to climate change. — Photograph: Alden Williams. The scope of the report did not include recommendations for tackling emissions and Robertson said the purpose was to open the conversation. “We are working quite significantly to bring together all the public services towards advising collectively and consistently around what government could do to create a pathway to our 2030 targets.” Current targets were to reduce greenhouse emissions to 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The document singles out transport as a key driver of increased emissions, which had jumped 78 percent since 1990 and now equated to 18 percent overall. However, agriculture emissions sat far higher, constituting just under half of overall emissions and had also climbed significantly in the same period. Robertson said the report had not sought to downplay agriculture's impact and she would not be shying away from it in policy advice. While New Zealand's emissions had continued to climb, the United Kingdom reduced its emissions by 26 percent from 1990 to 2013, Sweden by 25 percent, and France by 11 percent. Robertson refused to give New Zealand a scorecard on its performance to-date, but said now was the time to make changes. “The future impacts of climate change on our lives all depend on how fast global emissions are reduced and the extent to which our communities can adapt to change.” University of Otago environmental epidemiologist Simon Hales said the main takeaway was that the country was not living up to its international obligations on climate change. “We require a much better, more quantitative understanding of the likely adverse impacts of climate change on human health than the brief, vague statements in the MfE report.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/g/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/d/c/9/g/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mcws1.png/1508375108036.jpg) Fox Glacier in 2014. Our shrinking glaciers are a sign of a warming climate. — Photograph: Ian Fuller. Climate change would likely have an impact on our already struggling biodiversity. Research showed there was already a growing imbalance in the gender split of tuatara. Warmer temperatures in tuatara nests were more likely to produce male offspring; on North Brother Island in the Cook Strait, the ratio of male to female tuatara had increased from 1:66 to 2:36 in recent decades. Warmer temperatures also increased the wasp population in beech forests, which resulted in less food for native species, and the frequency of masts (tree seed dropping), creating food for rodents, which attract predators. “We can expect to face possibly costly decisions around how we manage the effects of a changing climate for our unique and celebrated native biodiversity,” the report said. Climate change would also affect the economy and our physical and mental health, although the extent for both was not yet clear. Rising sea levels and increasing extreme weather events would affect coastal communities, likely requiring some communities to move. An earlier risk census determined around $19 billion worth of buildings were at risk of rising sea levels (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/96503854). Drier conditions in some areas would have an impact on agriculture and the rates of some diseases may increase, as well as exposure to heat waves, flooding and fires. The report also determined the atmosphere's "ozone hole", which was attributed to high levels of melanoma in Australia and New Zealand, was shrinking. It had decreased 21 percent from its largest size, which was reached in 2006, and may no longer exist mid-way through the century. It was largely due to a global effort to reduce the usage of ozone depleting substances, such as those in refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. NIWA atmospheric researcher Richard McKenzie said the report was heartening, but the country still had to be vigilant. “The situation is delicate at present and we remain at risk from possible effects from future volcanic eruptions.” • Download the “Our Atmosphere and Climate 2017” report. (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/our-atmosphere-and-climate-2017-at-a-glance-final.pdf) (348KB PDF document) • Download the accompanying Media Release. (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Report%20confirms%20increasing%20emissions%20impacting%20New%20Zealand.pdf) (80KB PDF document) __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The seaside town being eaten alive (https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2017/04/eaten-alive) • Climate change could spell ‘extreme poverty’ in coastal NZ towns (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/91778352) • Sea level rise could swamp some New Zealand cities (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/90657833) https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 21, 2017, 12:13:36 pm Clearly KTJ you are just making shit up re "fake scientists" and try to hide your lack of thought through spamming. Get back to me when you've worked out how to think for yourself.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 21, 2017, 04:24:48 pm Would govt funded scientists get much funding if they said "actually this may not be a problem"?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 03, 2017, 01:30:29 pm from The Washington Post.... A proposal in New Zealand could trigger the era of ‘climate change refugees’ Victims of climate change are so far not officially recognized as refugees. New Zealand could change that. By RICK NOACK | 9:45PM EDT — Tuesday, October 31, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2014/08/Merlin_1005521.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2014/08/Merlin_1005521.jpg) Laundry hangs on the edge of a lagoon near Funafuti, Tuvalu, in 2004. — Photograph: Richard Vogel/Associated Press. NEW ZEALAND could become the world's first country to essentially recognize climate change as an official reason to seek asylum or residence elsewhere, a government minister indicated in an interview (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/31/new-zealand-considers-creating-climate-change-refugee-visas) on Tuesday. If implemented, up to 100 individuals per year could be admitted to the island nation on a newly created visa category, according to an initial campaign promise the proposal which is now being considered is based on. This may appear relatively insignificant, given that the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center predicts 150 to 300 million people to be forced out of their homes because of climate change by 2050. Yet the announcement has still stunned environmental activists who have long demanded such resettlement programs but have been blocked by governments and courts — including New Zealand's Supreme Court. Although New Zealand's approach does not bind other host countries, the experiment could be used as a role model, both in national courts and in the public debate. If implemented, the New Zealand proposal would likely be used by activists in European nations such as Sweden or Germany to pressure their own governments into creating similar schemes. The 1951 U.N. refugee convention, written long before there was such a thing, does not recognize victims of climate change. Host nations have so far been reluctant to change the convention, prompting some islands which are expected to be hit hardest by climate change to try to reframe the problem as a solution. The Pacific island of Kiribati launched a “Migration With Dignity” scheme, which trains citizens to be the kind of highly-skilled workers in short supply in New Zealand or elsewhere. Kiribati's program was created on the assumption that large multinational corporations may hold far more lobbying powers to change visa regulations than poor nations affected by climate change. Companies in richer countries such as New Zealand, the United States or Germany often face difficulties in recruiting skilled workers for certain tasks, and have pressured governments to relax visa restrictions much more successfully than nations such as Tuvalu or Kiribati could have done themselves. This strategy may work for some smaller islands, but not all climate refugees can become highly skilled workers. The vast majority of them will likely either face the prospect of staying in their home countries — if they still exist — or becoming “second class” citizens abroad who are not officially recognized as refugees. Activists in New Zealand have led international efforts to prevent such a scenario, given that their comparatively wealthy country is surrounded by smaller island nations such as Tuvalu or Kiribati, which are just two meters above sea level and could be fully submerged in approximately 30 to 50 years. In a major step forward for proponents of such efforts, New Zealand's Green Party promised the introduction of a new visa category in the run-up to September elections. The party has now become a coalition partner in the new Labour-led government. “The lives and livelihoods of many of our Pacific neighbors are already being threatened, and we need to start preparing for the inevitable influx of climate refugees,” New Zealand's UNICEF director Vivien Maidaborn wrote in an op-ed (https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/97735250) this month, in which she urged the government to make good on that promise. In June 2014, a family from Tuvalu was granted residency for the first time by the country's Immigration and Protection Tribunal after it claimed to be threatened by climate change there. At the time, experts told me that they were skeptical whether the ruling would have a wider impact, though. The family succeeded because it claimed “exceptional humanitarian grounds,” which is a wording recognized in New Zealand's immigration legislation but not by many other governments, said Vernon Rive (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/08/07/has-the-era-of-the-climate-change-refugee-begun), a senior lecturer in law at AUT Law School in Auckland. Others factors, apart from climate change, played into the court's 2014 decision to allow the family to stay, as well. Since then, similar cases have been declined and asylum seekers deported. Given the resistance of many countries to make changes to the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention and the fact that court rulings in other cases don't apply, legal scholars have explored a third alternative: the creation of legal arrangements on a bilateral or regional basis. New Zealand's new proposal would fall into that category. It would mostly be open to climate change refugees from Pacific islands and would necessitate close collaboration between authorities in New Zealand and in the affected nations. Those island nations have long been open to talks. At least in some richer countries such as New Zealand, there appears to be a growing awareness that time is now indeed running out, as a new report published on Monday (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/climate-change-fueling-disasters-disease-in-potentially-irreversible-ways-report-warns/2017/10/30/4f450ac4-bdaf-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html) by the British medical journal The Lancet warned (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)32464-9/abstract). Its authors concluded that climate change is essentially a “threat multiplier” for all global health hazards, with manifestations that will be “unequivocal and potentially irreversible.” • Rick Noack writes about foreign affairs for The Washington Post and is based in Europe. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Climate change fueling disasters, disease in ‘potentially irreversible’ ways, report warns (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/climate-change-fueling-disasters-disease-in-potentially-irreversible-ways-report-warns/2017/10/30/4f450ac4-bdaf-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/10/31/a-proposal-in-new-zealand-could-trigger-the-era-of-climate-change-refugees (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/10/31/a-proposal-in-new-zealand-could-trigger-the-era-of-climate-change-refugees) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 03, 2017, 03:44:21 pm But sea level rise ISN'T accelerating and there is no proven link between industrial activity and sea level rise. The seas have been gradually rising for the last 12000 years. Just more chicken little hysteria from the usual suspects 🙄
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 03, 2017, 04:00:05 pm The other thing you'll become aware of if you dig a bit deeper than the prevailing politically driven narrative, is that because the ocean is huge it can take centuries for it to show responses to various forcings.That means today's sea changes could be responses to natural events that happened centuries ago.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 03, 2017, 05:30:55 pm Didn't you just post recently that nobody is reading anything I'm posting at this group? So how come you're commenting on stuff that nobody reads? Presumably that includes you? You're as full-of-shit as that Reality/Donald clown who seems to have buggered off crying now that his beloved Nats are no longer the government. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 07:45:00 am Are you OK?
It's not exactly normal spending all that energy posting shit every day that nobody even responds to 😁 Doesn't Kiwirail have EAP? Ring them up and get some counselling 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 08:12:56 am How come you stopped copy and pasting vacuous verbal diarrhoea artist Mark "lightworker" Morford?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 08:47:07 am How's that horrible global warming going for you at the moment? Roasting you arse off with an early summer?? 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 04, 2017, 09:34:19 am How come you stopped copy and pasting vacuous verbal diarrhoea artist Mark "lightworker" Morford? I can easily correct that and post some BRILLIANT intelligent writings from Mark Morford just for you. But in the meantime, read the following report and also read how the idiots Donald “zero-brain” Trump and Scott “fucked-in-the-head” Pruitt have their heads firmly buried in the sand, unlike the learned and peer-reviewed US government scientists who have actually got their shit together when it comes to global warming/climate change.... • In clash with President Donald Trump, US report says humans cause climate change (https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/98555684) And accompanying the article is this photograph of a stupid fuckwit.... (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/o/c/n/z/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1moe1w.png/1509742635478.jpg) For some reason you appear to be trying very hard to emulate his level of stupidity and retardness. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 10:08:11 am Morford strikes me as being a consummate wanker. You'll be wasting keystrokes posting his crap.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 11:22:50 am How's that Fiji style weather long predicted by the eco prophets of doom working out there?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 04, 2017, 11:27:30 am Still waiting for the messiah, er I mean coming warming apocalypse?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 04, 2017, 04:06:38 pm I see climate change every day but nothing is new except this year a very cold wet winter
Mark Morford is a Gay arse clown Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 05, 2017, 12:04:50 am from The Washington Post.... Trump administration releases report finding ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change The White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government's National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law, despite the fact that its findings sharply contradict the administration's policies. By CHRIS MOONEY, JULIET EILPERIN and BRADY DENNIS | 4:00PM EDT - Friday, November 03, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/19/Health-Environment-Science/Images/GettyImages-500643593.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/19/Health-Environment-Science/Images/GettyImages-500643593.jpg) THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION released a dire scientific report (https://science2017.globalchange.gov) on Friday calling human activity the dominant driver of global warming, a conclusion at odds with White House decisions to withdraw from a key international climate accord, champion fossil fuels and reverse Obama-era climate policies. To the surprise of some scientists, the White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government's National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law. The report affirms that climate change is driven almost entirely by human action, warns of a worst-case scenario where seas could rise as high as eight feet by the year 2100, and details climate-related damage across the United States that is already unfolding as a result of an average global temperature increase of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit since 1900. “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,” the document reports. “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.” The report's release underscores the extent to which the machinery of the federal scientific establishment, operating in multiple agencies across the government, continues to grind on even as top administration officials have minimized or disparaged its findings. Federal scientists have continued to author papers and issue reports on climate change, for example, even as political appointees have altered the wording of news releases or blocked civil servants from speaking about their conclusions in public forums. The climate assessment process is dictated by a 1990 law that Democratic and Republican administrations have followed. The White House on Friday sought to downplay the significance of the study and its findings. “The climate has changed and is always changing. As the Climate Science Special Report states, the magnitude of future climate change depends significantly on ‘remaining uncertainty in the sensitivity of Earth's climate to [greenhouse gas] emissions’,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement. “In the United States, energy related carbon dioxide emissions have been declining, are expected to remain flat through 2040, and will also continue to decline as a share of world emissions.” Shah added that the Trump administration “supports rigorous scientific analysis and debate.” He said it will continue to “promote access to the affordable and reliable energy needed to grow economically” and to back advancements that improve infrastructure and ultimately reduce emissions. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and President Trump have all questioned the extent of humans' contribution to climate change. One of the EPA's Web pages posted scientific conclusions similar to those in the new report until earlier this year, when Pruitt's deputies ordered it removed (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/epa-website-removes-climate-science-site-from-public-view-after-two-decades). The report comes as Trump and members of his Cabinet are working to promote U.S. fossil-fuel production and repeal several federal rules aimed at curbing the nation's carbon output, including ones limiting greenhouse-gas emissions from existing power plants (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/09/pruitt-tells-coal-miners-he-will-repeal-power-plan-rule-tuesday-the-war-on-coal-is-over), oil and gas operations on federal land and carbon emissions from cars and trucks (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/10/trump-officials-begin-review-of-obama-emissions-standards-for-cars). Trump has also announced he will exit the Paris climate agreement, under which the United States has pledged to cut its overall greenhouse-gas emissions between 26 percent and 28 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2025. The report could have considerable legal and policy significance, providing new and stronger support for the EPA's greenhouse-gas “endangerment finding” under the Clean Air Act, which lays the foundation for regulations on emissions. “This is a federal government report whose contents completely undercut their policies, completely undercut the statements made by senior members of the administration,” said Phil Duffy, director of the Woods Hole Research Center. The government is required to produce the national assessment every four years (http://www.globalchange.gov/about/legal-mandate). This time, the report is split into two documents, one that lays out the fundamental science of climate change and the other that shows how the United States is being affected on a regional basis. Combined, the two documents total over 2,000 pages. The first document, called the Climate Science Special Report, is a finalized report, having been peer-reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences and vetted by experts across government agencies. It was formally unveiled on Friday. “I think this report is basically the most comprehensive climate science report in the world right now,” said Robert Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers who is an expert on sea-level rise and served as one of the report's lead authors. It affirms that the United States is already experiencing more extreme heat and rainfall events and more large wildfires in the West, that more than 25 coastal U.S. cities are already experiencing more flooding, and that seas could rise by between 1 and 4 feet by the year 2100, and perhaps even more than that if Antarctica proves to be unstable, as is feared. The report says that a rise of over eight feet is “physically possible” with high levels of greenhouse-gas emissions but that there's no way right now to predict how likely it is to happen. When it comes to rapidly escalating levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the report states, “there is no climate analog for this century at any time in at least the last 50 million years.” Most striking, perhaps, the report warns of the unpredictable — changes that scientists cannot foresee that could involve tipping points or fast changes in the climate system. These could switch the climate into “new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.” Some members of the scientific community had speculated that the administration might refuse to publish the report or might alter its conclusions. During the George W. Bush administration, a senior official at the White House Council on Environmental Quality edited aspects of some government science reports. Yet multiple experts, as well as some administration officials and federal scientists, said Trump political appointees did not change the special report's scientific conclusions. While some edits have been made to its final version — for instance, omitting or softening some references to the Paris climate agreement — those were focused on policy. “I'm quite confident to say there has been no political interference in the scientific messages from this report,” David Fahey, an atmospheric scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and a lead author of the study, told reporters on Friday. “Whatever fears we had weren't realized…. This report says what the scientists want it to say.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/energy-environment/201711/Images/EU_UN_Climate_28691-394ef.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/energy-environment/201711/Images/EU_UN_Climate_28691-394ef.jpg) A senior administration official, who asked for anonymity because the process is still underway, said in an interview that top Trump officials decided to put out the assessment without changing the findings of its contributors even if some appointees may have different views. Glynis Lough, who is deputy director of the food and environment program at the Union of Concerned Scientists and had served as chief of staff for the National Climate Assessment at the U.S. Global Change Research Program until mid-2016, said in an interview that the changes made by government officials to the latest report “are consistent with the types of changes that were made in the previous administration for the 2014 National Climate Assessment, to avoid policy prescriptiveness.” Perhaps no agency under Trump has tried to downplay and undermine climate science more than the EPA. Most recently, political appointees at the EPA instructed two agency scientists and one contractor not to speak as planned at a scientific conference in Rhode Island (http://nbep.org/the-state-of-our-watershed). The conference marked the culmination of a three-year report on the status of Narragansett Bay, New England's largest estuary, in which climate change featured prominently. The EPA also has altered parts of its website containing detailed climate data and scientific information. As part of that overhaul, in April the agency took down pages that had existed for years and contained a wealth of information on the scientific causes of global warming, its consequences and ways for communities to mitigate or adapt. The agency said that it was simply making changes to better reflect the new administration's priorities and that any pages taken down would be archived. Pruitt has repeatedly advocated for the creation of a government-wide “red team/blue team” exercise, in which a group of outside critics would challenge the validity of mainstream scientific conclusions around climate change. Other departments have also removed climate-change documents online: The Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, for example, no longer provides access to documents (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/under-trump-inconvenient-data-is-being-sidelined/2017/05/14/3ae22c28-3106-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html) assessing the danger that future warming poses to deserts in the Southwest. And when U.S. Geological Survey scientists working with international researchers published an article in the journal Nature (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-13165-x) evaluating how climate change and human population growth would affect where rain-fed agriculture could thrive, the USGS published a news release that omitted the words “climate change” altogether (https://www.usgs.gov/news/future-temperature-and-soil-moisture-may-alter-location-agricultural-regions). The Agriculture Department's climate hubs (https://www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov), however, remain freely available online. And researchers at the U.S. Forest Service have continued to publish papers this year (https://www.fs.fed.us/rmrs/research-topics/climate-change/publications) on how climate change is affecting wildfires, wetlands and aquatic habitat across the country. The climate science report is already coming under fire from some of the administration's allies. The day before it was published, Steven Koonin, a New York University physicist who has met with Pruitt and advocated for the “red team/blue team” exercise, pre-emptively criticized the document (https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deceptive-new-report-on-climate-1509660882) in The Wall Street Journal, calling it “deceptive”. Koonin argued that the report “ominously notes that while global sea level rose an average 0.05 inch a year during most of the 20th century, it has risen at about twice that rate since 1993. But it fails to mention that the rate fluctuated by comparable amounts several times during the 20th century.” But one of the report's authors suggested Koonin is creating a straw man. “The report does not state that the rate since 1993 is the fastest than during any comparable period since 1900 (though in my informal assessment it likely is), which is the non-statement Steve seems to be objecting to,” Kopp countered by email. Still, the line of criticism could be amplified by conservatives in the coming days. Joseph Bast, the chief executive of the Heartland Institute, a think tank that has long challenged many aspects of the science of global warming, also strongly critiqued the report in a statement to The Washington Post on Friday. “This is typical Obama-era political science,” Bast said. “It's all been debunked so many times it's not worth debating anymore. Why are we still wasting taxpayer dollars on green propaganda?” The administration also released, in draft form, the second volume of the National Climate Assessment (https://review.globalchange.gov), which looks at regional impacts across the United States. This document is available for public comment and will begin a peer review process, with final publication expected in late 2018. Already, however, it is possible to discern some of what it will conclude. For instance, a peer-reviewed EPA technical document (https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?dirEntryId=335095) released to inform the assessment finds that the monetary costs of climate change in the United States could be dramatic. That document, dubbed the Climate Change Impacts and Risk Analysis, finds that high temperatures could lead to the loss per year of “almost 1.9 billion labor hours across the national workforce” by 2090. That would mean $160 billion annually in lost income to workers. With high levels of warming, coastal property damage in 2090 could total $120 billion annually, and deaths from temperature extremes could reach 9,300 per year, or in monetized terms, $140 billion annually in damage. Additional tens of billions annually could occur in the form of damage to roads, rail lines and electrical infrastructure, the report finds. This could all be lessened considerably, the report notes, if warming is held to lower levels. • Jason Samenow contributed to this report. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. • Juliet Eilperin is The Washington Post's senior national affairs correspondent, covering how the new administration is transforming a range of U.S. policies and the federal government itself. She is the author of two books — one on sharks (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0307386805), and another on Congress (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0742551199), not to be confused with each other — and has worked for The Post since 1998. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Government's dire climate change report blames humans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/67fbb7b0-c0f3-11e7-9294-705f80164f6e_video.html) • VIDEO: Does the Trump administration believe in climate change? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/d2b9d6a2-0511-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_video.html) • VIDEO: Floods are getting worse and more frequent. Here's why. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/50111a34-3028-11e7-a335-fa0ae1940305_video.html) • Scott Pruitt blocks scientists with EPA grants from serving as agency advisers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/scott-pruitt-blocks-scientists-with-epa-funding-from-serving-as-agency-advisers/2017/10/31/959d91ac-be5a-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html) • White House reviewing new report that finds strong link between climate change, human activity (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/new-federal-report-finds-strong-link-between-climate-change-human-activity/2017/08/07/583283d2-7bdd-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) • EPA removes climate pages from public view after two decades (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/epa-website-removes-climate-science-site-from-public-view-after-two-decades) • Obama left Trump a major climate-change report — and independent scientists just said it's accurate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/15/obama-left-trump-a-major-climate-change-report-and-independent-scientists-just-said-its-accurate) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 05, 2017, 09:57:03 am Here's how a thinking brain works...
You see a headline like that and think "yeah right, better do some digging to find out the real story." But no, you just buy this shit lock,stock and barrell, without a second thought. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 05, 2017, 12:02:29 pm Click on the link and download the 2,000-page report from the American government and read it for yourself. I've downloaded it and although I haven't yet managed to read all of it (it will take weeks), just reading the abstract summary gives one a pretty good idea of what is in the report. Reading the rest of the report will fill in the details. So go on.....download it and read it....I dare you.....just to demonstrate that you aren't deliberately shutting your eyes, clocking your ears, and playing dumb. That is provided you aren't too dumb to comprehend stuff like that, which I guess is always a possibility. But you can prove that wrong if you dare. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 05, 2017, 06:11:10 pm http://www.chrismadden.co.uk/images/cartoons/carbon-footprint-climate-change-conference-cartoon.gif (http://www.chrismadden.co.uk/images/cartoons/carbon-footprint-climate-change-conference-cartoon.gif)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 05, 2017, 07:02:35 pm You haven't read it.The IPCC and other green/leftoid ideologue astroturfing outfits have a habit of writing conclusions and abstracts that are misleading.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 05, 2017, 07:16:24 pm You forget that I was once a co2pocalypse believer. I listen to the highly credentialed dissenting voices in the climate science field. They make the most sense.Models are garbage in, garbage out constructs.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 06, 2017, 06:18:09 am As usual, your selfishness is preventing you from opening your mind to peer-reviewed science. You don't give a shit about future generations because you only care about yourself NOW. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 06, 2017, 06:18:54 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 06, 2017, 06:19:47 am from The Washington Post.... Trump administration releases report finding ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change The White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government's National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law, despite the fact that its findings sharply contradict the administration's policies. By CHRIS MOONEY, JULIET EILPERIN and BRADY DENNIS | 4:00PM EDT - Friday, November 03, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/19/Health-Environment-Science/Images/GettyImages-500643593.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/08/19/Health-Environment-Science/Images/GettyImages-500643593.jpg) THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION released a dire scientific report (https://science2017.globalchange.gov) on Friday calling human activity the dominant driver of global warming, a conclusion at odds with White House decisions to withdraw from a key international climate accord, champion fossil fuels and reverse Obama-era climate policies. To the surprise of some scientists, the White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government's National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law. The report affirms that climate change is driven almost entirely by human action, warns of a worst-case scenario where seas could rise as high as eight feet by the year 2100, and details climate-related damage across the United States that is already unfolding as a result of an average global temperature increase of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit since 1900. “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,” the document reports. “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.” The report's release underscores the extent to which the machinery of the federal scientific establishment, operating in multiple agencies across the government, continues to grind on even as top administration officials have minimized or disparaged its findings. Federal scientists have continued to author papers and issue reports on climate change, for example, even as political appointees have altered the wording of news releases or blocked civil servants from speaking about their conclusions in public forums. The climate assessment process is dictated by a 1990 law that Democratic and Republican administrations have followed. The White House on Friday sought to downplay the significance of the study and its findings. “The climate has changed and is always changing. As the Climate Science Special Report states, the magnitude of future climate change depends significantly on ‘remaining uncertainty in the sensitivity of Earth's climate to [greenhouse gas] emissions’,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement. “In the United States, energy related carbon dioxide emissions have been declining, are expected to remain flat through 2040, and will also continue to decline as a share of world emissions.” Shah added that the Trump administration “supports rigorous scientific analysis and debate.” He said it will continue to “promote access to the affordable and reliable energy needed to grow economically” and to back advancements that improve infrastructure and ultimately reduce emissions. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and President Trump have all questioned the extent of humans' contribution to climate change. One of the EPA's Web pages posted scientific conclusions similar to those in the new report until earlier this year, when Pruitt's deputies ordered it removed (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/epa-website-removes-climate-science-site-from-public-view-after-two-decades). The report comes as Trump and members of his Cabinet are working to promote U.S. fossil-fuel production and repeal several federal rules aimed at curbing the nation's carbon output, including ones limiting greenhouse-gas emissions from existing power plants (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/10/09/pruitt-tells-coal-miners-he-will-repeal-power-plan-rule-tuesday-the-war-on-coal-is-over), oil and gas operations on federal land and carbon emissions from cars and trucks (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/10/trump-officials-begin-review-of-obama-emissions-standards-for-cars). Trump has also announced he will exit the Paris climate agreement, under which the United States has pledged to cut its overall greenhouse-gas emissions between 26 percent and 28 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2025. The report could have considerable legal and policy significance, providing new and stronger support for the EPA's greenhouse-gas “endangerment finding” under the Clean Air Act, which lays the foundation for regulations on emissions. “This is a federal government report whose contents completely undercut their policies, completely undercut the statements made by senior members of the administration,” said Phil Duffy, director of the Woods Hole Research Center. The government is required to produce the national assessment every four years (http://www.globalchange.gov/about/legal-mandate). This time, the report is split into two documents, one that lays out the fundamental science of climate change and the other that shows how the United States is being affected on a regional basis. Combined, the two documents total over 2,000 pages. The first document, called the Climate Science Special Report, is a finalized report, having been peer-reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences and vetted by experts across government agencies. It was formally unveiled on Friday. “I think this report is basically the most comprehensive climate science report in the world right now,” said Robert Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers who is an expert on sea-level rise and served as one of the report's lead authors. It affirms that the United States is already experiencing more extreme heat and rainfall events and more large wildfires in the West, that more than 25 coastal U.S. cities are already experiencing more flooding, and that seas could rise by between 1 and 4 feet by the year 2100, and perhaps even more than that if Antarctica proves to be unstable, as is feared. The report says that a rise of over eight feet is “physically possible” with high levels of greenhouse-gas emissions but that there's no way right now to predict how likely it is to happen. When it comes to rapidly escalating levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the report states, “there is no climate analog for this century at any time in at least the last 50 million years.” Most striking, perhaps, the report warns of the unpredictable — changes that scientists cannot foresee that could involve tipping points or fast changes in the climate system. These could switch the climate into “new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.” Some members of the scientific community had speculated that the administration might refuse to publish the report or might alter its conclusions. During the George W. Bush administration, a senior official at the White House Council on Environmental Quality edited aspects of some government science reports. Yet multiple experts, as well as some administration officials and federal scientists, said Trump political appointees did not change the special report's scientific conclusions. While some edits have been made to its final version — for instance, omitting or softening some references to the Paris climate agreement — those were focused on policy. “I'm quite confident to say there has been no political interference in the scientific messages from this report,” David Fahey, an atmospheric scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and a lead author of the study, told reporters on Friday. “Whatever fears we had weren't realized…. This report says what the scientists want it to say.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1000w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/energy-environment/201711/Images/EU_UN_Climate_28691-394ef.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_2500w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/energy-environment/201711/Images/EU_UN_Climate_28691-394ef.jpg) A senior administration official, who asked for anonymity because the process is still underway, said in an interview that top Trump officials decided to put out the assessment without changing the findings of its contributors even if some appointees may have different views. Glynis Lough, who is deputy director of the food and environment program at the Union of Concerned Scientists and had served as chief of staff for the National Climate Assessment at the U.S. Global Change Research Program until mid-2016, said in an interview that the changes made by government officials to the latest report “are consistent with the types of changes that were made in the previous administration for the 2014 National Climate Assessment, to avoid policy prescriptiveness.” Perhaps no agency under Trump has tried to downplay and undermine climate science more than the EPA. Most recently, political appointees at the EPA instructed two agency scientists and one contractor not to speak as planned at a scientific conference in Rhode Island (http://nbep.org/the-state-of-our-watershed). The conference marked the culmination of a three-year report on the status of Narragansett Bay, New England's largest estuary, in which climate change featured prominently. The EPA also has altered parts of its website containing detailed climate data and scientific information. As part of that overhaul, in April the agency took down pages that had existed for years and contained a wealth of information on the scientific causes of global warming, its consequences and ways for communities to mitigate or adapt. The agency said that it was simply making changes to better reflect the new administration's priorities and that any pages taken down would be archived. Pruitt has repeatedly advocated for the creation of a government-wide “red team/blue team” exercise, in which a group of outside critics would challenge the validity of mainstream scientific conclusions around climate change. Other departments have also removed climate-change documents online: The Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, for example, no longer provides access to documents (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/under-trump-inconvenient-data-is-being-sidelined/2017/05/14/3ae22c28-3106-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html) assessing the danger that future warming poses to deserts in the Southwest. And when U.S. Geological Survey scientists working with international researchers published an article in the journal Nature (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-13165-x) evaluating how climate change and human population growth would affect where rain-fed agriculture could thrive, the USGS published a news release that omitted the words “climate change” altogether (https://www.usgs.gov/news/future-temperature-and-soil-moisture-may-alter-location-agricultural-regions). The Agriculture Department's climate hubs (https://www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov), however, remain freely available online. And researchers at the U.S. Forest Service have continued to publish papers this year (https://www.fs.fed.us/rmrs/research-topics/climate-change/publications) on how climate change is affecting wildfires, wetlands and aquatic habitat across the country. The climate science report is already coming under fire from some of the administration's allies. The day before it was published, Steven Koonin, a New York University physicist who has met with Pruitt and advocated for the “red team/blue team” exercise, pre-emptively criticized the document (https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deceptive-new-report-on-climate-1509660882) in The Wall Street Journal, calling it “deceptive”. Koonin argued that the report “ominously notes that while global sea level rose an average 0.05 inch a year during most of the 20th century, it has risen at about twice that rate since 1993. But it fails to mention that the rate fluctuated by comparable amounts several times during the 20th century.” But one of the report's authors suggested Koonin is creating a straw man. “The report does not state that the rate since 1993 is the fastest than during any comparable period since 1900 (though in my informal assessment it likely is), which is the non-statement Steve seems to be objecting to,” Kopp countered by email. Still, the line of criticism could be amplified by conservatives in the coming days. Joseph Bast, the chief executive of the Heartland Institute, a think tank that has long challenged many aspects of the science of global warming, also strongly critiqued the report in a statement to The Washington Post on Friday. “This is typical Obama-era political science,” Bast said. “It's all been debunked so many times it's not worth debating anymore. Why are we still wasting taxpayer dollars on green propaganda?” The administration also released, in draft form, the second volume of the National Climate Assessment (https://review.globalchange.gov), which looks at regional impacts across the United States. This document is available for public comment and will begin a peer review process, with final publication expected in late 2018. Already, however, it is possible to discern some of what it will conclude. For instance, a peer-reviewed EPA technical document (https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_Report.cfm?dirEntryId=335095) released to inform the assessment finds that the monetary costs of climate change in the United States could be dramatic. That document, dubbed the Climate Change Impacts and Risk Analysis, finds that high temperatures could lead to the loss per year of “almost 1.9 billion labor hours across the national workforce” by 2090. That would mean $160 billion annually in lost income to workers. With high levels of warming, coastal property damage in 2090 could total $120 billion annually, and deaths from temperature extremes could reach 9,300 per year, or in monetized terms, $140 billion annually in damage. Additional tens of billions annually could occur in the form of damage to roads, rail lines and electrical infrastructure, the report finds. This could all be lessened considerably, the report notes, if warming is held to lower levels. • Jason Samenow contributed to this report. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. • Juliet Eilperin is The Washington Post's senior national affairs correspondent, covering how the new administration is transforming a range of U.S. policies and the federal government itself. She is the author of two books — one on sharks (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0307386805), and another on Congress (https://www.amazon.com/dp/product/0742551199), not to be confused with each other — and has worked for The Post since 1998. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Government's dire climate change report blames humans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/67fbb7b0-c0f3-11e7-9294-705f80164f6e_video.html) • VIDEO: Does the Trump administration believe in climate change? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/d2b9d6a2-0511-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_video.html) • VIDEO: Floods are getting worse and more frequent. Here's why. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/50111a34-3028-11e7-a335-fa0ae1940305_video.html) • Scott Pruitt blocks scientists with EPA grants from serving as agency advisers (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/scott-pruitt-blocks-scientists-with-epa-funding-from-serving-as-agency-advisers/2017/10/31/959d91ac-be5a-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html) • White House reviewing new report that finds strong link between climate change, human activity (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/new-federal-report-finds-strong-link-between-climate-change-human-activity/2017/08/07/583283d2-7bdd-11e7-9d08-b79f191668ed_story.html) • EPA removes climate pages from public view after two decades (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/04/28/epa-website-removes-climate-science-site-from-public-view-after-two-decades) • Obama left Trump a major climate-change report — and independent scientists just said it's accurate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/15/obama-left-trump-a-major-climate-change-report-and-independent-scientists-just-said-its-accurate) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 06, 2017, 12:22:06 pm CONCLUSIONS
Steve Koonin, Under Secretary for Science during President Obama’s first term, also finds the Report misleading, writing in an article for the Wall Street Journal: The world’s response to climate changing under natural and human influences is best founded upon a complete portrayal of the science. The U.S. government’s Climate Science Special Report, to be released Friday, does not provide that foundation. Instead, it reinforces alarm with incomplete information and highlights the need for more-rigorous review of climate assessments. A team of some 30 authors chartered by the U.S. Global Change Research Program began work in spring 2016 on the report, “designed to be an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change.” An early draft was released for public comment in January and reviewed by the National Academies this spring. I, together with thousands of other scientists, had the opportunity to scrutinize and discuss the final draft when it was publicized in August by the New York Times . While much is right in the report, it is misleading in more than a few important places. One notable example of alarm-raising is the description of sea-level rise, one of the greatest climate concerns. The report ominously notes that while global sea level rose an average 0.05 inch a year during most of the 20th century, it has risen at about twice that rate since 1993. But it fails to mention that the rate fluctuated by comparable amounts several times during the 20th century. The same research papers the report cites show that recent rates are statistically indistinguishable from peak rates earlier in the 20th century, when human influences on the climate were much smaller. The report thus misleads by omission. This isn’t the only example of highlighting a recent trend but failing to place it in complete historical context. The report’s executive summary declares that U.S. heat waves have become more common since the mid-1960s, although acknowledging the 1930s Dust Bowl as the peak period for extreme heat. Yet buried deep in the report is a figure showing that heat waves are no more frequent today than in 1900. Such data misrepresentations violate basic scientific norms. In his celebrated 1974 “Cargo Cult” lecture, the late Richard Feynman admonished scientists to discuss objectively all the relevant evidence, even that which does not support the narrative. That’s the difference between science and advocacy. These deficiencies in the new climate report are typical of many others that set the report’s tone. Consider the different perception that results from “sea level is rising no more rapidly than it did in 1940” instead of “sea level rise has accelerated in recent decades,” or from “heat waves are no more common now than they were in 1900” versus “heat waves have become more frequent since 1960.” Both statements in each pair are true, but each alone fails to tell the full story. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 06:45:11 pm Who Is Qualified To Be A Climate Spokesperson?
Published on May 4, 2017 Written by Duane Thresher PhD, Climate Expert It all started with Al Gore. Coming off a gig as Vice President, an ignoble job to begin with, to the most embarrassing President in US history, Bill Clinton, he then proceeded to lose the Presidential election to a political lightweight, George W. Bush. After that Gore was desperate to be taken seriously but wondered how. Science was his solution. And “global warming” (see terminology note at bottom) was a hot topic at the time (no pun intended). It didn’t matter that he did badly in the two “science for poets” courses he took in college or that he didn’t even take any math courses there. How could this happen? Because by nature most scientists hate talking to the public and anyone who wants to speak for them is welcome to do so. No qualifications necessary and no restrictions on what you say. If you’re famous, that’s even better since it makes getting funded and published so much less time-consuming. This is truly the only scientific consensus there is. Among themselves scientists agree about nothing else. By the way, “most scientists” includes me. I went into climate science just because I was very interested in chaos theory, modeling on supercomputers, and the role of climate in history and pre-history, which are all important parts of climate science. I just wanted to be paid for studying what I was interested in and be left alone. Nothing noble about it. More about me later. Once Gore had revitalized his failing entertainment career with the global warming saga “An Inconvenient Truth” (inspired by actual events!) and a Nobel Peace Prize (not a Nobel Science Prize!) every other failing entertainer wanted to use global warming to revitalize their careers. Ivanka Trump has promoted as a spokesman for global warming Leonardo DiCaprio, who has pretended to know a lot about the subject. Ivanka Trump is well-educated, but not in any STEM field (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). DiCaprio is a high school dropout. More recently, and getting to failing entertainer climate spokespeople with at least some sort of science background, there is Bill Nye, the Science Guy. Nye actually has a BS in mechanical engineering and worked for a time as a Boeing engineer. However, after winning a Steve Martin look-alike contest (no joke) he found that he was more interested in, and better at, standup comedy than engineering. You could argue that at least Nye has done some good for children’s science education, although my wife, also a climate scientist, and I would argue that he has done more harm than good. Learning science and math — they have to go together — is not usually the fun Nye misleads children to expect them to be. It’s hard work over many years and children have to have some inner drive to do it and become good scientists. Otherwise, as has occurred, you have to lower the standards to become a scientist, often replacing them with political ideology requirements, and drive out some of the good ones. (Plus I always thought Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker on The Muppet Show had cooler experiments and were much funnier than Nye.) But you can’t convincingly argue that Bill Nye knows enough about climate science to be a credible spokesperson for it. And you would have to agree that it would be better to have an actual climate scientist as a climate spokesperson. Unfortunately, that leads back to the reality that by nature most scientists hate talking to the public … with some exceptions. Dr. James Hansen is the father of global warming. Given his tactics he is sometimes called the godfather of global warming. On June 23, 1988 he made history by convincingly testifying before Congress about the dangers of global warming. Why convincingly? Because, as luck would have it, on June 23, 1988 in Washington DC they were in the middle of a heat wave. Similar heat waves had been seen there once in a while in the 200 years before and in the years since but people have bad weather memories so this one seemed significant. It was more than just luck though: the global warming alarmists in Congress who had called Hansen scheduled him to testify during the heat wave and turned the air conditioning off that day. Hansen got a BA in Physics and Math, an MS in Astronomy, and a PhD in Physics — no climate or even earth science degrees — from the relatively obscure University of Iowa. Earth scientists tend to be weak in math and physics and can be cowed by those with degrees in them from any college. For most of his career Hansen was the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, near Columbia University and over Tom’s Restaurant from the comedy Seinfeld. In 1988 he was 47 years old and his work before then in his own field was not going to win him any Nobel Science Prizes. He became famous after he testified about global warming. Dr. Gavin Schmidt is the global warming entertainer, being a media interview favorite, and is the current head of NASA GISS, having been anointed by Hansen. He has a BA in Math from Jesus College Oxford and a PhD in Math from University College London. He has no climate or even earth science degrees. As of 2004 Schmidt was still a British citizen and he may still be one. After 9/11 he was barred from using the NASA supercomputers until, as a foreigner, he had a security clearance background check done. Interestingly for the head of NASA GISS, as a foreigner he would not be eligible for some government grants, which require US citizenship. Not to mention that global warming has been touted as a national security issue. Schmidt is a media interview favorite because he is quite personable — as long as you admit he is smarter than you — and enjoys being an entertainer. For example, he’s a juggler. I’ve been with him juggling in public and he’s quite good. One of Schmidt’s favorite sayings is “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”. This doesn’t seem to be applied to global warming though. So who am I? I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from MIT and NASA, an MS in Atmospheric Science from the University of Arizona and NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) and a PhD in Earth & Environmental Sciences from Columbia University and NASA GISS. I was at NASA GISS while Dr. James Hansen was its head and I worked closely with Dr. Gavin Schmidt (I’d say we were friends). I am a coauthor with both on several publications. My graduate and postdoc work was in climate modeling (on supercomputers) AND climate proxies (records of past climate). This is unusual breadth for a climate scientist. I was teased by my climate modeller colleagues about so much hands-on work with climate proxies (e.g., tree rings and ocean sediment cores) and was considered askance by my climate proxy colleagues. I am not particularly well-published. I resisted publishing a lot of little papers (“islands of minutiae in a sea of trivia”) and my few big papers were in opposition to climate dogma so were unpublishable. A few years ago I became so disgusted with what climate science had become I quit. It wasn’t until Trump was elected that I decided to speak out. It would have been pointless before then. If I had stayed in climate science and spoke out people would have said that if I thought climate science was so terrible why did I stay and take the money? When I quit I was no longer a “working climate scientist” and my credibility is attacked that way. I created a website, www.RealClimatologists.org, to state simply why global warming is not irrefutable. Religious dogma is irrefutable, not science. Science is by design refutable. (For nitpickers, interchange “refutable” with “falsifiable”.) Labeling global warming skeptics as climate change deniers by analogy to Holocaust deniers is evil itself. Recently I sent an open letter to President Trump about his daughter and climate change, which got quite a bit of press. This letter is available at www.RealClimatologists.org. I am now an IT consultant, specializing in IT security, partly because my daughter’s medical records were lost to hackers not once but twice by two IT-incompetent health insurance organizations. Despite appeals the US Government did nothing about this (I thus have my own reasons for not liking FBI’s Comey). I don’t get paid by the oil companies to question global warming, although I really don’t see anything wrong with that. Global warming alarmists have been funded by the taxpayers for years. In fact I even wonder if James Hansen was forced out of NASA GISS for violations of the Hatch Act, which forbids government officials from spending government time and money on political activities. I’ll be writing more about climate and IT incompetence. Note: The term “global warming” got a bad reputation so it was changed to “climate change”. I refuse to be part of this reputation repair so I refer to it by its original meaningful name. ***** Dr. Duane Thresher is a climate expert who has done postdoctoral research on climate proxy modeling at University of Alaska and the Alfred Wegener Institute, Germany. He holds a PhD in Earth & Environmental Sciences from Columbia University, an MS in Atmospheric Science from the University of Arizona, and a BS, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 07, 2017, 07:00:46 pm A photograph gallery which is well worth opening and viewing: • A photographer selects images that visualize the impact of climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-sight/wp/2017/11/03/a-photographer-selects-images-that-visualize-the-impact-of-climate-change) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/in-sight/wp-content/uploads/sites/35/2017/11/PEP004.jpg&w=1000) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/in-sight/wp-content/uploads/sites/35/2017/11/PEP004.jpg&w=1484) Residents protect their homes from rising sea levels with sandbags at Betio. Due to rising sea levels and a higher frequency of storms, the reef is not the natural protection that it used to be. Betio island is the most populated part of Tarawa, and due to sea water intrusion and the large population, there is a serious lack of drinking water and agricultural land. — Photograph: Kadir van Lohuizen/The New York Times. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 07:09:32 pm https://youtu.be/52Mx0_8YEtg
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 07, 2017, 07:13:24 pm Hahaha.....Mr Selfish Twat (I don't give a shit about my grandchildren and my great-grandchildren and my great-great-grandchildren) is showing his selfish narcissistic tendencies again by posting a video clip. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 08:43:23 pm It can easily be shown that the selfish (not to mention delusional) twats who care least about the poor and "their grandchildren" are those deluded souls who believe toy power solutions like wind and solar can power civilisation. Deindustrialising through intermittent and expensive power generation WILL cause the most harm.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 08:44:58 pm Watch the movie then report back to me. Best not to watch it stoned 😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 08:53:08 pm You are like a fundy religious fanatic who says people will go to hell for not believing. Snap out of it and start looking into this stuff for yourself.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 07, 2017, 09:00:05 pm Disclaimer. One ocean scientist in the movie (Wunch) subsequently said he was misquoted (perhaps he was, or perhaps he was scared of being smeared and rolled by the climate propaganda machine)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 07, 2017, 09:06:44 pm WOW.....four posts (all full of self-serving bullshit) one after another. I guess this means that after each post, you woke up to the fact that you were posting shit, so tried to cover it up by chucking in another post. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 08, 2017, 08:50:02 am Yeah yeah... Watch the movie then report back to me. Best not to watch it stoned 😀
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 08, 2017, 11:50:34 am from The Washington Post.... As Syria embraces Paris climate deal, it's the United States against the world About 200 other countries have signed onto the agreement. Now, only one country has disavowed it. By BRADY DENNIS | 1:30PM EST - Tuesday, November 07, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_900w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/03/Health-Environment-Science/Images/Italy_US_Climate_95740-48acb-1193.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/03/Health-Environment-Science/Images/Italy_US_Climate_95740-48acb-1193.jpg) California Governor Jerry Brown, in Rome before the Bonn climate meeting, is one of the most prominent U.S. delegates. — Photograph: Alessandra Tarantino/Associated Press. PRESIDENT TRUMP has put America at odds with the rest of the world, literally, when it comes to the goal of combating climate change. At an international climate conference in Bonn on Tuesday, Syria announced its plans to join the Paris climate accord — an agreement forged in 2015 for nations to band together to slash global carbon emissions. That now leaves the United States as the only country to disavow the deal, after Trump this year announced intentions to withdraw from the agreement (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-to-announce-us-will-exit-paris-climate-deal/2017/06/01/fbcb0196-46da-11e7-bcde-624ad94170ab_story.html). According to news reports and people who were present on Tuesday, the Syrian delegation to the talks announced the war-torn country's intention to ratify the Paris agreement (https://unfccc.cloud.streamworld.de/webcast/ad-hoc-working-group-on-the-paris-agreement-apa). Separately, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency (http://sana.sy/en/?p=116320), lawmakers in Damascus last month “approved a draft law on ratifying Syria's accession to the Paris Climate Agreement.” The move comes after the only other holdout, Nicaragua, announced plans to join the Paris agreement in September (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/10/24/not-being-part-of-the-paris-climate-deal-something-only-the-u-s-and-syria-agree-on/?utm_term=.b2a0a158485c). Nicaragua initially had refused to join the agreement in 2015 because its leaders felt the accord did not go far enough in compelling nations to reduce their carbon emissions. But in joining the deal this fall, the country's president noted that it is the “only instrument we have” to unite the world around the goal of staving off the most catastrophic effects of global warming. “They said at the plenary that they will join Paris agreement,” said Safa' Al Jayoussi, executive director of IndyACT, a nongovernmental organization working on climate change policies in the Arab world, of Syria. “It only shows how urgent is the climate change solution for us in the region, with the severe drought that is hitting,” she said. Syria's decision to join the accord brought another round of rebukes for the Trump administration. “As if it wasn't already crystal clear, every single other country in the world is moving forward together to tackle the climate crisis, while Donald Trump's has isolated the United States on the world stage in an embarrassing and dangerous position,” Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, said in a statement. Trump in June announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the climate agreement, an extraordinary move that baffled American allies and threatened to undermine global efforts to slow the warming of the Earth's atmosphere. Trump's decision drew swift, sharp condemnation from foreign leaders, environmental groups and corporate titans, who argued that the U.S. exit from the Paris accord would represent a failure of American leadership in the face of irrefutable scientific evidence. Trump, who has labeled climate change a “hoax” and appointed climate change skeptics to top administration posts (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/04/pruitts-new-science-advisers-add-more-industry-experts-conservatives-to-the-mix), argued the Paris agreement and Obama-era regulations to curb emissions were crippling businesses and killing jobs. “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” Trump proclaimed at the time. He added that he would consider rejoining the deal if the United States could re-enter on more favorable terms. Other countries rejected that notion, saying individual countries already have the freedom to alter their pledges to reduce emissions. The U.S. withdrawal from the Paris agreement cannot actually be finalized until near the end of Trump's term because of the legal structure and language of the accord. But with the world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases essentially walking away from the pact, scientists and policymakers have said it would be nearly impossible for the world to realize its goal of limiting global warming to below a 2-degree Celsius (3.6-degree Fahrenheit) rise above pre-industrial temperatures. The withdrawal also marked a staggering reversal from the previous administration. President Barack Obama considered the accord a signature and critical diplomatic achievement (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/10/05/obama-hails-historic-ratification-of-paris-climate-agreement), and during his second term made it a top priority to persuade other world leaders to embrace the deal. • Chris Mooney contributed to this report. • Brady Dennis is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The U.S. will be the only country not part of the Paris climate agreement (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/paris-climate-agreement-withdrawal) • The world shrugs at Trump as global climate meeting begins in Bonn (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-world-shrugs-at-trump-as-global-climate-meeting-begins-in-bonn/2017/11/03/fd2029d6-bf4d-11e7-8444-a0d4f04b89eb_story.html) • VIDEO: Trump withdraws the U.S. from the Paris accord (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/b5c46aa4-46f6-11e7-8de1-cec59a9bf4b1_video.html) • Why Nicaragua and Syria didn't join the Paris climate accord (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/05/31/why-nicaragua-and-syria-didnt-join-the-paris-climate-accord) • As the U.S. leaves Paris climate accord, some see shifts in global leadership (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/as-the-us-leaves-paris-climate-accord-some-see-shifts-in-global-leadership/2017/06/01/4c916554-4634-11e7-a196-a1bb629f64cb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/07/as-syria-embraces-paris-climate-deal-its-the-united-states-against-the-world (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/07/as-syria-embraces-paris-climate-deal-its-the-united-states-against-the-world) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 08, 2017, 11:53:47 am So there we have it.....all of the countries of the world.....and one PARIAH, GREEDY, SELFISH COUNTRY holding out. Time for the climate talks to include TRADE SANCTIONS against the hold-out. A 1,000% tariff on ALL products imported from any country which refuses to ratify the agreement should do the trick. Make an exception for individual states of any federal country if those individual states ratify the agreement. Individual states such as California, Oregon and Washington, as well as the enlightened north-eastern states should be rewarded for their enlightened attitudes towards doing the right thing at the same time as the rest of the United States of America is severely punished for being the arseholes of the planet. And the rest of the world should cancel the citizenship of, and deport to America those clowns amongst them who are anit-warmalists and climate-change-deniers. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 08, 2017, 04:59:14 pm Are you aware that if all industrial activity halted, it would make fuck all difference to the climate?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 12, 2017, 12:41:03 pm https://youtu.be/tbGZo8D5gnI
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 12, 2017, 01:03:02 pm https://youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 12, 2017, 01:12:25 pm The ENTIRE WORLD versus Donald Trump. That's how it is now. And guess what? California and many other American states and cities have given Trump the one-finger salute and are enacting policies to mitigate against greenhouse gases. So American car manufacturers who have lobbied Trump to axe federal emissions standards will suddenly find their cars will be banned from sale in 20 American states. Haw haw haw.....that will get Trump frothing at the mouth and going on a twitter masturbation session, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 12, 2017, 01:13:47 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... U.S. cities, states defy Trump, still back Paris climate deal By ERIK KIRACHBAUM | 3:05PM PST - Saturday, November 11, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a077435/turbine/la-1510437935-pwfjh8b6hr-snap-image/1000) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a077435/turbine/la-1510437935-pwfjh8b6hr-snap-image) California Governor Jerry Brown speaks in the U.S. Climate Action Center at the COP 23 Climate Change Conference on Saturday in Bonn, Germany. — Photograph: Martin Meissner/Associated Press. DETERMINED TO demonstrate that large numbers of Americans remain committed to fighting climate change, a loose alliance of cities, states, companies and universities from across the United States gathered on the fringes of a United Nations climate conference in Bonn on Saturday to pledge their support for the Paris agreement. California Governor Jerry Brown, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore were among the leaders of the U.S. coalition during a series of speeches and panel discussions in a grand pavilion named the “U.S. Climate Action Center”. It was set up just outside the building where the U.N. climate conference is taking place. The American political and business figures told the audience that states, cities and businesses have real power that they can leverage in the fight against climate change even though the federal government wants to bail out. “It is important for the world to know — the American government may have pulled out of the Paris agreement, but the American people are committed to its goals, and there is nothing Washington can do to stop us,” Bloomberg told the audience in the packed tent. He noted that the alliance of 20 states, 110 cities and 1,400 businesses would be the world's third-largest economy and represented about half of the U.S. economy. President Trump announced in June that the United States will withdraw from the 2015 Paris agreement at the first possible date in 2020, arguing it was detrimental to U.S. business. Trump has expressed doubt about climate change, questioning how much human activity has contributed. The Trump administration is represented at the Bonn talks of nearly 200 nations by a senior diplomat but has taken a low-key approach — in stark contrast to the attention-grabbing U.S. Climate Action Center. Brown, who is on a whirlwind 10-day trip to four countries promoting climate change and California, was one of the featured speakers on Saturday that faced dozens of hecklers in the crowd who demanded his state do even more to fight pollution, stop fracking and oil drilling, and slow global warming. After some good-natured jousting with the green activists, Brown praised them for their dissent and announced he would “reframe my speech”. He also told them he was a former cheerleader in college and that he liked their rallying cry “We're still in” so much that he led the whole audience in a cheering: “We're still in, we're still in”. “Only in California can we stimulate this kind of opposition with strong advocates on all sides — [even though] we're doing more than anyone else,” Brown said. “This is one of the reasons why California has the most aggressive goals: no matter what we do, we're being challenged to do more, and I agree with that. We'll do a lot more.” Brown then diverted from the rest of his planned “America's Pledge” speech to say: “California is the most aggressive, most far-reaching climate action state in the country and in the Western Hemisphere. Is it enough? No. Do we have a lot of pollutants? Yes. Do we have 32 million cars driving 335 billion miles every year? Yes. Are we going to stop them today? No. Are we going to stop them in time? Yes, if America's pledge is picked up by the rest of the country and rest of the world. If we can take some of that noise and bottle it into energy, we'll get the job done. America, we're here, we're in and we're not going away.” Bloomberg and Brown appeared along with Fiji Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who presiding over the U.N. conference at its climate headquarters in Bonn that runs until Friday. The talks are focused on designing a detailed set of rules to help guide forward the 2015 Paris climate agreement that established a goal of ending the fossil-fuel era by the end of the century. Earlier on Saturday, Senator Edward J. Markey (Democrat-Massachusetts) promised the United States would remain committed to its climate change goals. “We are here in Bonn to say we are not saying ‘bon voyage to our commitment on climate’,” he said. • Erik Kirschbaum is a correspondent for the Reuters International News Agency, a non-fiction author, a long-time Springsteen fan, and an unabashed crusader for renewable energy. He has written about topics anywhere from entertainment to climate change in over 20 countries for many news organisations including the Los Angeles Times. He lives in Berlin. http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-germany-climate-change-conference-20171111-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-germany-climate-change-conference-20171111-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 13, 2017, 08:37:09 pm Except California and other hipster States AREN'T "mitigating against greenhouse gases". They are simply wasting huge amounts of other people's money on ineffective greenwash schemes that give the true believers a hard on but actually do nothing to the climate.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 12:34:35 pm Ah, yes.....duck-shove and use every tactic to avoid dealing with the REAL issue, which is global warming causing climate change with negative effects, such as increasing number and increasing severity of storms. Stick the head in the sand after first screwing the eyes tightly shut and blocking the ears. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 06:24:47 pm Scientists don't actually know whether co2 will cause more severe storms, or less syorms, or for all intents and purposes be completely irrelevent to storm severity.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:43:07 pm Actually, REAL climate scientists DO know. It's only the “fake scientists” quoted by “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” who don't know because they are FAKE SCIENTISTS for the DESPERATE. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 06:43:51 pm ALL CO2 in the atmosphere is only .04% of the atmosphere.
97% of that total atmospheric CO2 came from natural sources. So, only .0012% of the atmosphere is CO2 put there by human activity. AND the "green house effect" of CO2 doesn't just keep increasing heat as co2 increases. It's effect becomes logarithmically less. Think of painting a raw wood barn red. The first coat adds a red effect. Adding more coats of red paint... you just get the same same...red. You can't make it any more red. AND ancient air bubbles trapped in ice cores show that as the earth warms, more co2 is released, NOT the other way around.😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:45:49 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:46:44 pm CLICK HERE (https://climateclock.net) and learn something. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 06:47:06 pm The loony left excuse of "fake scientists" is pure bullshit. Key sceptical scientists are highly credentialed experts in their field.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:47:45 pm from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... Insurers warn climate change will hit policy prices and make some properties uninsurable By GED CANN | 3:35PM - Sunday, 12 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/b/v/x/3/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/b/v/x/3/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) Otaki resident Tanja Gerritsen, pictured with daughter Kate Osborne, sits on sandbags which permanently decorate her backyard. — Photograph: Maarten Holl. HOMEOWNERS could find their insurance price doubling or their homes become uninsurable as climate change takes hold. Bryce Davies, general manager corporate relations for insurance giant IAG, says the shift towards evaluating properties for their individual climate-change risk has already began, meaning homeowners with properties in flood plains and beachfronts could expect increases. In the past risks were calculated across communities, with relative hazards spread across many households, meaning insurance costs were effectively lower for those most exposed. “We know it's going to rain more in some places, we know there will be flooding in some locations, we know the sea level is going to rise and places are going to get drier — those all have impacts on the things that we insure.” “If they get worse the cost to recover gets higher and therefore the premiums people pay will go up,” Davies said. “As these things become more certain, our appetite to offer insurance reduces. We insure people against risks — not certainties.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/t/p/h/9/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/t/p/h/9/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) Bryce Davies, general manager corporate relations at IAG. Davies said there were moral considerations to be addressed, because a totally individual risk-based approach risked making insurance unaffordable for some homeowners, leaving them vulnerable. Tanja Gerritsen's Otaki home has been flooded three times in the past two years, with the latest event after a one-in-eight-year flood of the Otaki River on February 3rd. After that flood, the Rangiuru Road resident chose not to notify her insurer for fear her premiums would skyrocket or that she'd be declined. “I thought if I rung again they wouldn't insure me. The third time it was just the garage and the bedroom and I just ripped the carpet up myself and saved as much as I could.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/b/v/x/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/b/v/x/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) Firemen inspect Tanja Gerritsen homes after a flood at her home in the past two years. Gerritsen said the prospect of her home being uninsurable was “terrifying”. “It would mean my house becomes un-sellable, and that's all my equity in my house gone. That's my retirement funding as well.” Davies said the majority of properties currently were insurable, but exceptions were emerging. “On the foreshore of Haumoana [Hawke's Bay] when, the waves are coming into the lounge, that's a very obvious example of where we possibly don't insure people,” he said. “There are some locations where we just ask more questions, because we want to understand the risk more, and sometimes we will tailor what we offer to people because of that risk.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/b/w/n/d/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/b/w/n/d/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) The day after ex-tropical Cyclone Pam passed by Hawke's Bay, coastal areas like Haumoana, Te Awanga and Clifton copped a battering. — Photograph: Clinton Llewellyn. Changes to insurance contracts would be gradual and localised, but would happen. Reports from former environment commissioner Jan Wright had helped inform IAG's approach, Davies said, including a report released in March last year which estimated a 50cm high-tide rise would affect 9,000 homes and an additional 4,000 buildings. A separate Ministry for the Environment report estimated $19b of property was threatened by increased flooding and coastal erosion. Davies sits on the government's Climate Change Adaptation Technical Working Group. Speaking at a recent Climate Change and Business conference, Davies said climate changes impact was already inevitable, even if greenhouse gas emissions were cut rapidly. “We know that there's another 30 centimetres of sea level rise to come,” he said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/b/r/h/o/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/b/r/h/o/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtkx7.png/1510459011857.jpg) Onlookers above Westmorland were moved on by police as flames leapt out of a large pine plantation behind Worsleys Road properties consumed by the huge fire on the Port Hills. — Photograph: Joseph Johnson. This year is already the most expensive year on record for insurance claims related to significant weather events, according to the Insurance Council. Chief executive Tim Grafton said 2017 had been marred by the Port Hills fires in February, the Tasman tempest flooding in March and the remnants of two cyclones in April, which triggered Edgecumbe's flooding and evacuation. “These large-scale events combined with other flooding in most other months of the year brings the total for significant weather events for 2017 to $230 million, which now surpasses the year of the Wahine storm in 1968.” __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Climate change predicted to take big toll on Kiwis' mental and physical health (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98161110) • Some New Zealand climate change impacts may already be irreversible (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081) https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98797867 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98797867) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 06:52:08 pm Corporate whores who mindlessly run to be seen fawning before the alter of political correctness shouldn't be seen as oracles of rationality.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:52:41 pm from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... Insurance likely to become a problem for homes on the edge of Wellington Harbour By NICHOLAS BOYACK | 2:24PM - Monday, 13 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) Days Bay resident Sarah Gilbert checks out the weather in a 2013 storm. Katherine Mansfield's holiday beach house was badly damaged during the storm. Getting insurance could become a major problem for residents of the Lower Hutt suburb of Eastbourne. OBTAINING INSURANCE is likely to become increasingly difficult for home-owners in the Lower Hutt suburb of Eastbourne, with Wellington Harbour rising due to climate change. Insurer IAG this week said in future properties would be assessed in terms of their individual climate change risk. Beach-front properties at risk of flooding should expect to see their premiums rise, the company warned. Eastbourne Community Board chair Virginia Horrocks said a resident recently contacted her after an insurance company declined to insure her house. It is a situation she predicted that would only become more common. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) Debris covered the footpath and road at York Bay, after a storm in July. — Photograph: Kevin Stent. Horrocks, who stood for the Greens in Hutt South, is on a council advisory group looking at climate change. Next year, she is planning meetings with local residents to look at the impact on individual bays. Lowry Bay was likely to have the biggest problem. Residents already had to deal with debris and waves on the road in storms, and Horrocks said the situation could only get worse. Lowry Bay Residents Association President David Miller wrote to the Hutt City Council in July calling for action. “This specific concern has arisen as a result of the last storm in which at several points along the Eastern bays, particularly in Lowry Bay, waves were quite deep across the road, stones and logs washed around and accumulated on the road, and debris from the waves travelled up to 18 metres into residential properties.” Miller acknowledged that finding a solution was likely to be technically difficult. “However, we think it is time that the Hutt City Council began considering options with a view to implementing a long-term and effective road and property protection solution.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/b/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/b/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) Waves breaking over the road in Lowry Bay. — Photograph: Nicholas Boyack. In July, council policy manager Wendy Moore told councillors that climate change and the resulting rise in sea level, would have a major impact on Hutt City. It was time to stop talking and instead focus on finding ways to mitigate the impact, she said in a memo. “The level of uncertainty about the speed of climate change and sea level rise has resulted in people using this uncertainty as a reason for inaction. The longer the climate discourse is caught up in arguing about uncertainty, the less likely it is that the required actions will take place.” Climate change sceptics had successfully spread doubt, she said. “This means it is difficult for councils to achieve a level of community consensus on how to approach the risk and resilience issues associated with climate change and sea level rise.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/f/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/6/n/f/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mtyq1.png/1510549781788.jpg) High tide at Point Howard in a recent storm. The council is appointing a senior manager who will be responsible for long-term climate change planning. Insurance companies were already reluctant to provide cover in low lying areas such as Eastbourne and Petone, which faced the threat of rising sea levels and tsunamis, Moore said. Former community board chair and civil engineer Derek Wilshere has been observing coastal changes in Eastbourne since 1949. He worked for the regional council as a flood consultant and said the rise in sea level was already having a major impact. Although the road was under threat, he predicted it would be 50 years before houses are threatened. • In December 2015 the Parliamentary commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright released a report Preparing New Zealand for Rising Seas. It predicted an increase in sea level of 20-35cm by 2050 for Wellington Harbour. • Preparing New Zealand for rising seas: Certainty and Uncertainty (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/preparing-new-zealand-for-rising-seas-certainty-and-uncertainty) __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Insurers warning to householders on climate change (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98797867) • 25,000 Christchurch homes could be swamped by sea (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/98756380) • Taking steps to save the planet (http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/98426284) https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/98815753 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/98815753) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 06:58:39 pm from The Washington Post.... Fossil fuel emissions will reach an all-time high in 2017, scientists say — dashing hopes of progress Scientists thought global carbon emissions had flatlined. No such luck. By CHRIS MOONEY | 3:30AM EST - Monday, November 13, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-08/Getty/AFP_U37LQ.jpg&w=999) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-08/Getty/AFP_U37LQ.jpg&w=1484) Visitors walk past a sphere featuring national flags at India's pavilion last week during the COP23 U.N. Climate Change Conference in Bonn, Germany. — Photograph: Patrik Stollarz/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. GLOBAL CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS are projected to rise again in 2017, climate scientists reported on Monday (http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/17/highlights.htm), a troubling development for the environment and a major disappointment for those who had hoped emissions of the climate change-causing gas had at last peaked. The emissions from fossil fuel burning and industrial uses are projected to rise by up to 2 percent in 2017, as well as to rise again in 2018, the scientists told a group of international officials gathered for a United Nations climate conference in Bonn, Germany. Despite global economic growth, total emissions held level from 2014 to 2016 at about 36 billion tons per year, stoking hope among many climate change advocates that emissions had reached an all-time high point and would subsequently begin to decline. But that was not to be, the new analysis suggests. “The temporary hiatus appears to have ended in 2017,” wrote Stanford University's Rob Jackson, who along with colleagues at the Global Carbon Project tracked 2017 emissions to date and projected them forward. “Economic projections suggest further emissions growth in 2018 is likely.” The renewed rise is a troubling development for the global effort to keep atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases below the levels needed to mitigate the worst effects of climate change. The more we emit now, scientists say, the more severe cuts will have to be later. That's because of the very long atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide, which means we can only emit a fixed amount in total if we want to stay within key climate goals. “It's sort of, lose one year now, you have to pick up five years later,” said Glen Peters, one of the study's co-authors and a researcher at the Center for International Climate Research in Oslo. Emissions are forecast to reach around 37 billion tons of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel burning and industrial activity in 2017, said the group, which published the results in the journal Environmental Research Letters (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa9662/meta) and more detailed findings in Earth System Science Data Discussions (https://www.earth-syst-sci-data-discuss.net/essd-2017-123). The renewed increase is driven largely by more fossil fuel burning in China and many other nations. “We've been lucky in the last three years with emissions being flat without any real policy driving it,” Peters said. “If we want to ensure that emissions remain flat we have to put policies in place … and the second step is to start to drive emissions down.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/11/s09_FossilFuel_and_Cement_emissions_1990.png&w=750) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/11/s09_FossilFuel_and_Cement_emissions_1990.png&w=1484) Peters said the 2017 number would be a record high for emissions from fossil fuel burning and industrial uses (such as cement), although carbon emissions from deforestation and land-use changes were actually higher in 2015. The scientists also acknowledge some uncertainty in their estimate, meaning that the 2017 emissions rise could be as low as 1 percent or as high as 3 percent. All in all, the finding is bad news for global climate policy. The Paris agreement, now supported by every nation except for the United States, aims to limit the warming of the planet to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels, and to try to hold warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). But this requires emissions not just to stay flat but to go down — rapidly. “The 2017 emissions data make it crystal clear that urgent and very serious emissions reductions are needed to stop global warming below 2°C, as was unanimously agreed in Paris,” Stefan Rahmstorf, a climate scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, said in an email. Rahmstorf was not involved with the current work. Rahmstorf said there are currently about 600 billion remaining tons of carbon dioxide that can be emitted if the world is to have a good chance of keeping warming considerably below 2 degrees Celsius, and with some 40 billion tons of emissions each year, that leaves just 15 years. “If we start to ramp down emissions from now on we can stretch this budget to last us about 30 years,” he said. “With every year that we wait we will have to stop using fossil energy even earlier.” The rise of global emissions projected for the year 2017 in the current research is attributable to multiple causes. In particular, China's emissions were projected to increase by 3.5 percent in 2017 as the country consumed more of all three of the top fossil fuels — coal, natural gas and oil. China is the single largest emitting country. India, which has been experiencing rapid emissions growth, will pull back to 2 percent growth in 2017 because of economic contraction, the research suggests. Emissions from the United States and European Union are projected to decline 0.4 percent and 0.2 percent, respectively. But emissions for the rest of the globe — which, in total, are even larger than China's — will rise by close to 2 percent, according to the projection. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/11/erlaa9662f3_hr.jpg&w=750) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/11/erlaa9662f3_hr.jpg&w=1484) If the increase continues, what many hoped was a plateau in emissions seen from 2014 to 2016 could come to look more like a pause. During that era, many cited a broad “decoupling” of economic growth and emissions growth, thanks in part to greater energy efficiency and renewable energy. And there's no denying that renewables are continuing to grow around the world – making it hard to know quite what to make of the current emissions rise. “It's too early to say whether it's a long-term trend, or just a one-off little blip,” Peters said. The new results reinforce just how much of the globe's emissions trajectory depends on China, its largest emitter. China took a number of steps to cut back coal emissions in the past three years, notes Joanna Lewis, a Georgetown University professor who studies energy trends in the country. This led to less coal use in the electricity and industrial sectors. “What is less clear is whether these trends can continue,” Lewis said by email. “Reduced plant operation and closures around the country are putting huge pressures on local governments to deal with slowing economic growth and unemployment. Overcapacity in these sectors, and particularly an overbuild of coal plants, means there is pressure to increase coal electricity production, which is often done through the curtailment of renewables. As a result, China's long term CO² emissions trends are unclear at best.” While 37 billion tons of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels and industry represent the lion's share of the globe's emissions, there are also several billion tons of carbon dioxide each year from deforestation and other changes in how humans use land. When it comes to global tree loss, there are also worrying signs (http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/global-tree-cover-loss-rose-51-percent-2016) that it is not abating as hoped. There are also rising emissions of methane (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/29/scientists-find-that-belching-cows-could-solve-a-key-mystery-about-the-atmosphere), a greenhouse gas that is a stronger and faster warming agent, although not nearly as long-lived in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. There is still a debate over where the methane growth is coming from, but much of it could be from animal agriculture. The new findings will be immediately relevant to the proceedings in Bonn, since one part of the agenda involves laying the groundwork for a “facilitative dialogue” (http://unfccc.int/items/10265.php) to take place next year, in which countries will take a hard look at where their emissions are, and where they need to be, to live up to the Paris goals. Higher emissions will, in this context, inevitably mean deeper cuts will be required of participating nations — even as deadlines for avoiding the most severe effects of global warming draw near. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • As Syria embraces Paris climate deal, it's the United States against the world (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/07/as-syria-embraces-paris-climate-deal-its-the-united-states-against-the-world) • The world shrugs at Trump as global climate meeting begins in Bonn (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-world-shrugs-at-trump-as-global-climate-meeting-begins-in-bonn/2017/11/03/fd2029d6-bf4d-11e7-8444-a0d4f04b89eb_story.html) • Scientists may have found a solution to the atmosphere's methane mystery (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/29/scientists-find-that-belching-cows-could-solve-a-key-mystery-about-the-atmosphere) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/fossil-fuel-emissions-projected-to-reach-an-all-time-high-in-2017-dashing-hopes-of-progress (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/fossil-fuel-emissions-projected-to-reach-an-all-time-high-in-2017-dashing-hopes-of-progress) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 07:13:38 pm An all time high...pushing human produced co2 to a whopping .0012% of the total atmosphere 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 07:15:45 pm That's roughly one thousandth of one percent of the atmosphere 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 07:18:19 pm In the cult of climate change, every unprecedented instance of bad weather is a portent of their coming Climate Apocalypse
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 07:20:24 pm Correction: In the cult of climate change, every unremarkable instance of bad weather is a portent of their coming Climate Apocalypse
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 07:25:30 pm from The Washington Post.... Thousands of scientists issue bleak ‘second notice’ to humanity In 1992, scientists warned humanity about a host of impending ecological disasters. A quarter-century later, most of them have gotten worse. By SARAH KAPLAN | 3:14PM EST - Monday, November 13, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/09/02/Health-Environment-Science/Images/1-bluemarble_west1472837891.jpg&w=999) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/09/02/Health-Environment-Science/Images/1-bluemarble_west1472837891.jpg&w=1484) Planet Earth. — Photograph: NASA. IN LATE 1992, 1,700 scientists from around the world issued a dire “warning to humanity” (http://www.ucsusa.org/about/1992-world-scientists.html). They said humans had pushed Earth's ecosystems to their breaking point and were well on the way to ruining the planet. The letter listed environmental impacts like they were biblical plagues — stratospheric ozone depletion, air and water pollution, the collapse of fisheries and loss of soil productivity, deforestation, species loss and catastrophic global climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels. “If not checked,” wrote the scientists, led by particle physicist and Union of Concerned Scientists co-founder Henry Kendall (http://www.ucsusa.org/about/henry-w-kendall.html), “many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know.” But things were only going to get worse. To mark the letter's 25th anniversary, researchers have issued a bracing follow-up. In a communique published on Monday in the journal BioScience (http://scientists.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/sw/files/Ripple_et_al_warning_2017.pdf), more than 15,000 scientists from 184 countries assess the world's latest responses to various environmental threats. Once again, they find us sorely wanting. “Humanity has failed to make sufficient progress in generally solving these foreseen environmental challenges, and alarmingly, most of them are getting far worse,” they write. This letter, spearheaded by Oregon State University ecologist William Ripple, serves as a “second notice,” the authors say: “Soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory.” Global climate change sits atop the new letter's list of planetary threats. Global average temperatures have risen by more than half a degree Celsius since 1992, and annual carbon dioxide emissions (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/fossil-fuel-emissions-projected-to-reach-an-all-time-high-in-2017-dashing-hopes-of-progress) have increased by 62 percent. But it's far from the only problem people face. Access to fresh water has declined, as has the amount of forestland and the number of wild-caught fish (a marker of the health of global fisheries). The number of ocean dead zones has increased. The human population grew by a whopping 2 billion, while the populations of all other mammals, reptiles, amphibians and fish have declined by nearly 30 percent. The lone bright spot exists way up in the stratosphere, where the hole in the planet's protective ozone layer has shrunk to its smallest size since 1988 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/03/the-earths-ozone-hole-is-shrinking-and-is-the-smallest-its-been-since-1988). Scientists credit that progress to the phasing out of chlorofluorocarbons — chemicals once used in refrigerators, air conditioners and aerosol cans that trigger reactions in the atmosphere to break down ozone. “The rapid global decline in ozone depleting substances shows that we can make positive change when we act decisively,” the letter says. The authors offer 13 suggestions for reining in our impact on the planet, including establishing nature reserves, reducing food waste, developing green technologies and establishing economic incentives to shift patterns of consumption. To this end, Ripple and his colleagues have formed a new organization, the Alliance of World Scientists (http://scientists.forestry.oregonstate.edu), aimed at providing a science-based perspective on issues affecting the well-being of people and the planet. “Scientists are in the business of analyzing data and looking at the long-term consequences,” Ripple said in a release. “Those who signed this second warning aren't just raising a false alarm. They are acknowledging the obvious signs that we are heading down an unsustainable path. We are hoping that our paper will ignite a widespread public debate about the global environment and climate.” • Sarah Kaplan is a reporter for Speaking of Science (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science) at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Trump's top environmental pick says she has ‘many questions’ about climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/08/trumps-top-environmental-pick-says-she-has-many-questions-about-climate-change) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/13/thousands-of-scientists-issue-bleak-second-notice-to-humanity (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/13/thousands-of-scientists-issue-bleak-second-notice-to-humanity) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 07:26:57 pm BTW.....I got to post message #1,000 in this thread!! ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 07:55:23 pm Mass hysteria and political stupidity drives the climate cult. Hundreds (if not thousands) of highly credentialed scientists agree....we don't know how sensitive the climate is to human produced co2.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 08:01:38 pm from The Washington Post.... Climate change upped the odds of Harvey's extreme rains, study finds It could be the first of many studies of climate change and the extreme 2017 hurricane season. By CHRIS MOONEY | 4:28PM EST - Monday, November 13, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/28/Development-Transportation/Images/APTOPIX_Harvey_64716-95c90-0211.jpg&w=999) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/08/28/Development-Transportation/Images/APTOPIX_Harvey_64716-95c90-0211.jpg&w=1484) Rescue boats fill a flooded street as victims are evacuated from Harvey's rising waters on August 28th in Houston. — Photograph: David J. Phillip/Associated Press. THE EXTREME RAINS that inundated the Houston area during Hurricane Harvey were made more likely by climate change, a new study suggests (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/11/07/1716222114), adding that such extreme flooding events will only become more frequent as the globe continues to warm. “I guess what I was hoping to achieve was a little bit of a public service,” said MIT hurricane expert Kerry Emanuel, who published the study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday. “There are folks down in Texas who are having to rebuild infrastructure, and I think they need to have some idea of what kind of event they're building for.” In the wake of Harvey, many researchers pointed out that a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor and that, as a result, a warmer planet should see more extreme rains. But Emanuel's study goes beyond this general statement to support the idea that the specific risk of such an extreme rain event is already rising because of how humans have changed the planet. Via climate modeling, Emanuel generated 3,700 computerized storms for each of three separate models that situated the storms in the climates of the years from 1980 to 2016. All of the storms were in the vicinity of Houston or other Texas areas. He examined how often, in his models, there would be about 20 inches of rain in one of these events. Harvey produced closer to 33 inches over Houston. But in the tests under the 1980 to 2016 conditions, getting 20 inches of rain was rare in the extreme. “By the standards of the average climate during 1981-2000, Harvey's rainfall in Houston was ‘biblical’ in the sense that it likely occurred around once since the Old Testament was written,” wrote Emanuel, adding that in the much larger area of Texas, such rains did occur once every 100 years. Then Emanuel performed a similar analysis, this time in the projected climates of the years 2080 to 2100, assuming the climate changes in some of the more severe ways scientists suggest it could. The odds, accordingly, shifted toward a much greater likelihood of such events by 2100. Harvey's rains in Houston became a once-in-100-years event (rather than a once-in-2,000-years event), and for Texas as a whole, the odds increased from once in 100 years to once every 5½. This also meant, Emanuel calculated, that Harvey was probably more likely in 2017 than in the era from 1981 to 2000. In 2017, Harvey would be a once-in-325-years event. For Texas as a whole, in 2017 it would be a once-in-16-years event. “It was a very unusual event,” Emanuel said. “Less unlikely than it might have been 30 years ago, but even now very unusual.” Emanuel conceded that precisely why the simulations changed the odds with greater global warming wasn't clear — whether it had something to do with more water vapor or other storm characteristics. “This is left to future work,” he wrote. Several researchers praised the study, including Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate expert at Stanford University who has focused on the science of attributing extreme events to climate change. “Harvey was a complex event with lots of contributing ingredients. This study breaks new ground by isolating the role that global warming played in upping the odds that a storm like Harvey produces very heavy rainfall,” he said. “The 20-fold future increase in the probability of Harvey-level rainfall points toward a markedly increasing vulnerability of Gulf Coast communities — one that they are not well prepared to adjust to,” added Greg Holland, a hurricane scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Shane Hubbard, a researcher at the Space Science and Engineering Center of the University of Wisconsin–Madison who has also studied the odds of Harvey's rains, did question some aspects of the presentation. He suggested that Harvey was such an extreme event — producing as much rainfall as three prior Texas flood disasters combined — that Emanuel's approach of looking at rainfall at a single point “does not accurately represent what happened during Harvey.” Still, looking toward the future, Hubbard found the research helpful. “This work suggests that with landfalling hurricanes, the amounts of precipitation will dramatically increase, meaning the risk to populations along streams and rivers will also dramatically increase. Hurricanes are not a single hazard, but multiple hazards,” he added. The new study will probably be followed by many others on the link between the devastating 2017 hurricane season and climate change. “I think humans have changed the odds quite a bit,” Emanuel said. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment at The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/climate-change-upped-the-odds-of-harveys-extreme-rains-study-finds (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/climate-change-upped-the-odds-of-harveys-extreme-rains-study-finds) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 08:17:52 pm Get with the programme. Climate cultist models continue to get things wrong.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 14, 2017, 08:20:46 pm 97% of ice core, weather balloon and satelite observations agree. Climate change cultists don't know their arses from their elbows.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 14, 2017, 08:36:23 pm from The Dominion Post.... Need for change reaches high-water mark EDITORIAL | 5:00AM - Tuesday, 14 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/f/i/o/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mubos.png/1510543489283.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/f/i/o/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mubos.png/1510543489283.jpg) Coastal flooding and tidal surges are expected to be more frequent and fierce in the decades ahead, undermining the foothold of many coast communities. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED: The tides and times are a-changing; they have brought us to a crossroads. That, in a nutshell, was the message from IAG insurance spokesman Bryce Davies, when asked about the possible impacts of climate change for both homeowner and insurer in this country. It is the clearest signal yet, if indeed one were needed, that climate change is REAL (sorry, President Trump) and is going to have an increasingly significant impact, not only on insurance premiums but the very existence of some communities hugging the lines of coast and river of New Zealand. If the changing climate has brought us to a crossroads, the paths extending from that point are less certain. Like the many tributaries that feed a great river they are numerous and varying in significance and influence. Will the rise of sea levels and associated insurance premiums mean even more Kiwis locked out of ownership along the coast? Will ratepayers have to fork out even more on expensive stopbanks and flood-protection works? Will there ever be enough money to secure vulnerable regions? Davies suggests another even more dramatic impact: the possibility that whole communities could become uninsurable no-go zones. That, surely, must have crossed the minds of Tanja Gerritsen and many others around the nation. The Ōtaki River has flooded her home three times in the past two years. She's terrified that her insurer will say enough is enough, it's time to move on. Judging by what Davies is saying, it looks they are seriously considering it. If those warnings seem a little beyond the high-water mark, they merely echo similar concerns expressed two years ago by Jan Wright, the then Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/f/i/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mubos.png/1510543489283.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/f/i/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mubos.png/1510543489283.jpg) Aerial photos of Lismore showing flooding from the aftermath of Cyclone Debbie. In her report, Preparing New Zealand for Rising Seas (http://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/preparing-new-zealand-for-rising-seas-certainty-and-uncertainty), she observed that about 9,000 homes around the country lie less than 50 centimetres above spring high tide levels. “This is more than the number of homes that were red-zoned after the Christchurch earthquakes.” In another comparison with the devastating tremors, she highlights the folly of building on land known to be at risk of liquefaction. “We should see allowing new subdivisions on vulnerable coastal land as equally foolish.” As worrying as that may sound, it could be the easier part of preparing New Zealand for the rising tide of climate change; it merely acknowledges that some areas may not be fit for homes yet to be built. Forewarned is forearmed these days in the purchase of coastal property. The truly tricky and potentially painful part will be identifying existing communities at the greatest risk and the solutions to ensure their survival. As Wright points out, one of the options may be “the uprooting of entire communities and the associated financial cost”. And “the highest costs will come from large scale managed retreat”. Much of that cost will be borne by those people living on the coast, but just as insurance premiums can be a rising tide that has an impact on everyone, the “financial cost” of climate change is also likely to pull all into its growing catchment. That, like climate change, is a certainty. It is clear from the words of Davies, Wright and others that another certainty is the need for planning. Lots of it. Now. https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/98832556 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/98832556) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 15, 2017, 07:45:00 pm from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... Human-induced global warming: Faster than ever and accelerating! 11:00AM - Tuesday, 14 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/t/g/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1muqa7.png/1510610432370.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/t/g/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1muqa7.png/1510610432370.jpg) Warming exceeded 1°C above mid-nineteenth-century levels in 2017. — Photograph: David Gray. HUMAN-INDUCED GLOBAL WARMING is happening faster than ever and accelerating. And it's increasing at a rate that means there's little time left to achieve goals of the Paris climate agreement, researchers say. A tool to measure the rate of global warming called the Global Warming Index (http://www.globalwarmingindex.org) — developed by an international team led by Victoria University's Professor Dave Frame — showed the acceleration of warming. Dr Karsten Haustein from the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom and lead author of a paper on the index said global warming had risen at a rate of 0.16 degrees Celsius per decade over the past 20 years. “Worryingly, it appears to be accelerating, despite the recent slowdown in carbon dioxide emissions, because of trends in other climate pollutants, notably methane.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/u/s/y/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1muqa7.png/1510610432370.jpg) (http://www.globalwarmingindex.org) The Global Warming Index is a continuously updated index of human-induced warming. The release of methane gas from ruminant livestock — sheep and cattle — amounted to almost a third of New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions, and it was the largest contributor, according to Landcare Research (https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/greenhouse-gases/agricultural-greenhouse-gases/methane-emissions). Methane also accounted for over 40 percent of all emissions in terms of global warming potential, Landcare Research said. Warming exceeded 1°C above mid-nineteenth-century levels in 2017. Frame said: “A robust, continuously updated index of human-induced warming — the only component of global temperatures we have any control over — is essential to monitor progress toward meeting temperature goals.” “We hope the Global Warming Index will provide this essential information to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process.” “Using our index, as well as ClimateClock.net (https://climateclock.net), in conjunction with carbon budget estimates based on current emissions, the remaining time until we cross the anthropogenic warming target of 1.5°C or 2°C can be monitored continuously.” Haustein said global temperatures could be pushed up temporarily by El Niño events or down by volcanic eruptions. “We combine temperature observations with measurements of drivers of climate change to provide an up-to-date estimate of the contribution of human influence to global warming.” Frame said a consistent measure was important so that when it hit 2°C, it didn't fluctuate based on factors other than human-induced warming. The index is intended to provide improved scientific context for temperature stabilisation targets, with the potential to reduce climate policy volatility. The findings were announced in a paper for the Nature research journal Scientific Reports (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14828-5). • THE CLIMATE CLOCK (https://climateclock.net) __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Livestock and global warming (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/advice/98819916) • Climate change to hit insurance (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/98797867) • NZ to go big on climate change (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98700485) https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/98851471 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/98851471) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 16, 2017, 07:04:30 pm Yes your loony left pay wall rags eargerly believe what they want to hear. Just like you do 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 16, 2017, 07:07:56 pm We now truly live in an idiocracy. The lunatic religion of climate change is exhibit A.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 16, 2017, 07:20:40 pm The Paris agreement will cost the world trillions of dollars EVERY YEAR (if promises are kept, which they wont be) and this stupendous waste of money will delay the alleged human caused climate change by a triffling 8 or so years by the end of the century.
THAT IS SIMPLY LUNACY. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 16, 2017, 08:04:54 pm The earth is fucked because of greedy, selfish twats such as YOU. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 17, 2017, 07:31:19 pm Nah, the poor are being fucked over because of loony left twits and their irrational climate beleifs.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 18, 2017, 09:40:20 am Yep....“head in the sand” syndrome is alive & well amongst the selfish & greedy twats in NZ and around the world. Oooooooooh.....the last post in yet another page in this thread. Time to begin the next page, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 18, 2017, 09:42:12 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 18, 2017, 02:43:08 pm (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1175w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/11/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_India_Air_Pollution_27115-32205.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/11/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_India_Air_Pollution_27115-32205.jpg) Indian motorists ride through a thick blanket of smog and dust on the outskirts of New Delhi. Thick smog has constricted India's capital this week, smudging landmarks from view and angering residents. The air was the worst it has been all year in New Delhi, with microscopic particles that can affect breathing and health spiking, at times, to 75 times the level considered safe by the World Health Organization. — Photograph: Photograph: Altaf Qadri/Associated Press. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 18, 2017, 03:36:08 pm Nothing to do with CO2. Next piece of irrelevant bed-wetting?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 19, 2017, 08:30:13 am https://youtu.be/ObvdSmPbdLg
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 19, 2017, 11:02:09 am I know somebody in my street who has a bach down near Cape Palliser, just north of Ngawi. Their batch is not connected to the national grid, but has the entire north-facing slope of the roof covered with solar panels (both electrical and water-heating), as well as two wind turbines on poles to take advantage of the frequent high winds in that area. The whole lot is connected up to a bank of batteries, then via an inverter into the building's 230/240-volt ac mains wiring system. Most cooking is done with gas, although the bach has a wood-fired stove in addition to the gas stove; and hot water is a combination of solar and gas. The electrical system is so good that they leave the fridge and freezer going all the time and they never have problems with the contents thawing out. They have a small bill for gas useage and they usually drop off a load of firewood to the batch once a year, but the rest of the energy for the house is provided by mother nature. They stay in their bach for about six-weeks over the Christmas-New Year-January period, then make frequent weekend visits to their batch throughout the rest of the year. Flat-earthers/anti-warmalists/climate-change-deniers/heads-in-the-sand-brigade hate seeing people being self-sufficient in their energy requirements like that. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 19, 2017, 07:52:27 pm Yes *sounds* good doesn't it. The total cost of all that to run a proper modern house is signifantly more than grid power. Its a boutique solution for the wealthy.
But, that doesn't stack up when you scale up to powering towns and cities. Germany which is one of the most advanced industrialised societies on earth tried the utopian wind and solar fantasy and now in order to stop killing the poor through unaffordable power they are INCREASING their use of coal power. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 19, 2017, 08:10:39 pm Solar requires highly industrialised processes using rare resources. The panels have to be replaced and disposed of. Ditto batteries.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 19, 2017, 08:56:48 pm Change hands....you'll wear out the one you're using for masturbating if you don't share the load. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 20, 2017, 09:02:56 pm Engage a few braincells.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 22, 2017, 11:47:50 am Hahaha.....“flat-earthers” and “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” are all kooks & retards, alright. from The Washington Post.... This man is about to launch himself in his homemade rocket to prove the Earth is flat Goodbye, cold, flat Earth. By AVI SELK | 1:51PM EST — Tuesday, November 21, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-20/AP/Mad_Rocket_Scientist_65466-98a23.jpg&w=1025) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-20/AP/Mad_Rocket_Scientist_65466-98a23.jpg&w=1484) Mike Hughes and his steam-powered rocket constructed out of salvaged parts on a five-acre property that he leases in Apple Valley, California. — Photograph: Waldo Stakes/Mad Mike Hughes/Associated Press. SEEKING TO PROVE that a conspiracy of astronauts fabricated the shape of the Earth, a California man intends to launch himself 1,800 feet high on Saturday in a rocket he built from scrap metal. Assuming the 500-mph, mile-long flight through the Mojave Desert does not kill him, Mike Hughes told the Associated Press (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/self-taught-rocket-scientist-plans-to-launch-over-ghost-town/2017/11/20/0caa953e-cdcd-11e7-a87b-47f14b73162a_story.html), his journey into the atmosflat will mark the first phase of his ambitious flat-Earth space program. Hughes's ultimate goal is a subsequent launch that puts him miles above the Earth, where the 61-year-old limousine driver hopes to photograph proof of the disc we all live on. “It'll shut the door on this ball earth,” Hughes said in a fundraising interview with a flat-Earth group (https://tinyurl.com/ybfq86v6) for Saturday's flight. Theories discussed during the interview included NASA being controlled by round-Earth Freemasons and Elon Musk making fake rockets from blimps. Hughes promised the flat-Earth community that he would expose the conspiracy with his steam-powered rocket, which will launch from a heavily modified mobile home — though he acknowledged that he still had much to learn about rocket science. “This whole tech thing,” he said in the June interview. “I'm really behind the eight ball.” That said, Hughes isn't a totally unproven engineer. He set a Guinness World Record in 2002 for a limousine jump, according to Ars Technica, and has been building rockets for years, albeit with mixed results. “Okay, Waldo. 3 … 2 … 1!” someone yells in a test fire video from 2012 (https://tinyurl.com/ych4pkoy). There's a brief hiss of boiling water, then … nothing. So Hughes walks up to the engine and pokes it with a stick, at which point a thick cloud of steam belches out toward the camera. He built his first manned rocket in 2014, the Associated Press reported, and managed to fly a quarter-mile over Winkelman, Arizona. As seen in a YouTube video (https://tinyurl.com/yatycjt3), the flight ended with Hughes being dragged, moaning from the remains of the rocket. The injuries he suffered put him in a walker for two weeks, he said. And the 2014 flight was only a quarter of the distance of Saturday's mile-long attempt. And it was based on round-Earth technology. Hughes only recently converted to flat-Eartherism, after struggling for months to raise funds for his follow-up flight over the Mojave. It was originally scheduled for early 2016 in a Kickstarter campaign — “From Garage to Outer Space!” (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1441636269/mission-rock-it-stage-i-the-1-mile-manned-rocket-j?ref=discovery) — that mentioned nothing about Illuminati astronauts, and was themed after a NASCAR event. “We want to do this and basically thumb our noses at all these billionaires trying to do this,” Hughes said, standing in his Apple Valley, California, living room, which he had plastered with drawings of his rockets. “They have not put a man in space yet,” Hughes said. “There are 20 different space agencies here in America, and I'm the last person that's put a man in a rocket and launched it.” He compared himself to Evel Knievel, as he promised to launch himself from a California racetrack — the first step on his steam-powered leap toward space. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-20/AP/Mad_Rocket_Scientist_24265-d9830.jpg&w=950) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-11-20/AP/Mad_Rocket_Scientist_24265-d9830.jpg&w=1484) Mike Hughes plans to launch his rocket on Saturday over the ghost town of Amboy, California, at a speed of roughly 500 miles per hour. — Photograph: Mad Mike Hughes/Associated Press. The Kickstarter raised $310 of its $150,000 goal (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1441636269/mission-rock-it-stage-i-the-1-mile-manned-rocket-j?ref=discovery). Hughes made other pitches, including a plan to fly over Texas in a “SkyLimo”. But he complained to Ars Technica last year (https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/mad-mike-built-a-rocket-so-he-can-jump-the-grand-canyon-of-texas) about the difficulty of funding his dreams on a chauffeur's meager salary. A year later, he called into a flat-Earth community Web show (https://tinyurl.com/ybfq86v6) to announce that he had become a recent convert. “We were kind of looking for new sponsors for this. And I'm a believer in the flat Earth,” Hughes said. “I researched it for several months.” The host sounded impressed. Hughes had actually flown in a rocket, he noted, whereas astronauts were merely paid actors performing in front of a CGI globe. “John Glenn and Neil Armstrong are Freemasons,” Hughes agreed. “Once you understand that, you understand the roots of the deception.” The host talked of “Elon Musk's fake reality,” and Hughes talked of “anti-Christ, Illuminati stuff.” After half an hour of this, the host told his 300-some listeners to back Hughes's exploration of space. While there is no one hypothesis for what the flat Earth is supposed to look like, many believers envision a flat disc ringed by sea ice (https://wiki.tfes.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_does_the_earth_look_like.3F_How_is_circumnavigation_possible.3F), which naturally holds the oceans in. What's beyond the sea ice, if anything, remains to be discovered. “We need an individual who's not compromised by the government,” the host told Hughes. “And you could be that man.” A flat-Earth GoFundMe subsequently raised nearly $8,000 (https://www.gofundme.com/flat-earth-community-rocket-launch) for Hughes. By November, the Associated Press reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/self-taught-rocket-scientist-plans-to-launch-over-ghost-town/2017/11/20/0caa953e-cdcd-11e7-a87b-47f14b73162a_story.html), his $20,000 rocket had a fancy coat of Rust-Oleum paint and “RESEARCH FLAT EARTH” inscribed on the side. While his flat-Earth friends helped him finally get the thing built, the Associated Press reported, Hughes will be making adjustments right up to Saturday's launch. He won't be able to test the rocket before he climbs inside and attempts to steam himself at 500 mph across a mile of desert air. And even if it's a success, he's promised his backers an even riskier launch within the next year, into the space above the disc. “It's scary as hell,” Hughes told the Associated Press. “But none of us are getting out of this world alive.” This is true. Yet some will try to live to see its edges. • Avi Selk is an American-Canadian nomad. He reported for the Dallas Morning News from 2009 until December 2016, when he joined the general assignment desk at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Kyrie Irving's flat-Earth beliefs now the bane of middle-school teachers' existence (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/07/28/kyrie-irvings-flat-earth-beliefs-now-the-bane-of-middle-school-teachers) • Kyrie Irving believes the Earth is flat. It is not. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/02/17/kyrie-irving-believes-the-earth-is-flat-it-is-not) • A Trump team member just compared climate science to the flat-Earth theory (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/14/a-trump-team-member-just-compared-climate-science-to-the-flat-earth-theory) • The explorers who really disproved flat-Earth theories (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-explorers-who-really-disproved-flat-earth-theories/2015/04/10/335baf92-d96a-11e4-bf0b-f648b95a6488_story.html) • VIDEO: Watch SpaceX's greatest explosions, courtesy of Elon Musk (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/2c83004a-995b-11e7-af6a-6555caaeb8dc_video.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/21/this-man-is-about-to-launch-himself-in-his-homemade-rocket-to-prove-the-earth-is-flat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/21/this-man-is-about-to-launch-himself-in-his-homemade-rocket-to-prove-the-earth-is-flat) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 22, 2017, 04:47:42 pm Dumb spam. Not read.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 25, 2017, 10:03:03 pm from The Washington Post.... A flat-Earther's plan to launch himself in a homemade rocket just hit a speed bump “It's still happening,” Mike Hughes said of his plan to “prove” that Earth is flat. By AMY B. WANG and AVI SELK | 2:28PM EST — Friday, November 24, 2017 A CALIFORNIA MAN who planned to launch himself 1,800 feet high on Saturday in a homemade scrap-metal rocket — in an effort to prove that Earth is flat — said he is postponing the experiment after he couldn't get permission from a federal agency to conduct it on public land. Instead, Mike Hughes said the launch will take place sometime next week on private property, albeit still in Amboy, California, an unincorporated community in the Mojave Desert along historic Route 66. “It's still happening. We're just moving it three miles down the road,” Hughes told The Washington Post on Friday. “This is what happens anytime you have to deal with any kind of government agency.” Hughes claimed the Bureau of Land Management said he couldn't launch his rocket as planned on Saturday in Amboy. He claimed the federal agency had given him verbal permission more than a year ago, pending approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. A BLM spokeswoman said its local field office had no record of speaking with Hughes and that he had not applied for the necessary special recreation permit to hold an event on public land. “Someone from our local office reached out to him after seeing some of these news articles [about the launch], because that was news to them,” BLM spokeswoman Samantha Storms said. Representatives from the FAA did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday. Hughes said he had originally intended to arrive in Amboy on Wednesday to start setting up the rocket. The BLM's denial, along with some technical difficulties — a motor in his modified motor home quit working for a day — threw a wrench into his plans, according to Hughes. “I don't see [the launch] happening until about Tuesday, honestly,” he said. “It takes three days to set up…. You know, it's not easy because it's not supposed to be easy.” Assuming the 500-mph, mile-long flight through the Mojave Desert does not kill him, Hughes told the Associated Press (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/self-taught-rocket-scientist-plans-to-launch-over-ghost-town/2017/11/20/0caa953e-cdcd-11e7-a87b-47f14b73162a_story.html), his journey into the atmosflat will mark the first phase of his ambitious flat-Earth space program. Hughes’s ultimate goal is a subsequent launch that puts him miles above Earth, where the 61-year-old limousine driver hopes to photograph proof that it's a disk we all live on. “It'll shut the door on this ball Earth,” Hughes said in a flight fundraising interview with a flat-Earth group (https://tinyurl.com/ybfq86v6). Theories discussed during the interview included NASA being controlled by round-Earth Freemasons and Elon Musk making fake rockets from blimps. Hughes promised the flat-Earth community that he would expose the conspiracy with his steam-powered rocket, which will launch from a heavily modified mobile home — though he acknowledged that he still had much to learn about rocket science. “This whole tech thing,” he said in the June interview. “I'm really behind the eight ball.” That said, Hughes isn't a totally unproven engineer. He set a Guinness World Record in 2002 for a limousine jump, according to Ars Technica, and has been building rockets for years, albeit with mixed results. “Okay, Waldo. 3 … 2 … 1!” someone yells in a test-fire video from 2012 (https://tinyurl.com/ych4pkoy). There's a brief hiss of boiling water, then … nothing. So Hughes walks up to the engine and pokes it with a stick, at which point a thick cloud of steam belches out toward the camera. He built his first manned rocket in 2014, the Associated Press reported, and managed to fly a quarter-mile over Winkelman, Arizona. As seen in a YouTube video (https://tinyurl.com/yatycjt3), the flight ended with Hughes being dragged, moaning, from the remains of the rocket. The injuries he suffered put him in a walker for two weeks, he said. The 2014 flight was only a quarter of the distance of Saturday's mile-long attempt. And it was based on round-Earth technology. Hughes only recently converted to flat-Eartherism, after struggling for months to raise funds for his follow-up flight over the Mojave. It was originally scheduled for early 2016 in a Kickstarter campaign — “From Garage to Outer Space!” (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1441636269/mission-rock-it-stage-i-the-1-mile-manned-rocket-j?ref=discovery) — that mentioned nothing about Illuminati astronauts and was themed after a NASCAR event. “We want to do this and basically thumb our noses at all these billionaires trying to do this,” Hughes said in the pitch video, standing in his Apple Valley, California, living room, which he had plastered with drawings of his rockets. “They have not put a man in space yet,” Hughes said. “There are 20 different space agencies here in America, and I'm the last person that's put a man in a rocket and launched it.” Comparing himself to Evel Knievel, he promised to launch himself from a California racetrack that year as the first step in his steam-powered leap toward space. The Kickstarter raised $310 of its $150,000 goal (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1441636269/mission-rock-it-stage-i-the-1-mile-manned-rocket-j?ref=discovery). Hughes made other pitches, including a plan to fly over Texas in a “SkyLimo”. But he complained to Ars Technica last year about the difficulty of funding his dreams on a chauffeur's meager salary. A year later, he called into a flat-Earth community Web show (https://tinyurl.com/ybfq86v6) to announce that he had become a recent convert. “We were kind of looking for new sponsors for this. And I'm a believer in the flat Earth,” Hughes said. “I researched it for several months.” The host sounded impressed. Hughes had actually flown in a rocket, he noted, whereas astronauts were merely paid actors performing in front of a CGI globe. “John Glenn and Neil Armstrong are Freemasons,” Hughes agreed. “Once you understand that, you understand the roots of the deception.” The host talked of “Elon Musk's fake reality,” and Hughes talked of “anti-Christ, Illuminati stuff.” After half an hour of this, the host told his 300-some listeners to back Hughes’s exploration of space. While there is no one hypothesis for what the flat Earth is supposed to look like, many believers envision a flat disk ringed by sea ice (https://wiki.tfes.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_does_the_earth_look_like.3F_How_is_circumnavigation_possible.3F), which naturally holds the oceans in. What’s beyond the sea ice, if anything, remains to be discovered. “We need an individual who's not compromised by the government,” the host told Hughes. “And you could be that man.” A flat-Earth GoFundMe effort subsequently raised nearly $8,000 (https://www.gofundme.com/flat-earth-community-rocket-launch) for Hughes. By November, the Associated Press reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/self-taught-rocket-scientist-plans-to-launch-over-ghost-town/2017/11/20/0caa953e-cdcd-11e7-a87b-47f14b73162a_story.html), his $20,000 rocket had a coat of Rust-Oleum paint and “RESEARCH FLAT EARTH” inscribed on the side. While his flat-Earth friends helped him finally get the thing built, the Associated Press reported, Hughes will be making adjustments right up to the launch. But he won't be able to test the rocket before he climbs inside and attempts to steam himself at 500 mph across a mile of desert air. And if it's a success, he's promised his backers an even riskier launch within the next year, into the space above the disk. He told Ars Technica last year that the second phase of his mission might involve floating in a balloon up to 20,000 feet above the ground, then rocket-packing himself into space. “It's scary as hell,” Hughes told the Associated Press. “But none of us are getting out of this world alive.” This is true. And yet some hope to live to see its edges. • Amy B Wang is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post. • Avi Selk is an American-Canadian nomad. He reported for the Dallas Morning News from 2009 until December 2016, when he joined the general assignment desk at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: This man hopes his homemade rocket will prove the earth is flat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/6f662902-cf37-11e7-a87b-47f14b73162a_video.html) • Kyrie Irving believes Earth is flat. It is not. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/02/17/kyrie-irving-believes-the-earth-is-flat-it-is-not) • A Trump team member just compared climate science to the flat-Earth theory (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/14/a-trump-team-member-just-compared-climate-science-to-the-flat-earth-theory) • The explorers who really disproved flat-Earth theories (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-explorers-who-really-disproved-flat-earth-theories/2015/04/10/335baf92-d96a-11e4-bf0b-f648b95a6488_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/24/a-flat-earthers-plan-to-launch-himself-in-a-homemade-rocket-just-hit-a-speed-bump (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/24/a-flat-earthers-plan-to-launch-himself-in-a-homemade-rocket-just-hit-a-speed-bump) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 26, 2017, 09:07:10 pm from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... EVs: The future is closer than you think Electric dreams fast overtaking the dino-juice drinkers By MIKE O'DONNELL | 5:00AM - Saturday, 25 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/b/2/z/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/b/2/z/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) Like the Skoda Kodiak, EVs are confounding everyone's expectations. THE motoring journos at STUFF have just announced their pick of the 2017 Top Cars. The overall winner was the Skoda Kodiak, the first seven seater SUV from the Czech manufacturer. Apart from being a fine car in its own right, the granting of the 2017 Top Car gong to Skoda is solid recognition that the brand migration for Skoda is fully completed. As a teenager Skoda represented everything that was bad about Soviet manufacturing — they were ugly, unreliable and unfashionable. Today they are great drives with a higher quality of assembly than their owner, Volkswagen. Plus, they are less expensive than their other stable mate, Audi. Apart from the migration of the Skoda brand, the thing that caught my eye was the number of electric cars in the lineup. Four of the 16 Top Cars were EVs or hybrids. It was only a couple of years ago that the first electrically assisted car made the STUFF list, now its 25 percent. I'd be willing to bet it will be closer to 50 per cent next year, if the rise of electric bikes is any indication. It's clear that in the race for the future of personal cars, the EV has won. While you can argue the micro diesel is a better contender, the decision has been made so the industry had better get on with it. While EV fans wax lyrical about the consumer centric-joy of being about to drive for a day and charge overnight, the explosive disruptor is the electric motor. Specifically, it's simplicity. The motor in the new Tesla Model S has just 18 moving parts. By contrast, the internal combustion engine sitting under the bonnet of your late model Toyota Corolla has about 1,600. If you're driving a BMW or Subaru, that number is closer to 2,000. That's 2,000 pieces of (mainly) metal moving, exploding, rubbing and reciprocating. All of which need lubrication, monitoring for wear, regular maintenance and periodic replacement. Whereas the electric motor has a couple of sealed bearings that might need replacing every 250,000 kilometres or so, and that's largely it, as long as the battery hasn't got a dud cell. The disruptive implications of this are vast. Much of the existing mechanical, auto electrical and engineering industries will have dramatic reductions in workload. The concepts of an oil and filter, a lube or a new cambelt will likely exist only as metaphors. A little like the phrase “don't scare the horses” is now. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/q/w/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/q/w/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) Stanford economist Tony Seba sees peak oil use occurring around 2022 — about 10 years earlier than previously thought. — Photograph: Tom Pullar-Strecker. Speaking of horses, futurist Tony Seba has a presentation that's doing the rounds at the moment on YouTube. It features a photograph of a New York Street in 1900 and he asked you to find the car. If you look hard enough, you can find it but mainly the photo is full of horse riders and horse drawn carriages. He then shows a photograph of the same street taken 11 years later and asks you to find the horse. This time the street is absolutely chocka with cars, with just one twitchy horse visible, if you look really hard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hoB7HN4B0k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hoB7HN4B0k) But the downstream impact of this disruption is far greater than just putting my mechanic mates out on the street. Currently demand for EVs is outstripping supply many-fold. While part of this is fuelled by the Government's EV friendly policy, the big thing is that consumers are voting with their feet, or rather by their credit cards. So car manufacturers are spending billions on retooling and figuring out how much longer they can flog the dino-juice drinkers they've got 100 years of costs sunk into. The multi-billion dollar parts industry will do it tough. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/9/v/8/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/9/v/8/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1n1f2d.png/1511486200473.jpg) Mike O'Donnell: “It's clear that in the race for the future of personal cars, the EV has won.” — Photograph: Kevin Stent. But the biggest pain will be felt by the oil companies, particularly once the unstoppable advance of electric cars marries the irresistible functionality of self-driving autonomy platforms. My old mate Steve West who's behind the EV charging network ChargeNet reckons that autonomous EVs will be able to deliver private rides for less than 30 cents a mile. Futurist Seba reckons that it will be more like 15 cents, falling to less than 10 cents over time. That will see peak oil use happening around 2022 — about 10 years earlier than previously thought. And by 2030, petrol use for private cars will have dropped to near zero (because no one will drive petrol cars) while total crude oil use will have dropped by almost a third. Some energy companies — like Z — are leaning forward into this challenge having rolled out eight fast-charge electric vehicle charging stations and sponsoring the likes of “An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6322922). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huX1bmfdkyA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huX1bmfdkyA) Others like Mobil may have have missed the (electric) bus in godzone. Just as we're currently neck deep in Software as a Service (SaaS), futurists are picking that Transport as a Service (TaaS) will be the way of the future in towns and cities. So fast forward just a few years and instead of handing out the awards for Top Cars, the STUFF motoring journos might be issuing virtual gongs to TaaS providers based in the cloud. • Mike “MOD” O'Donnell is a professional director and amateur rally driver. His Twitter handle is @modsta (https://twitter.com/modsta) and he owns more internal combustion engines than is prudent. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/99163525 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/99163525) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 28, 2017, 06:53:50 pm If and when EVs are cheaper and better than conventional cars/trucks then the masses will want to buy them. Don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 28, 2017, 08:05:20 pm from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... Petrol cars could vanish as quickly as the horse and carriage There will be 80 percent fewer cars on the roads by 2030, economist predicts. By TOM PULLAR-STRECKER | 5:00AM - Sunday, 26 November 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/9/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.j) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/9/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.j) Autonomous vehicles will mean 80 per cent fewer cars parked and on the road, US economist Tony Seba has forecast. NO PETROL VEHICLES will be built after 2025 and the number of cars in the United States will have plummeted by 80 percent five years later, with most journeys taken “Uber-style” in fleets of self-driving cars. That was the message given to APEC delegates in Wellington by Stanford economist Tony Seba, who believes the transport and power industries are just a few years away from a massive tipping point. Energy Minister Megan Woods described his predictions as “both interesting and challenging”. Associate Transport Minister Julie Anne Genter said she would be discussing options to promote the uptake of electric vehicles (EVs) with officials over the next few weeks. “This government is committed to reducing climate pollution to net zero by 2050. That means we have a responsibility to start reducing emissions from transport,” she said. “Increasing the uptake of electric vehicles will be a priority alongside our plans to boost investment in public transport and walking and cycling.” Seba agreed that there was no need for governments to consider subsidising EVs if his forecasts were correct, as they would take over rapidly anyway. Instead the most useful thing policy-makers could do was to encourage pilots of driverless vehicles, he said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/1/x/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/2/1/x/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) Tony Seba believes a transport revolution will unfold very suddenly, once an economic tipping point is reached in a few years. — Photograph: Mark Tantrum. Seba said councils should also be preparing for huge areas of major cities to be freed-up by a reduced need for parking. On current trends it would be cheaper to build a mid-range EV costing US$33,000 than a conventional car by 2019, and they would be cheaper than the average equivalent conventional small car by 2022, he said. Given EVs were 10 times cheaper to fuel and much cheaper to maintain, petrol and diesel cars would soon be difficult to give away, he believed. While the average car had more than 2,000 moving parts, EVs had just 18 and could rack up 500,000 miles, he said, quoting research from Baron Funds Research. By 2030, 95 per cent of passenger-miles would taken in self-driving vehicles, he said. In the US “200 million cars are going to be stranded — useless”. Motor Trade Association industry relationships manager Greig Epps said he came away “a bit gobsmacked” from a presentation by Seba, who had some “very persuasive information” about changes in battery technology. Epps forecast in 2016 that it would be 20 years before EVs had a significant impact in New Zealand, but now believed that could happen within 10 to 15 years. New Zealand would lag the US though, given most imports were of secondhand cars, he said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/6/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/6/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) Associate Transport Minister Julie Anne Genter will be discussing options to increase the uptake of electric vehicles with officials over the next few weeks. — Photograph: Warwick Smith. Seba's forecasts are predicated on the assumption that the cost of generating and storing solar electricity will continue to fall — to the point where just about all generation will be solar by 2030. But electricity production would only have to increase by 18 per cent in the US to cope with a complete switch to EVs, he said. At some point, the cost of producing solar power at the home would fall below the transmission cost of transporting electricity across national grids, meaning no other form of generation would be able to compete, he said. Like conventional cars and parking buildings, investments in deep sea and shale oil would be a write-off, with the price of oil collapsing below US$25 a barrel because of a lack of demand. Seba fired off statistic after statistic to back up his case at the APEC meeting, but not all experts believe EVs or solar power will take over quite as quickly as he suggests. The number of EVs on New Zealand roads has already more than doubled this year to 5,431, but that still represents only a little over a tenth of one percent of all vehicles. International Energy Agency transport leader Pierpaolo Cazzola, who also addressed the APEC electric vehicle and hydrogen energy working group meeting, believed EV uptake would still depend a lot on government policies. Seba believed no-one would be manufacturing land vehicles — even tractors — with combustion engines after 2025. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/1/p/0/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1mzimf.png/1511412141801.jpg) Opposition energy spokeswoman Judith Collins describes Tony Seba's forecasts as “challenging”. — Photograph: Kevin Stent. But Cazzola noted 10 members of the IEA — the US, Britain, China, France, Germany, Japan, Holland, Norway, Canada and Sweden — had set a much more modest goal of ensuring 30 percent of cars, buses and trucks were EVs or hybrids by 2030. Cazzola acknowledged the IEA's forecast had not factored in the possibility that most journeys would be undertaken using self-driving vehicles that would be owned by Uber-like companies. Seba agreed other forecasters had access to the same data as him about technology trends and had come to less radical conclusions. That was because they had not picked up that change was exponential and tended to be guided by each others' forecasts, he said. “Mainstream analysts look at one another instead of looking at the data.” That had happened before, for example when consultant McKinsey advised telecommunications giant AT&T in 1980 that there would be fewer than a million cellphones in the US by 2000, whereas the actual number was 109 million, he said. “In 13 years, New York City went from all horses to all cars.” __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • How electric cars can create the biggest disruption since iPhone (https://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/97187380) • Petrol cars will be obsolete in 8 years, says US report (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/92592333) • NZ's 15,000 motor mechanics get ready for the electric vehicle era (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/82255599) https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/99074823 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/99074823) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 28, 2017, 10:48:04 pm Yes "could". The favourite word for unicorn chasers (and especially ones from the eco-cult of Co2) when making predictions about the future.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 05, 2017, 08:54:18 am Listen carefully boys and girls...
https://youtu.be/U-9UlF8hkhs Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 05, 2017, 09:06:34 am I really should have titled this thread “Some Reading for the Terminally Stupid!” It would have been considerably more appropriate, but the thread has being going now for so long that it would sacrilage to change it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 05, 2017, 07:32:35 pm It hurts your brain to be confronted by scientific reality. That's normal for those who believe cultic rubbish.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 05, 2017, 07:34:17 pm Let me see you actually state that Prof William Happer is "terminally stupid".
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 12:20:41 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Climate scientists see alarming new threat to California By EVAN HALPER | 3:00AM PST — Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a0b5b28/turbine/la-1510693668-ztf5vgurnz-snap-image) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a0b5b28/turbine/la-1510693668-ztf5vgurnz-snap-image) In this May 2nd, 2014, photo, dust rises around a walnut tree as a worker mows weeds in Gridley, California. — Photograph: Jae C. Hong/Associated Press. CALIFORNIA could be hit with significantly more dangerous and more frequent droughts in the near future as changes in weather patterns triggered by global warming block rainfall from reaching the state, according to new research led by scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Using complex new modeling, the scientists have found that rapidly melting Arctic sea ice now threatens to diminish precipitation over California by as much as 15% within 20 to 30 years. Such a change would have profound economic impacts in a state where the most recent drought drained several billion dollars out of the economy, severely stressed infrastructure and highlighted how even the state most proactively confronting global warming is not prepared for its fallout. The latest study adds a worrying dimension to the challenge California is already facing in adapting to climate change, and shifts focus to melting polar ice that only recently has been discovered to have such a direct, potentially dramatic impact on the West Coast. While climate scientists generally agree that the increased temperatures already resulting from climate change have seriously exacerbated drought in California, there has been debate over whether global warming would affect the amount of precipitation that comes to California. The study, published on Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications (http://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01907-4), provides compelling evidence that it would. The model the scientists used homed in on the link between the disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic and the buildup of high ridges of atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean. Those ridges push winter storms away from the state, causing drought. The scientists found that as the sea ice goes away, there is an increase in the formation of ridges. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image/925) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/Google Earth. “Our design was aimed at looking at what will happen in 20 to 30 years, when the Arctic becomes ice-free in the summer,” said Ivana Cvijanovic, the lead climate scientist on the study. “It is coming soon. We want to understand what the impact would be…. The similarities between what will happen and [how weather patterns caused] the most recent drought are really striking.” Rainfall in California would drop, on average, 10% to 15% in the coming decades under Cvijanovic's model, but the decline would present itself sporadically, exacerbating the potential for drought. Some years the decline in rainfall because of diminished Arctic ice would be much steeper than 15%. Other years would be wetter than they otherwise would be. The study is yet another by federally funded researchers that finds the failure to more rapidly diminish greenhouse gas emissions could have a serious impact on California and other parts of the country. The findings contrast starkly with Trump administration policy on warming, which ignores the mainstream scientific consensus that human activity is driving it. The administration has been working aggressively to unravel Obama-era action on climate change, withdrawing from the Paris agreement that seeks to limit its impact, dismantling restrictions on power plant emissions, and signaling that it will relax vehicle mileage rules that are a critical component to addressing global warming. The warnings about the impact of melting sea ice on California are being embraced by some prominent climate scientists. They say that while the study is just one of multiple models being used to project global warming impacts, it is bolstered by other studies that have signaled a connection between the ice melt in the Arctic and the buildup of atmospheric ridges affecting California. Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, said in an email that it paints a sobering picture for the state. “As we learn more about the subtleties in the dynamics of climate change, we are learning that certain climate change impacts, like California drought, may be far worse than we had previously thought,” Mann wrote. “It also means that, when it comes to water resource issues in California, the impacts of climate change may exceed our adaptive capacity. That leaves only mitigation — doing something about climate change — as a viable strategy moving forward.” Governor Jerry Brown has been taking a lead globally in confronting climate change, warning the Trump administration's approach is reckless and defies science. He traveled last month to a United Nations climate conference in Bonn, Germany, to meet with world leaders and send the signal that much of the nation is moving to act on climate change, even if President Trump is not. Brown is helping lead a coalition of state and local governments that is vowing to reduce emissions enough to meet the entire country’s obligation under the Paris agreement, which President Obama signed last year. But the Trump administration’s retreat threatens to substantially slow the rate at which U.S. climate emissions decline. And even if all commitments made in the Paris agreement are kept, climate scientists say the Arctic ice situation would still be dire. “This is happening very quickly,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University. “The change is dramatic, and it is taking place faster than had been projected by climate models.” Diffenbaugh said the study is a breakthrough for climate researchers who have been struggling to pinpoint the impacts of melting Arctic ice. “Being able to isolate the effect of melting sea ice on the atmosphere and the ocean's response — and how it impacts precipitation in California — that is a big step forward,” he said. Because the model only projects future impacts, the study does not focus on the role melting Arctic ice may have played in the massive drought from which California recently emerged — the most severe in 1,200 years, according to one scientific study. But the atmospheric patterns leading to that drought had all the characteristics of those that can be triggered by Arctic sea ice melt, Cvijanovic said, raising the prospect that California might have dodged the latest drought — or at least not have been hit as hard — if not for the large amount of ice that has already vanished. “There is lots of research to be done,” she said. “Hopefully we do it in time to allow people to plan for whatever may be coming.” • Evan Halper writes for the Los Angeles Times about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C., with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • 150 structures destroyed, 27,000 people evacuated in raging Ventura wildfire (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-school-fire-20171204-story.html) • ‘It's coming across this way!’ Residents tend to older parents as fire approaches. (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fire-santa-paula-20171205-story.html) • More than 260,000 customers lose power amid intense winds (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-thomas-fire-ventura-power-20171204-story.html) • 7,700 homes evacuated as fire rages; traffic jams as residents flee (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-evacuation-ventura-county-fire-20171204-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2017, 02:08:21 am climate cult morons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmq4WIjQxp0 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 04:46:49 am Eco alarmists making up the usual "could" happen bed wetting stories. You do realise how many times already those stupid prophecies have turned out to be total bullshit right?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 08:59:38 am ROFLMAO....you two “flat-earthers” are hilariously funny. Your faces must be lilly-white from the amount of time you have your heads buried in the sand. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 09:45:04 am Well....look at that....it's time for a new page in this thread. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 09:45:37 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 09:53:01 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Climate scientists see alarming new threat to California By EVAN HALPER | 3:00AM PST — Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2012277_me_1001_c_2_1_MA2UE195.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2012277_me_1001_c_2_1_MA2UE195.jpg) Jon Pedotti on a Cambria lake bed in 2014. California just emerged from what one study called the most severe drought in 1,200 years. — Photograph: Al Seib/Los Angeles Times. CALIFORNIA could be hit with significantly more dangerous and more frequent droughts in the near future as changes in weather patterns triggered by global warming block rainfall from reaching the state, according to new research led by scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Using complex new modeling, the scientists have found that rapidly melting Arctic sea ice now threatens to diminish precipitation over California by as much as 15% within 20 to 30 years. Such a change would have profound economic impacts in a state where the most recent drought drained several billion dollars out of the economy, severely stressed infrastructure and highlighted how even the state most proactively confronting global warming is not prepared for its fallout. The latest study adds a worrying dimension to the challenge California is already facing in adapting to climate change, and shifts focus to melting polar ice that only recently has been discovered to have such a direct, potentially dramatic impact on the West Coast. While climate scientists generally agree that the increased temperatures already resulting from climate change have seriously exacerbated drought in California, there has been debate over whether global warming would affect the amount of precipitation that comes to California. The study, published on Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications (http://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01907-4), provides compelling evidence that it would. The model the scientists used homed in on the link between the disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic and the buildup of high ridges of atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean. Those ridges push winter storms away from the state, causing drought. The scientists found that as the sea ice goes away, there is an increase in the formation of ridges. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image/975) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/Google Earth. “Our design was aimed at looking at what will happen in 20 to 30 years, when the Arctic becomes ice-free in the summer,” said Ivana Cvijanovic, the lead climate scientist on the study. “It is coming soon. We want to understand what the impact would be…. The similarities between what will happen and [how weather patterns caused] the most recent drought are really striking.” Rainfall in California would drop, on average, 10% to 15% in the coming decades under Cvijanovic's model, but the decline would present itself sporadically, exacerbating the potential for drought. Some years the decline in rainfall because of diminished Arctic ice would be much steeper than 15%. Other years would be wetter than they otherwise would be. The study is yet another by federally funded researchers that finds the failure to more rapidly diminish greenhouse gas emissions could have a serious impact on California and other parts of the country. The findings contrast starkly with Trump administration policy on warming, which ignores the mainstream scientific consensus that human activity is driving it. The administration has been working aggressively to unravel Obama-era action on climate change, withdrawing from the Paris agreement that seeks to limit its impact, dismantling restrictions on power plant emissions, and signaling that it will relax vehicle mileage rules that are a critical component to addressing global warming. The warnings about the impact of melting sea ice on California are being embraced by some prominent climate scientists. They say that while the study is just one of multiple models being used to project global warming impacts, it is bolstered by other studies that have signaled a connection between the ice melt in the Arctic and the buildup of atmospheric ridges affecting California. Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, said in an email that it paints a sobering picture for the state. “As we learn more about the subtleties in the dynamics of climate change, we are learning that certain climate change impacts, like California drought, may be far worse than we had previously thought,” Mann wrote. “It also means that, when it comes to water resource issues in California, the impacts of climate change may exceed our adaptive capacity. That leaves only mitigation — doing something about climate change — as a viable strategy moving forward.” Governor Jerry Brown has been taking a lead globally in confronting climate change, warning the Trump administration's approach is reckless and defies science. He traveled last month to a United Nations climate conference in Bonn, Germany, to meet with world leaders and send the signal that much of the nation is moving to act on climate change, even if President Trump is not. Brown is helping lead a coalition of state and local governments that is vowing to reduce emissions enough to meet the entire country’s obligation under the Paris agreement, which President Obama signed last year. But the Trump administration’s retreat threatens to substantially slow the rate at which U.S. climate emissions decline. And even if all commitments made in the Paris agreement are kept, climate scientists say the Arctic ice situation would still be dire. “This is happening very quickly,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University. “The change is dramatic, and it is taking place faster than had been projected by climate models.” Diffenbaugh said the study is a breakthrough for climate researchers who have been struggling to pinpoint the impacts of melting Arctic ice. “Being able to isolate the effect of melting sea ice on the atmosphere and the ocean's response — and how it impacts precipitation in California — that is a big step forward,” he said. Because the model only projects future impacts, the study does not focus on the role melting Arctic ice may have played in the massive drought from which California recently emerged — the most severe in 1,200 years, according to one scientific study. But the atmospheric patterns leading to that drought had all the characteristics of those that can be triggered by Arctic sea ice melt, Cvijanovic said, raising the prospect that California might have dodged the latest drought — or at least not have been hit as hard — if not for the large amount of ice that has already vanished. “There is lots of research to be done,” she said. “Hopefully we do it in time to allow people to plan for whatever may be coming.” • Evan Halper writes for the Los Angeles Times about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C., with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • 150 structures destroyed, 27,000 people evacuated in raging Ventura wildfire (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-school-fire-20171204-story.html) • ‘It's coming across this way!’ Residents tend to older parents as fire approaches. (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fire-santa-paula-20171205-story.html) • More than 260,000 customers lose power amid intense winds (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-thomas-fire-ventura-power-20171204-story.html) • 7,700 homes evacuated as fire rages; traffic jams as residents flee (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-evacuation-ventura-county-fire-20171204-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 10:23:02 am Clown-mate scientists of the eco-evangelist variety see portents of doom in every slight weather change.
Over time this becomes increasingly laughable as their predictions continue to fail and also spectacularly contradict each other. Strangely in the mind of the loony left believer this doesn't register. 😁 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 10:34:12 am Stupid flat-earthers just stick their heads deeper into the sand, prefering to believe that the ever-increasing 1,000-year weather events, droughts, firestorms, etc, are their god's will. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 11:05:33 am These stupid predictions are always hedged with "blah blah blah epic doom scenario *could* happen if we don't commit economic and societal suicide by switching to unaffordable and unreliable energy sources immediately ". No different to those bullshit cures commercials about unproven supplements. "*May* help improve arthritis" .....Yeah right 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 11:07:16 am Bullshit again. There are not increasing 1000 year events. Prove that there are.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 11:08:48 am from the Los Angeles Times.... EDITORIAL: While Southern California battles its wildfires, we have to start preparing for our hotter, drier future By the LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | 11:40AM PST - Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a26e91b/turbine/la-1512499479-ues2admb63-snap-image/975) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a26e91b/turbine/la-1512499479-ues2admb63-snap-image) Two firefighters confront flames along Kagel Canyon Street in Lakeview Terrace. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times. WILDFIRES have been a part of the California ecosystem since long before modern settlement, let alone the exurban sprawl that brings housing and development into fire-prone areas. We tend to deal with the possibility of raging firestorms abstractly — local governments do a little planning, fire departments offer advice on clearing brush and other flammables from property, insurers sell policies to cover our losses if a fire actually burns our homes and businesses to the ground. But those steps don't prepare us for the violent reality. The fire currently raging in Ventura County (the Thomas fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-school-fire-20171204-story.html)) and the one in foothill neighborhoods around Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley (the Creek fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-creek-fire-20171205-story.html)) are breathtaking in two ways: the sheer power of wind-driven wildfire to devour landscape, whether it hold scrub brush or mansions, and the fragility of human life in the face of it. Forecasts predict this current round of Santa Ana winds will run with varying intensity through most of the week, which means these two major fires — moving too fast to be contained — have only just begun to destroy property and upend lives. And it means, too, that additional dangerous fires are likely to crop up. The Riverdale fire (http://www.pe.com/2017/12/05/winds-continue-to-be-concern-for-firefighters-battling-jurupa-valley-riverdale-fire) already is burning in Riverside County, though firefighters at the moment seem to have that 50% contained. And late on Tuesday morning, Los Angeles County firefighters were trying halt yet another fire — the Rye fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fire-santa-clarita-20171205-story.html) — near Santa Clarita, which grew quickly and forced the closure of the 5 Freeway. There will be time for assessments after these firestorms subside. Were they natural or human-caused? Would better zoning limit exposure? Do we have sufficient capacity to fight so many fires at once? Are there better building materials we should be using to limit fire damage? For the time being, we must focus on evacuating where prudent, getting firefighters the support they need to protect as much property as possible without endangering themselves needlessly, and hope that the destruction we’ve already seen stands as the peak of this outbreak, and not just the opening act. October's wine country fires, which killed 44 people (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-44th-victim-firestorm-20171130-story.html), turned Santa Rosa neighborhoods (http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/santa-rosa-fire-how-a-sudden-firestorm-obliterated-a-city) to ash and damaged or destroyed more than $3 billion in property, serve as a sober warning of how bad this can get. What makes this season so awful, and what should make Southern California truly fearful, is that climate change likely means a future of more frequent and more intense wildfires. These fires will end, and what we do afterward — assessing how to better prepare, and how and whether to rebuild — will influence the damage from the fires next time. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Unhealthy air quality declared in parts of Los Angeles County due to smoke from Creek Fire (http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-southern-california-wildfires-live-unhealthy-air-quality-declared-in-parts-1512502821-htmlstory.html) http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-ventura-sylmar-wildfires-20171205-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-ventura-sylmar-wildfires-20171205-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 11:23:13 am from The Washington Post.... ‘Out of control’ Southern California fire explodes as growing blazes force tens of thousands to flee “The fire is still out of control and structures continue to be threatened throughout the fire area,” Ventura County officials said. By MAX UFBERG, MARK BERMAN and NOAH SMITH | 6:14PM EST — Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-12-05/Reuters/2017-12-05T131101Z_401985217_RC1558E74670_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg&w=975) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-12-05/Reuters/2017-12-05T131101Z_401985217_RC1558E74670_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg&w=1484) Smoke rises into the night sky as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. VENTURA, CALIFORNIA — Ferocious fires tore through Southern California on Tuesday, burning massive stretches of land in a matter of hours and forcing tens of thousands of people from their homes. As firefighters in Ventura County grappled with an explosive blaze northwest of downtown Los Angeles, others across the region confronted additional fires that burned during the day and forced additional evacuations. Authorities issued ominous warnings of more dangers to come during a “multi-day event” across the area, as weather forecasters said the region faces “extreme fire danger” through at least Thursday due to intense Santa Ana winds and low humidity that could cause the fires to grow rapidly. The wildfires are the latest grim chapter in a brutal year for California, coming just months after deadly blazes in the state's wine country killed dozens of people and razed thousands of buildings. The biggest fire on Tuesday was in Ventura County, where a small blaze quickly went out of control as it spread across more than 50,000 acres by the afternoon. The fire — which burned an area nearly as large as Seattle — stretched into the city of Ventura, home to more than 100,000 people. “The prospects for containment are not good,” Ventura County Fire Chief Mark Lorenzen said at a news briefing as the fire was beginning its aggressive expansion. “Really, Mother Nature's going to decide when we have the ability to put it out.” As the flames continued to spread, the sun rose over Ventura and revealed the damage left behind by what is named the Thomas Fire. Homes were destroyed and the charred remains of cars sat among heaps of ash. The impact hit home for many of those responding to the blaze: One local fire official told a reporter that he had to call his daughter to tell her that her apartment had burned. California Governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) declared a state of emergency in Ventura County, calling the fire “very dangerous” as it spread rapidly: “We'll continue to attack it with all we've got,” Brown said. “It's critical residents stay ready and evacuate immediately if told to do so.” What caused the fire remained unknown on Tuesday, Lorenzen said, and the fire's ultimate impact also remained unclear. Authorities said at least 150 structures in Ventura County were destroyed by Tuesday afternoon, but Lorenzen said that number could increase because firefighters were not yet able to assess the damage in most affected areas. He also warned that there is “a high possibility” that more areas will be evacuated. Lorenzen said 27,000 people were evacuated, and “almost none of them know the status of their homes.” Some of those who did were given bad news. Debbie Gennaro, who wiped tears from her eyes as she was consoled by her husband, Mark, said they were told that their home of 12 years has been burned to an ashy husk. They had packed up clothes, photographs and passports on Monday night and headed to a hotel ahead of the fire; the couple is unsure where they will go next. “This is life in Southern California. This is where we live,” Mark Gennaro said. “I stand on that back hill and I see all that brush and I'm like, ‘Something’s gonna happen at some point’.” The fires on Tuesday sparked unusually late in the wildfire season, which typically runs from spring to late fall. That is because, unlike other parts of the United States, summer and early fall tend to be dry in California. Wildfires need just three things to start and spread: fuel, dry weather and an ignition source. The dry weather is significant this week — humidity was just 10 percent on Monday morning and “red flag” fire conditions will last through at least to Thursday, according to the National Weather Service. The fire's fuel was a year in the making. After an epic, multiyear drought, California finally got the rain and snow it needed last winter, and it allowed vegetation to rebound. The hills turned green and the brush thickened. But as the weather turned dry, it created plentiful amounts of fuel, which are now feeding the wildfires. People who escaped the fires reported apocalyptic scenes. Gena Aguayo, 53, of Ventura, said she saw fire “coming down the mountain.” When Lorena Lara evacuated with her children on Tuesday morning after initially staying put, she said the wind was so strong it was blowing ashes into her home. “I've never experienced something like that,” said Lara, 42. “Maybe in Santa Barbara, but we didn't expect it here.” As the fires forced waves of people to rush from their homes, the contours of daily life were shut down. Multiple schools were closed on Tuesday, while some events were canceled amid the fires and power outages. In Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, more than 260,000 people were left without power at some point, Southern California Edison said in a tweet (https://twitter.com/SCE/status/937950829226659840). Fire officials were blunt about the blaze, saying that it was out of control and that structures throughout the area were under serious threat, with Ventura County officials saying that “due to the intensity of the fire, crews are having trouble making access and there are multiple reports of structures on fire.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2017/12/2300ventura-fire-1.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2017/12/2300ventura-fire-1.jpg) Further east, firefighters also hurried to respond to a wildfire north of downtown Los Angeles that also expanded quickly, growing to 11,000 acres by early Tuesday afternoon. Officials said that fire began outside the city limits before threatening parts of the Sylmar and Lake View Terrace areas. “We are facing critical fire behavior, in ways that people may not have experienced in the past,” Los Angeles County Fire Chief Daryl L. Osby said at a news briefing. “To our citizens, it is extremely critical that when you're asked to evacuate, evacuate early. We've had experience in other fires throughout this region that when we've had fatalities, it’s because people did not heed the early-warning evacuations.” Osby said that a number of structures had been lost to that blaze, dubbed the Creek Fire, but an exact count was not immediately available. “This is going to be a multi-day event,” Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck warned. “This will not be the only fire.” Underscoring Beck's point, Osby said that as he was preparing to brief reporters, his fire department was called to respond to another fire that had begun to burn in Santa Clarita, California. Osby said the county department diverted two helicopters to respond to that blaze, which officials said grew to 1,000 acres by midday on Tuesday and shut down the interstate there. The Creek Fire prompted a wave of mandatory evacuations (https://twitter.com/LACoFDPIO/status/938102205101387776), forcing people to leave about 2,500 homes, and a convalescent hospital evacuated 105 patients, officials said. It was unclear how many people have been injured or killed in the fires. In Ventura County, a battalion chief was injured in a traffic accident on Monday night and is expected to recover, Lorenzen said. The National Weather Service reported (https://twitter.com/NWSLosAngeles/status/937998432781914112) that damaging winds and “very critical fire weather conditions” would return late on Wednesday night and into Thursday, saying the conditions could lead to “very rapid fire growth” and “extreme fire behavior.” The NWS issued a red flag warning (https://alerts.weather.gov/cap/wwacapget.php?x=CA125879751F00.RedFlagWarning.125879B05020CA.LOXRFWLOX.e2c13b4591bf3403f520886b22bcb5d2) for Ventura and Los Angeles, saying wind gusts between 50 mph and 70 mph are likely through to Thursday. (https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video_thumb/DQSCO8xU8AExHlY.jpg) (https://twitter.com/NWSBayArea/status/938017993203822592) Authorities had previously warned that a combination of strong winds and low humidity this week could increase the wildfire risk across Southern California. Cal Fire said it had moved resources from the northern part of the state to the south and prepared aircraft and fire equipment to respond. Once the fire in Ventura County began on Monday, it moved “unbelievably fast,” said Ventura County Fire Sergeant Eric Buschow. Robert Perez, who preaches at the Santa Paula Church of Christ in Ventura County, was driving home from the airport when he first caught word of the Thomas Fire from his daughter, who called to warn him. Perez said that when he finally got home at around 11 p.m., the police were already evacuating his street. Perez, 57, quickly loaded his wife, daughter, grandson, and pets into his car and drove to the church. They planned to return home in the early hours of the morning, but the strong Santa Ana winds put their house in danger, so they remained at the church. Perez said his family was joined by several other church members, who he said slept overnight in their cars in the church parking lot. “The fire was so close to the church, I think it scared the members,” he said. “There were a few members that came and parked in our parking lot, but didn't go inside the church.” For some, the fires came as a shock. Lance Korthals, of Ventura, said he looked out from between his blinds early on Tuesday morning and “saw an odd color.” Then he saw that the hills behind his apartment complex “were just completely engulfed in flames.” Korthals, 66, a retired business executive originally from Detroit, said he then banged on doors trying to alert others in the apartment complex, but they had already evacuated, so he eventually hit the road. “The trees within the complex were already on fire,” Korthals said. “I had to drive around the flames that were already flowing into the road.” Others, though, said they expected something like this to happen. “We live in Southern California,” said Kevin Wycoff, 55, who was with his family at the Ventura County Fairgrounds, which was sheltering evacuees. “This [ash] is what we call snow. This is our weather.” Michelle Wycoff, his wife, added: “We'll have mudslides coming soon.” • Mark Berman reported from Washington. Travis M. Andrews, Angela Fritz and J. Freedom du Lac in Washington contributed to this report, which has been updated throughout the day. • Max Ufberg is the digital director at Pacific Standard, where he oversees the magazine's daily news coverage. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow at Wired, and a reporter at Philadelphia Weekly and the Virgin Islands Daily News. Ufberg has also written for The Washington Post, The New Yorker, Outside, Maxim, and many other outlets. • Mark Berman covers national news for The Washington Post and anchors Post Nation (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation), a destination for breaking news and stories from around the country. • Noah Smith is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was an assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, and he blogs at Noahpinion (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.co.nz). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: A ferocious wildfire threatens thousands of homes in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/815ef196-d9a2-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • VIDEO: View from above: Fires ravage Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/43b5468c-da11-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • Santa Ana winds sparked a critical wildfire threat in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/12/04/santa-ana-winds-have-sparked-a-critical-wildfire-threat-in-southern-california) • What happens when people live in areas where natural disasters can erupt (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/people-love-to-live-in-places-that-are-at-risk-for-disasters-and-this-is-what-happens/2017/10/15/ba50ed38-b03f-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html) • Ten miles of California's loveliest countryside, transformed by fire (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ten-miles-of-californias-loveliest-countryside-transformed-by-fire/2017/10/15/d82f8eb6-b10e-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 12:40:35 pm from The Washington Post.... PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Pictures of a raging Southern California wildfire Tuesday, December 05, 2017 AN EXPLOSIVE BRUSH FIRE raced through Southern California with ferocious speed… (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130643Z_1513283931_RC1E9A1B5370_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130643Z_1513283931_RC1E9A1B5370_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) A structure burns as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130515Z_1827298797_RC15BA33AEF0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130515Z_1827298797_RC15BA33AEF0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Property is torched at night as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130351Z_1086437445_RC1F220EACB0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130351Z_1086437445_RC1F220EACB0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) A home is destroyed as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130316Z_1673287812_RC1A57F1E650_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130316Z_1673287812_RC1A57F1E650_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Embers blow from a tree shortly before it fell near burned out cars as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/Rex_Thomas_Fire_which_began_in_Ventu_9258028A.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/Rex_Thomas_Fire_which_began_in_Ventu_9258028A.jpg) The Thomas Fire near Ventura, Califoria. — Photograph: European Pressphoto Agency/Agencia-EFE/Rex/Shutterstock. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130703Z_185609767_RC1C6A30C700_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130703Z_185609767_RC1C6A30C700_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Downtown Santa Paula, California, is darkened by a power outage as smoke rises in the distance from the Thomas Fire. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW177.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW177.jpg) A wildfire burns along a hillside near homes in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1MA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1MA.jpg) Firefighters battle a wildfire in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T161150Z_1737943514_RC1A2E520F40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T161150Z_1737943514_RC1A2E520F40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) Embers blow from burned trees as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_86684-7c411.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_86684-7c411.jpg) Flames consume a home as a wildfire rages in Ventura, California. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_62847-28eed.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_62847-28eed.jpg) Flames burn bushes near a home in Ventura. — Photograph: Jae C. Hong/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T165459Z_1773350652_RC1D17391C40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T165459Z_1773350652_RC1D17391C40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) A house burns from a wildfire in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1LH.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1LH.jpg) A wildfire burns along a hillside near Highway 126 in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_61143-3a6ed.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_61143-3a6ed.jpg) A man watches as a wildfire burns in Ventura. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_84164-30953.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_84164-30953.jpg) Smoke rises behind a leveled apartment complex in Ventura. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_01935-c816a.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_01935-c816a.jpg) A firefighter stands under windswept palm trees as he hoses down smoldering debris in Ventura. — Photograph: Daniel Dreifuss/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181914Z_1796031193_RC1A71497300_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181914Z_1796031193_RC1A71497300_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) The remains of homes after they burned to the ground during a wind-driven wildfire in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181516Z_1581017427_RC1EDDDB6C00_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181516Z_1581017427_RC1EDDDB6C00_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) The remains of a burned-down home in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Santa Ana winds sparked a critical wildfire threat in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/12/04/santa-ana-winds-have-sparked-a-critical-wildfire-threat-in-southern-california) • ‘Out of control’ Southern California fire explodes as growing blazes force tens of thousands to flee (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours) https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/photos-of-a-southern-california-fire-exploding-overnight/2017/12/05/22b77da2-d9c5-11e7-a841-2066faf731ef_gallery.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/photos-of-a-southern-california-fire-exploding-overnight/2017/12/05/22b77da2-d9c5-11e7-a841-2066faf731ef_gallery.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 05:40:14 pm Uh huh. Loony left media pictures of fires and associated bullshit lefty media climate hype. So what?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 07:20:27 pm from TVNZ ONE News.... • Will your insurance premiums go up because of climate change? (https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/your-insurance-premiums-go-up-because-climate-change-v1) (click on the link and watch the television news item) The Insurance Council is asking consumers to read between the lines as to whether insurance rates will be affected by the fact 2017 has been the most expensive year on record for weather related financial losses. With events like Cyclone Debbie costing insurance claims of more than $90 million, the Insurance Council has pointed the finger at climate change being a factor in the record breaking year. “There is no collusion in terms of determination of price but I'll leave it over to people to work out that if matters become highly, probably or certain.” “There is only one response the insurance sector can make,” Tim Grafton from the Insurance Council of NZ says. After wet weather events caused the brunt of headaches in 2017, a hot and dry Kiwi summer may pose new challenges, as the agriculture industry wonders how climate change will effect their industry in the new year. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 07:24:19 pm SNIGGER....I guess when your insurance company ramps up your insurance premiums to cover their increasing losses from increasing extreme weather events (in both regularity and severity) caused by global warming and the resultant climate change, you'll be able to stick your fingers in your ears, screw your eyes tightly shut, and chant this mantra over and over and over again: “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” “It's all bullshit....it isn't happening! I'm only imagining that I've got less money in my pocket!!” (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/TooFunny_zps2gz4suf2.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingPinkPanther_zpsy6iu8yso.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ROFLMAO_Dog_zpsc4esrpyc.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingHard_zpswco6umsu.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ItchyBugga_zpsebzrttez.gif~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 10:19:07 pm Wake up. The warming is natural.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 06, 2017, 10:22:51 pm I used to be a warmist. After a long period of listening to eminent sceptical scientists I decided to leave the death cult of warmunism 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2017, 10:37:14 pm In other words, you decided to bury your head in the sand, just like all the other selfish greedies. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2017, 11:44:41 pm I notice every stupid thing you say you're talking about yourself
In other words, you decided to bury your head in the sand, just like all the other selfish greedies >Jeff Bezos Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 08:33:32 am No, not at all. Those with their heads truly up their arses are those shreiking idiots who believe that taking away affordable energy is going to help humanity.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 08:49:02 am You said that 1000 year weather events are increasing. Show us hard incrontrovertible proof of that.
It's pure bullshit. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 08:53:58 am See enviro cultists like to play smoke and mirrors with insurance numbers. The reason why natural disasters cost more is because these days our infrastructure is a lot more dense and expensive, NOT because the failed theory of a trace gas induced Apocalypse (hyped up by eco evangelists and an idiotic media class).
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 08:59:20 am The insurance companies believe it and they have good reason to believe it. Year by year, the value of claims from extreme weather-related events have been increasing by a huge amount. You are already seeing that in your insurance premiums and those are about to get ramped up considerably more to cover the increased risk. Oh well, I guess you STUPID people can always pretend that your insurance costs aren't increasing, eh? Just get pissed and ignore it. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 10:26:27 am Only if you believe compulsive bed wetters like Greenpiss.
Check the facts. There is no trend for increased "extreme weather events" over time scales that matter. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 10:51:14 am Once you realise the CO2 mania was created and hyped by human hating environmental activists you can then open your mind to listening properly to highly credentialed sceptical climate scientists. They are the ones who actually make sense.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 01:53:21 pm from The Washington Post.... The most accurate climate change models predict the most alarming consequences, study finds The study adds to a growing body of bad news about how human activity is changing the planet's climate and how dire those changes will be in the future. By CHRIS MOONEY | 1:00PM EST — Wednesday, December 06, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/06/KidsPost/Images/870917168.jpg&w=1075) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/06/KidsPost/Images/870917168.jpg&w=1484) People pass the “Climate Planet”, an exhibition and film venue sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development, near the plenary halls of the COP 23 United Nations Climate Change Conference on November 6th in Bonn, Germany. — Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images. THE climate change simulations that best capture current planetary conditions are also the ones that predict the most dire levels of human-driven warming, according to a statistical study released in the journal Nature (http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature24672) on Wednesday. The study, by Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, examined the high-powered climate change simulations, or “models”, that researchers use to project the future of the planet based on the physical equations that govern the behavior of the atmosphere and oceans. The researchers then looked at what the models that best captured current conditions high in the atmosphere predicted was coming. Those models generally predicted a higher level of warming than models that did not capture these conditions as well. The study adds to a growing body of bad news about how human activity is changing the planet's climate and how dire those changes will be. But according to several outside scientists consulted by The Washington Post, while the research is well-executed and intriguing, it's also not yet definitive. “The study is interesting and concerning, but the details need more investigation,” said Ben Sanderson, a climate expert at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. Brown and Caldeira are far from the first to study such models in a large group, but they did so with a twist. In the past, it has been common to combine together the results of dozens of these models, and so give a range for how much the planet might warm for a given level of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. That's the practice of the leading international climate science body, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Instead, Brown and Caldeira compared these models' performance with recent satellite observations of the actual atmosphere and, in particular, of the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation that ultimately determines the Earth's temperature. Then, they tried to determine which models performed better. “We know enough about the climate system that it doesn't necessarily make sense to throw all the models in a pool and say, we're blind to which models might be good and which might be bad,” said Brown, a postdoc at the Carnegie Institution. The research found the models that do the best job capturing the Earth's actual “energy imbalance”, as the authors put it, are also the ones that simulate more warming in the planet's future. Under a high warming scenario in which large emissions continue throughout the century, the models as a whole give a mean warming of 4.3 degrees Celsius (or 7.74 degrees Fahrenheit), plus or minus 0.7 degrees Celsius, for the period between 2081 and 2100, the study noted. But the best models, according to this test, gave an answer of 4.8 degrees Celsius (8.64 degrees Fahrenheit), plus or minus 0.4 degrees Celsius. Overall, the change amounted to bumping up the projected warming by about 15 percent. The researchers presented this figure to capture the findings: (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/12/brown-caldeira-2017-nature.png&w=525) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/12/brown-caldeira-2017-nature.png&w=1484) When it comes down to the question of why the finding emerged, it appears that much of the result had to do with the way different models handled one of the biggest uncertainties in how the planet will respond to climate change. “This is really about the clouds,” said Michael Winton, a leader in the climate model development team at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who discussed the study with The Post but was not involved in the research. Clouds play a crucial role in the climate because among other roles, their light surfaces reflect incoming solar radiation back out to space. So if clouds change under global warming, that will in turn change the overall climate response. How clouds might change is quite complex, however, and as the models are unable to fully capture this behavior due to the small scale on which it occurs, the programs instead tend to include statistically based assumptions about the behavior of clouds. This is called “parameterization” (https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch8s8-2-1-3.html). But researchers aren't very confident that the parameterizations are right. “So what you're looking at is, the behavior of what I would say is the weak link in the model,” Winton said. This is where the Brown and Caldeira study comes in, basically identifying models that, by virtue of this programming or other factors, seem to do a better job of representing the current behavior of clouds. However, Winton and two other scientists consulted by The Post all said that they respected the study's attempt, but weren't fully convinced. Sanderson of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, was concerned that the current study might find an effect that wasn't actually there, in part because models are not fully independent of one another — they tend to overlap in many areas. “This approach is designed to find relationships between future temperatures and things we can observe today,” he said. “The problem is we don't have enough models to be confident that the relationships are robust. The fact that models from different institutions share components makes this problem worse, and the authors haven't really addressed this fully.” “It's great that people are doing this well and we should continue to do this kind of work — it's an important complement to assessments of sensitivity from other methods,” added Gavin Schmidt, who heads NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “But we should always remember that it's the consilience of evidence in such a complex area that usually gives you robust predictions.” Schmidt noted future models might make this current finding disappear — and also noted the increase in warming in the better models found in the study was relatively small. Lead study author Brown argued, though, that the results have a major real world implication: They could mean the world can emit even less carbon dioxide than we thought if it wants to hold warming below the widely accepted target of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). This would mean shrinking the “carbon budget.” The study “would imply that to stabilize temperature at 2 degrees Celsius, you'd have to have 15 percent less cumulative CO² emissions,” he said. The world can ill afford that — as it is, it is very hard to see how even the current carbon budget can be met. The world is generally regarded as being off track when it comes to cutting its emissions, and with continuing economic growth, the challenge is enormous. In this sense, that the new research will have to win acceptance may be at least a temporary reprieve for policymakers, who would be in a tough position indeed if it were shown to be definitively right. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Government's dire climate change report blames humans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/67fbb7b0-c0f3-11e7-9294-705f80164f6e_video.html) • The world's clouds are in different places than they were 30 years ago (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/07/11/the-worlds-clouds-are-in-different-places-than-they-were-30-years-ago) • Why uncertainty about climate change is definitely not our friend (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/07/why-uncertainty-about-climate-change-is-not-our-friend) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/06/the-most-accurate-climate-change-models-predict-the-most-alarming-consequences-study-claims (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/06/the-most-accurate-climate-change-models-predict-the-most-alarming-consequences-study-claims) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 05:20:27 pm Nope. Their model failed to predict the widely acknowledged warming pause. That's why they started pulling silly reasons for the pause out of their bottoms in a blind panic.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 07, 2017, 05:23:19 pm " The warming got hidden for 10 or so years in the deep oceans" bwah hah hah hah 😁 Now explain how the fuck hot water ends up in the deep oceans??
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 06:31:29 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:36:45 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Climate scientists see alarming new threat to California By EVAN HALPER | 3:00AM PST — Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2012277_me_1001_c_2_1_MA2UE195.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2012277_me_1001_c_2_1_MA2UE195.jpg) Jon Pedotti on a Cambria lake bed in 2014. California just emerged from what one study called the most severe drought in 1,200 years. — Photograph: Al Seib/Los Angeles Times. CALIFORNIA could be hit with significantly more dangerous and more frequent droughts in the near future as changes in weather patterns triggered by global warming block rainfall from reaching the state, according to new research led by scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Using complex new modeling, the scientists have found that rapidly melting Arctic sea ice now threatens to diminish precipitation over California by as much as 15% within 20 to 30 years. Such a change would have profound economic impacts in a state where the most recent drought drained several billion dollars out of the economy, severely stressed infrastructure and highlighted how even the state most proactively confronting global warming is not prepared for its fallout. The latest study adds a worrying dimension to the challenge California is already facing in adapting to climate change, and shifts focus to melting polar ice that only recently has been discovered to have such a direct, potentially dramatic impact on the West Coast. While climate scientists generally agree that the increased temperatures already resulting from climate change have seriously exacerbated drought in California, there has been debate over whether global warming would affect the amount of precipitation that comes to California. The study, published on Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications (http://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01907-4), provides compelling evidence that it would. The model the scientists used homed in on the link between the disappearance of sea ice in the Arctic and the buildup of high ridges of atmospheric pressure over the Pacific Ocean. Those ridges push winter storms away from the state, causing drought. The scientists found that as the sea ice goes away, there is an increase in the formation of ridges. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image/975) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a25ac65/turbine/la-1512418398-uz564mh46r-snap-image) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/Google Earth. “Our design was aimed at looking at what will happen in 20 to 30 years, when the Arctic becomes ice-free in the summer,” said Ivana Cvijanovic, the lead climate scientist on the study. “It is coming soon. We want to understand what the impact would be…. The similarities between what will happen and [how weather patterns caused] the most recent drought are really striking.” Rainfall in California would drop, on average, 10% to 15% in the coming decades under Cvijanovic's model, but the decline would present itself sporadically, exacerbating the potential for drought. Some years the decline in rainfall because of diminished Arctic ice would be much steeper than 15%. Other years would be wetter than they otherwise would be. The study is yet another by federally funded researchers that finds the failure to more rapidly diminish greenhouse gas emissions could have a serious impact on California and other parts of the country. The findings contrast starkly with Trump administration policy on warming, which ignores the mainstream scientific consensus that human activity is driving it. The administration has been working aggressively to unravel Obama-era action on climate change, withdrawing from the Paris agreement that seeks to limit its impact, dismantling restrictions on power plant emissions, and signaling that it will relax vehicle mileage rules that are a critical component to addressing global warming. The warnings about the impact of melting sea ice on California are being embraced by some prominent climate scientists. They say that while the study is just one of multiple models being used to project global warming impacts, it is bolstered by other studies that have signaled a connection between the ice melt in the Arctic and the buildup of atmospheric ridges affecting California. Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, said in an email that it paints a sobering picture for the state. “As we learn more about the subtleties in the dynamics of climate change, we are learning that certain climate change impacts, like California drought, may be far worse than we had previously thought,” Mann wrote. “It also means that, when it comes to water resource issues in California, the impacts of climate change may exceed our adaptive capacity. That leaves only mitigation — doing something about climate change — as a viable strategy moving forward.” (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a0b5b28/turbine/la-1510693668-ztf5vgurnz-snap-image) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a0b5b28/turbine/la-1510693668-ztf5vgurnz-snap-image) In this May 2nd, 2014, photo, dust rises around a walnut tree as a worker mows weeds in Gridley, California. — Photograph: Jae C. Hong/Associated Press. Governor Jerry Brown has been taking a lead globally in confronting climate change, warning the Trump administration's approach is reckless and defies science. He traveled last month to a United Nations climate conference in Bonn, Germany, to meet with world leaders and send the signal that much of the nation is moving to act on climate change, even if President Trump is not. Brown is helping lead a coalition of state and local governments that is vowing to reduce emissions enough to meet the entire country’s obligation under the Paris agreement, which President Obama signed last year. But the Trump administration’s retreat threatens to substantially slow the rate at which U.S. climate emissions decline. And even if all commitments made in the Paris agreement are kept, climate scientists say the Arctic ice situation would still be dire. “This is happening very quickly,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University. “The change is dramatic, and it is taking place faster than had been projected by climate models.” Diffenbaugh said the study is a breakthrough for climate researchers who have been struggling to pinpoint the impacts of melting Arctic ice. “Being able to isolate the effect of melting sea ice on the atmosphere and the ocean's response — and how it impacts precipitation in California — that is a big step forward,” he said. Because the model only projects future impacts, the study does not focus on the role melting Arctic ice may have played in the massive drought from which California recently emerged — the most severe in 1,200 years, according to one scientific study. But the atmospheric patterns leading to that drought had all the characteristics of those that can be triggered by Arctic sea ice melt, Cvijanovic said, raising the prospect that California might have dodged the latest drought — or at least not have been hit as hard — if not for the large amount of ice that has already vanished. “There is lots of research to be done,” she said. “Hopefully we do it in time to allow people to plan for whatever may be coming.” • Evan Halper writes for the Los Angeles Times about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C., with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • 150 structures destroyed, 27,000 people evacuated in raging Ventura wildfire (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-school-fire-20171204-story.html) • ‘It's coming across this way!’ Residents tend to older parents as fire approaches. (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fire-santa-paula-20171205-story.html) • More than 260,000 customers lose power amid intense winds (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-thomas-fire-ventura-power-20171204-story.html) • 7,700 homes evacuated as fire rages; traffic jams as residents flee (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-evacuation-ventura-county-fire-20171204-story.html) http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-climate-california-20171205-htmlstory.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:37:11 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... EDITORIAL: While Southern California battles its wildfires, we have to start preparing for our hotter, drier future By the LOS ANGELES TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | 11:40AM PST - Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a26e91b/turbine/la-1512499479-ues2admb63-snap-image/975) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a26e91b/turbine/la-1512499479-ues2admb63-snap-image) Two firefighters confront flames along Kagel Canyon Street in Lakeview Terrace. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times. WILDFIRES have been a part of the California ecosystem since long before modern settlement, let alone the exurban sprawl that brings housing and development into fire-prone areas. We tend to deal with the possibility of raging firestorms abstractly — local governments do a little planning, fire departments offer advice on clearing brush and other flammables from property, insurers sell policies to cover our losses if a fire actually burns our homes and businesses to the ground. But those steps don't prepare us for the violent reality. The fire currently raging in Ventura County (the Thomas fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-school-fire-20171204-story.html)) and the one in foothill neighborhoods around Sylmar in the San Fernando Valley (the Creek fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-creek-fire-20171205-story.html)) are breathtaking in two ways: the sheer power of wind-driven wildfire to devour landscape, whether it hold scrub brush or mansions, and the fragility of human life in the face of it. Forecasts predict this current round of Santa Ana winds will run with varying intensity through most of the week, which means these two major fires — moving too fast to be contained — have only just begun to destroy property and upend lives. And it means, too, that additional dangerous fires are likely to crop up. The Riverdale fire (http://www.pe.com/2017/12/05/winds-continue-to-be-concern-for-firefighters-battling-jurupa-valley-riverdale-fire) already is burning in Riverside County, though firefighters at the moment seem to have that 50% contained. And late on Tuesday morning, Los Angeles County firefighters were trying halt yet another fire — the Rye fire (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fire-santa-clarita-20171205-story.html) — near Santa Clarita, which grew quickly and forced the closure of the 5 Freeway. There will be time for assessments after these firestorms subside. Were they natural or human-caused? Would better zoning limit exposure? Do we have sufficient capacity to fight so many fires at once? Are there better building materials we should be using to limit fire damage? For the time being, we must focus on evacuating where prudent, getting firefighters the support they need to protect as much property as possible without endangering themselves needlessly, and hope that the destruction we’ve already seen stands as the peak of this outbreak, and not just the opening act. October's wine country fires, which killed 44 people (http://beta.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-44th-victim-firestorm-20171130-story.html), turned Santa Rosa neighborhoods (http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/09/santa-rosa-fire-how-a-sudden-firestorm-obliterated-a-city) to ash and damaged or destroyed more than $3 billion in property, serve as a sober warning of how bad this can get. What makes this season so awful, and what should make Southern California truly fearful, is that climate change likely means a future of more frequent and more intense wildfires. These fires will end, and what we do afterward — assessing how to better prepare, and how and whether to rebuild — will influence the damage from the fires next time. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Unhealthy air quality declared in parts of Los Angeles County due to smoke from Creek Fire (http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-southern-california-wildfires-live-unhealthy-air-quality-declared-in-parts-1512502821-htmlstory.html) http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-ventura-sylmar-wildfires-20171205-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-ventura-sylmar-wildfires-20171205-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:37:30 pm from The Washington Post.... ‘Out of control’ Southern California fire explodes as growing blazes force tens of thousands to flee “The fire is still out of control and structures continue to be threatened throughout the fire area,” Ventura County officials said. By MAX UFBERG, MARK BERMAN and NOAH SMITH | 6:14PM EST — Tuesday, December 05, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-12-05/Reuters/2017-12-05T131101Z_401985217_RC1558E74670_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg&w=975) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-12-05/Reuters/2017-12-05T131101Z_401985217_RC1558E74670_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg&w=1484) Smoke rises into the night sky as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. VENTURA, CALIFORNIA — Ferocious fires tore through Southern California on Tuesday, burning massive stretches of land in a matter of hours and forcing tens of thousands of people from their homes. As firefighters in Ventura County grappled with an explosive blaze northwest of downtown Los Angeles, others across the region confronted additional fires that burned during the day and forced additional evacuations. Authorities issued ominous warnings of more dangers to come during a “multi-day event” across the area, as weather forecasters said the region faces “extreme fire danger” through at least Thursday due to intense Santa Ana winds and low humidity that could cause the fires to grow rapidly. The wildfires are the latest grim chapter in a brutal year for California, coming just months after deadly blazes in the state's wine country killed dozens of people and razed thousands of buildings. The biggest fire on Tuesday was in Ventura County, where a small blaze quickly went out of control as it spread across more than 50,000 acres by the afternoon. The fire — which burned an area nearly as large as Seattle — stretched into the city of Ventura, home to more than 100,000 people. “The prospects for containment are not good,” Ventura County Fire Chief Mark Lorenzen said at a news briefing as the fire was beginning its aggressive expansion. “Really, Mother Nature's going to decide when we have the ability to put it out.” As the flames continued to spread, the sun rose over Ventura and revealed the damage left behind by what is named the Thomas Fire. Homes were destroyed and the charred remains of cars sat among heaps of ash. The impact hit home for many of those responding to the blaze: One local fire official told a reporter that he had to call his daughter to tell her that her apartment had burned. California Governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) declared a state of emergency in Ventura County, calling the fire “very dangerous” as it spread rapidly: “We'll continue to attack it with all we've got,” Brown said. “It's critical residents stay ready and evacuate immediately if told to do so.” What caused the fire remained unknown on Tuesday, Lorenzen said, and the fire's ultimate impact also remained unclear. Authorities said at least 150 structures in Ventura County were destroyed by Tuesday afternoon, but Lorenzen said that number could increase because firefighters were not yet able to assess the damage in most affected areas. He also warned that there is “a high possibility” that more areas will be evacuated. Lorenzen said 27,000 people were evacuated, and “almost none of them know the status of their homes.” Some of those who did were given bad news. Debbie Gennaro, who wiped tears from her eyes as she was consoled by her husband, Mark, said they were told that their home of 12 years has been burned to an ashy husk. They had packed up clothes, photographs and passports on Monday night and headed to a hotel ahead of the fire; the couple is unsure where they will go next. “This is life in Southern California. This is where we live,” Mark Gennaro said. “I stand on that back hill and I see all that brush and I'm like, ‘Something’s gonna happen at some point’.” The fires on Tuesday sparked unusually late in the wildfire season, which typically runs from spring to late fall. That is because, unlike other parts of the United States, summer and early fall tend to be dry in California. Wildfires need just three things to start and spread: fuel, dry weather and an ignition source. The dry weather is significant this week — humidity was just 10 percent on Monday morning and “red flag” fire conditions will last through at least to Thursday, according to the National Weather Service. The fire's fuel was a year in the making. After an epic, multiyear drought, California finally got the rain and snow it needed last winter, and it allowed vegetation to rebound. The hills turned green and the brush thickened. But as the weather turned dry, it created plentiful amounts of fuel, which are now feeding the wildfires. People who escaped the fires reported apocalyptic scenes. Gena Aguayo, 53, of Ventura, said she saw fire “coming down the mountain.” When Lorena Lara evacuated with her children on Tuesday morning after initially staying put, she said the wind was so strong it was blowing ashes into her home. “I've never experienced something like that,” said Lara, 42. “Maybe in Santa Barbara, but we didn't expect it here.” As the fires forced waves of people to rush from their homes, the contours of daily life were shut down. Multiple schools were closed on Tuesday, while some events were canceled amid the fires and power outages. In Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, more than 260,000 people were left without power at some point, Southern California Edison said in a tweet (https://twitter.com/SCE/status/937950829226659840). Fire officials were blunt about the blaze, saying that it was out of control and that structures throughout the area were under serious threat, with Ventura County officials saying that “due to the intensity of the fire, crews are having trouble making access and there are multiple reports of structures on fire.” (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2017/12/2300ventura-fire-1.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2017/12/2300ventura-fire-1.jpg) Further east, firefighters also hurried to respond to a wildfire north of downtown Los Angeles that also expanded quickly, growing to 11,000 acres by early Tuesday afternoon. Officials said that fire began outside the city limits before threatening parts of the Sylmar and Lake View Terrace areas. “We are facing critical fire behavior, in ways that people may not have experienced in the past,” Los Angeles County Fire Chief Daryl L. Osby said at a news briefing. “To our citizens, it is extremely critical that when you're asked to evacuate, evacuate early. We've had experience in other fires throughout this region that when we've had fatalities, it’s because people did not heed the early-warning evacuations.” Osby said that a number of structures had been lost to that blaze, dubbed the Creek Fire, but an exact count was not immediately available. “This is going to be a multi-day event,” Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck warned. “This will not be the only fire.” Underscoring Beck's point, Osby said that as he was preparing to brief reporters, his fire department was called to respond to another fire that had begun to burn in Santa Clarita, California. Osby said the county department diverted two helicopters to respond to that blaze, which officials said grew to 1,000 acres by midday on Tuesday and shut down the interstate there. The Creek Fire prompted a wave of mandatory evacuations (https://twitter.com/LACoFDPIO/status/938102205101387776), forcing people to leave about 2,500 homes, and a convalescent hospital evacuated 105 patients, officials said. It was unclear how many people have been injured or killed in the fires. In Ventura County, a battalion chief was injured in a traffic accident on Monday night and is expected to recover, Lorenzen said. The National Weather Service reported (https://twitter.com/NWSLosAngeles/status/937998432781914112) that damaging winds and “very critical fire weather conditions” would return late on Wednesday night and into Thursday, saying the conditions could lead to “very rapid fire growth” and “extreme fire behavior.” The NWS issued a red flag warning (https://alerts.weather.gov/cap/wwacapget.php?x=CA125879751F00.RedFlagWarning.125879B05020CA.LOXRFWLOX.e2c13b4591bf3403f520886b22bcb5d2) for Ventura and Los Angeles, saying wind gusts between 50 mph and 70 mph are likely through to Thursday. (https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video_thumb/DQSCO8xU8AExHlY.jpg) (https://twitter.com/NWSBayArea/status/938017993203822592) Authorities had previously warned that a combination of strong winds and low humidity this week could increase the wildfire risk across Southern California. Cal Fire said it had moved resources from the northern part of the state to the south and prepared aircraft and fire equipment to respond. Once the fire in Ventura County began on Monday, it moved “unbelievably fast,” said Ventura County Fire Sergeant Eric Buschow. Robert Perez, who preaches at the Santa Paula Church of Christ in Ventura County, was driving home from the airport when he first caught word of the Thomas Fire from his daughter, who called to warn him. Perez said that when he finally got home at around 11 p.m., the police were already evacuating his street. Perez, 57, quickly loaded his wife, daughter, grandson, and pets into his car and drove to the church. They planned to return home in the early hours of the morning, but the strong Santa Ana winds put their house in danger, so they remained at the church. Perez said his family was joined by several other church members, who he said slept overnight in their cars in the church parking lot. “The fire was so close to the church, I think it scared the members,” he said. “There were a few members that came and parked in our parking lot, but didn't go inside the church.” For some, the fires came as a shock. Lance Korthals, of Ventura, said he looked out from between his blinds early on Tuesday morning and “saw an odd color.” Then he saw that the hills behind his apartment complex “were just completely engulfed in flames.” Korthals, 66, a retired business executive originally from Detroit, said he then banged on doors trying to alert others in the apartment complex, but they had already evacuated, so he eventually hit the road. “The trees within the complex were already on fire,” Korthals said. “I had to drive around the flames that were already flowing into the road.” Others, though, said they expected something like this to happen. “We live in Southern California,” said Kevin Wycoff, 55, who was with his family at the Ventura County Fairgrounds, which was sheltering evacuees. “This [ash] is what we call snow. This is our weather.” Michelle Wycoff, his wife, added: “We'll have mudslides coming soon.” • Mark Berman reported from Washington. Travis M. Andrews, Angela Fritz and J. Freedom du Lac in Washington contributed to this report, which has been updated throughout the day. • Max Ufberg is the digital director at Pacific Standard, where he oversees the magazine's daily news coverage. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow at Wired, and a reporter at Philadelphia Weekly and the Virgin Islands Daily News. Ufberg has also written for The Washington Post, The New Yorker, Outside, Maxim, and many other outlets. • Mark Berman covers national news for The Washington Post and anchors Post Nation (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation), a destination for breaking news and stories from around the country. • Noah Smith is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was an assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, and he blogs at Noahpinion (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.co.nz). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: A ferocious wildfire threatens thousands of homes in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/815ef196-d9a2-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • VIDEO: View from above: Fires ravage Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/43b5468c-da11-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • Santa Ana winds sparked a critical wildfire threat in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/12/04/santa-ana-winds-have-sparked-a-critical-wildfire-threat-in-southern-california) • What happens when people live in areas where natural disasters can erupt (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/people-love-to-live-in-places-that-are-at-risk-for-disasters-and-this-is-what-happens/2017/10/15/ba50ed38-b03f-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html) • Ten miles of California's loveliest countryside, transformed by fire (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ten-miles-of-californias-loveliest-countryside-transformed-by-fire/2017/10/15/d82f8eb6-b10e-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:37:52 pm from The Washington Post.... PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Pictures of a raging Southern California wildfire Tuesday, December 05, 2017 AN EXPLOSIVE BRUSH FIRE raced through Southern California with ferocious speed… (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130643Z_1513283931_RC1E9A1B5370_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130643Z_1513283931_RC1E9A1B5370_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) A structure burns as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130515Z_1827298797_RC15BA33AEF0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130515Z_1827298797_RC15BA33AEF0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Property is torched at night as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130351Z_1086437445_RC1F220EACB0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130351Z_1086437445_RC1F220EACB0_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) A home is destroyed as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130316Z_1673287812_RC1A57F1E650_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130316Z_1673287812_RC1A57F1E650_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Embers blow from a tree shortly before it fell near burned out cars as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/Rex_Thomas_Fire_which_began_in_Ventu_9258028A.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/Rex_Thomas_Fire_which_began_in_Ventu_9258028A.jpg) The Thomas Fire near Ventura, Califoria. — Photograph: European Pressphoto Agency/Agencia-EFE/Rex/Shutterstock. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130703Z_185609767_RC1C6A30C700_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T130703Z_185609767_RC1C6A30C700_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRE.jpg) Downtown Santa Paula, California, is darkened by a power outage as smoke rises in the distance from the Thomas Fire. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW177.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW177.jpg) A wildfire burns along a hillside near homes in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1MA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1MA.jpg) Firefighters battle a wildfire in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T161150Z_1737943514_RC1A2E520F40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T161150Z_1737943514_RC1A2E520F40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) Embers blow from burned trees as strong winds push the Thomas Fire across thousands of acres near Santa Paula. — Photograph: David Mcnew/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_86684-7c411.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_86684-7c411.jpg) Flames consume a home as a wildfire rages in Ventura, California. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_62847-28eed.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_62847-28eed.jpg) Flames burn bushes near a home in Ventura. — Photograph: Jae C. Hong/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T165459Z_1773350652_RC1D17391C40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T165459Z_1773350652_RC1D17391C40_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) A house burns from a wildfire in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1LH.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/AFP_UW1LH.jpg) A wildfire burns along a hillside near Highway 126 in Santa Paula. — Photograph: Ringo Chiu/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_61143-3a6ed.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_61143-3a6ed.jpg) A man watches as a wildfire burns in Ventura. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_84164-30953.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/Foreign/Images/APTOPIX_California_Wildfires_84164-30953.jpg) Smoke rises behind a leveled apartment complex in Ventura. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_01935-c816a.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/California_Wildfires_01935-c816a.jpg) A firefighter stands under windswept palm trees as he hoses down smoldering debris in Ventura. — Photograph: Daniel Dreifuss/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181914Z_1796031193_RC1A71497300_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181914Z_1796031193_RC1A71497300_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) The remains of homes after they burned to the ground during a wind-driven wildfire in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181516Z_1581017427_RC1EDDDB6C00_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/12/05/National-Enterprise/Images/2017-12-05T181516Z_1581017427_RC1EDDDB6C00_RTRMADP_3_USA-WILDFIRES.jpg) The remains of a burned-down home in Ventura. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Santa Ana winds sparked a critical wildfire threat in Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/12/04/santa-ana-winds-have-sparked-a-critical-wildfire-threat-in-southern-california) • ‘Out of control’ Southern California fire explodes as growing blazes force tens of thousands to flee (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/12/05/out-of-control-southern-california-brush-fire-grows-from-50-to-25000-acres-in-7-hours) https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/photos-of-a-southern-california-fire-exploding-overnight/2017/12/05/22b77da2-d9c5-11e7-a841-2066faf731ef_gallery.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/photos-of-a-southern-california-fire-exploding-overnight/2017/12/05/22b77da2-d9c5-11e7-a841-2066faf731ef_gallery.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:38:19 pm from TVNZ ONE News.... • Will your insurance premiums go up because of climate change? (https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/your-insurance-premiums-go-up-because-climate-change-v1) (click on the link and watch the television news item) The Insurance Council is asking consumers to read between the lines as to whether insurance rates will be affected by the fact 2017 has been the most expensive year on record for weather related financial losses. With events like Cyclone Debbie costing insurance claims of more than $90 million, the Insurance Council has pointed the finger at climate change being a factor in the record breaking year. “There is no collusion in terms of determination of price but I'll leave it over to people to work out that if matters become highly, probably or certain.” “There is only one response the insurance sector can make,” Tim Grafton from the Insurance Council of NZ says. After wet weather events caused the brunt of headaches in 2017, a hot and dry Kiwi summer may pose new challenges, as the agriculture industry wonders how climate change will effect their industry in the new year. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:38:57 pm Some photographs from the Los Angeles Times… (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029266_la-me-tho_3_1_962UIC96.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029266_la-me-tho_3_1_962UIC96.jpg) A firefighter at a burning apartment building in Ventura, where the Thomas fire charred 55,500 acres and forced 27,000 to flee. — Photograph: Michael Owen Baker/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029285_la-me-tho_2_1_962UICQS.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029285_la-me-tho_2_1_962UICQS.jpg) Muriel Rowley, 15, left; Olivia Jacobson, 16; Emma Jacobson, 19; and Anna Niebergall, 20, comfort one another as the Jacobsons' home burns in Ventura. — Photograph: Marcus Yam/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_3N2UIPGQ.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_3N2UIPGQ.jpg) A firefighter works against the Creek fire in the Shadow Hills area of Los Angeles as a structure burns in the background. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_FA2UJMVE.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_FA2UJMVE.jpg) Judy Hofmann-Sanders watches as the Creek fire consumes her home on McBroom Street in L.A.'s Shadow Hills neighborhood on Tuesday. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029338_me_thomas_2_1_EQ2UIKJO.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029338_me_thomas_2_1_EQ2UIKJO.jpg) An aerial view of some of the 150 structures in Ventura County that were destroyed by the Thomas fire. Cal Fire officials said the number could grow by hundreds. — Photograph: Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029363_la-me-cre_2_1_EQ2UILT1.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029363_la-me-cre_2_1_EQ2UILT1.jpg) A firefighter monitors the Creek fire near Johanna Avenue and McBroom Street in Shadow Hills. The blaze scorched 11,000 acres and burned 30 homes. — Photograph: Luis Sinco/Los Angeles Times. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_962UII18.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3029280_ME_1205_C_2_1_962UII18.jpg) Two women help a horse that was spooked by the Creek fire and fell in Lake View Terrace. The fire started in the San Gabriel Mountain foothills before dawn. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:39:14 pm from The Washington Post.... The most accurate climate change models predict the most alarming consequences, study finds The study adds to a growing body of bad news about how human activity is changing the planet's climate and how dire those changes will be in the future. By CHRIS MOONEY | 1:00PM EST — Wednesday, December 06, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/06/KidsPost/Images/870917168.jpg&w=1075) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/11/06/KidsPost/Images/870917168.jpg&w=1484) People pass the “Climate Planet”, an exhibition and film venue sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development, near the plenary halls of the COP 23 United Nations Climate Change Conference on November 6th in Bonn, Germany. — Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images. THE climate change simulations that best capture current planetary conditions are also the ones that predict the most dire levels of human-driven warming, according to a statistical study released in the journal Nature (http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature24672) on Wednesday. The study, by Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, examined the high-powered climate change simulations, or “models”, that researchers use to project the future of the planet based on the physical equations that govern the behavior of the atmosphere and oceans. The researchers then looked at what the models that best captured current conditions high in the atmosphere predicted was coming. Those models generally predicted a higher level of warming than models that did not capture these conditions as well. The study adds to a growing body of bad news about how human activity is changing the planet's climate and how dire those changes will be. But according to several outside scientists consulted by The Washington Post, while the research is well-executed and intriguing, it's also not yet definitive. “The study is interesting and concerning, but the details need more investigation,” said Ben Sanderson, a climate expert at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. Brown and Caldeira are far from the first to study such models in a large group, but they did so with a twist. In the past, it has been common to combine together the results of dozens of these models, and so give a range for how much the planet might warm for a given level of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. That's the practice of the leading international climate science body, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Instead, Brown and Caldeira compared these models' performance with recent satellite observations of the actual atmosphere and, in particular, of the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation that ultimately determines the Earth's temperature. Then, they tried to determine which models performed better. “We know enough about the climate system that it doesn't necessarily make sense to throw all the models in a pool and say, we're blind to which models might be good and which might be bad,” said Brown, a postdoc at the Carnegie Institution. The research found the models that do the best job capturing the Earth's actual “energy imbalance”, as the authors put it, are also the ones that simulate more warming in the planet's future. Under a high warming scenario in which large emissions continue throughout the century, the models as a whole give a mean warming of 4.3 degrees Celsius (or 7.74 degrees Fahrenheit), plus or minus 0.7 degrees Celsius, for the period between 2081 and 2100, the study noted. But the best models, according to this test, gave an answer of 4.8 degrees Celsius (8.64 degrees Fahrenheit), plus or minus 0.4 degrees Celsius. Overall, the change amounted to bumping up the projected warming by about 15 percent. The researchers presented this figure to capture the findings: (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/12/brown-caldeira-2017-nature.png&w=525) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2017/12/brown-caldeira-2017-nature.png&w=1484) When it comes down to the question of why the finding emerged, it appears that much of the result had to do with the way different models handled one of the biggest uncertainties in how the planet will respond to climate change. “This is really about the clouds,” said Michael Winton, a leader in the climate model development team at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who discussed the study with The Post but was not involved in the research. Clouds play a crucial role in the climate because among other roles, their light surfaces reflect incoming solar radiation back out to space. So if clouds change under global warming, that will in turn change the overall climate response. How clouds might change is quite complex, however, and as the models are unable to fully capture this behavior due to the small scale on which it occurs, the programs instead tend to include statistically based assumptions about the behavior of clouds. This is called “parameterization” (https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch8s8-2-1-3.html). But researchers aren't very confident that the parameterizations are right. “So what you're looking at is, the behavior of what I would say is the weak link in the model,” Winton said. This is where the Brown and Caldeira study comes in, basically identifying models that, by virtue of this programming or other factors, seem to do a better job of representing the current behavior of clouds. However, Winton and two other scientists consulted by The Post all said that they respected the study's attempt, but weren't fully convinced. Sanderson of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, was concerned that the current study might find an effect that wasn't actually there, in part because models are not fully independent of one another — they tend to overlap in many areas. “This approach is designed to find relationships between future temperatures and things we can observe today,” he said. “The problem is we don't have enough models to be confident that the relationships are robust. The fact that models from different institutions share components makes this problem worse, and the authors haven't really addressed this fully.” “It's great that people are doing this well and we should continue to do this kind of work — it's an important complement to assessments of sensitivity from other methods,” added Gavin Schmidt, who heads NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “But we should always remember that it's the consilience of evidence in such a complex area that usually gives you robust predictions.” Schmidt noted future models might make this current finding disappear — and also noted the increase in warming in the better models found in the study was relatively small. Lead study author Brown argued, though, that the results have a major real world implication: They could mean the world can emit even less carbon dioxide than we thought if it wants to hold warming below the widely accepted target of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). This would mean shrinking the “carbon budget.” The study “would imply that to stabilize temperature at 2 degrees Celsius, you'd have to have 15 percent less cumulative CO² emissions,” he said. The world can ill afford that — as it is, it is very hard to see how even the current carbon budget can be met. The world is generally regarded as being off track when it comes to cutting its emissions, and with continuing economic growth, the challenge is enormous. In this sense, that the new research will have to win acceptance may be at least a temporary reprieve for policymakers, who would be in a tough position indeed if it were shown to be definitively right. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Government's dire climate change report blames humans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/67fbb7b0-c0f3-11e7-9294-705f80164f6e_video.html) • The world's clouds are in different places than they were 30 years ago (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/07/11/the-worlds-clouds-are-in-different-places-than-they-were-30-years-ago) • Why uncertainty about climate change is definitely not our friend (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/07/why-uncertainty-about-climate-change-is-not-our-friend) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/06/the-most-accurate-climate-change-models-predict-the-most-alarming-consequences-study-claims (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/06/the-most-accurate-climate-change-models-predict-the-most-alarming-consequences-study-claims) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2017, 07:39:32 pm from The Washington Post.... Ferocious wildfires ravage Southern California, evacuating communities and destroying homes Authorities warned that more fires could erupt in the coming days. By SCOTT WILSON, MARK BERMAN and ELI ROSENBERG | 10:23PM PST — Wednesday, December 06, 2017 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Z7RYMiMV3RlV16l2b51-b3P5nMo=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UNEVXHMZMUZHHIT26AUOQG7IUE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Z7RYMiMV3RlV16l2b51-b3P5nMo=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UNEVXHMZMUZHHIT26AUOQG7IUE.jpg) A firefighter tries to keep flames from spreading while battling a wildfire in Ventura, California. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. OJAI, CALIFORNIA — The flames came from all sides, tearing across cliffs and roaring down mountains, burning through homes and engulfing cars. Entire communities were evacuated, forcing people to grab what they could and flee as raging wildfires spread rapidly across Southern California on Wednesday. Yet even as they scrambled for shelter from the choking smoke and flames that turned idyllic communities into apocalyptic backdrops, many worried about the dangers still to come. Officials warned that the wildfire threat could increase through the end of the week, with the same weather conditions fueling the fires forecast to intensify. The wildfires in Ventura and Los Angeles counties have so far forced tens of thousands to escape, destroying hundreds of structures and emptying homes, hospitals, schools and multimillion-dollar mansions alike. Some 100,000 acres have burned. In Ventura, the Thomas Fire burned across 90,000 acres on Wednesday, spreading through an area larger than the city of Detroit. Officials there said they had evacuated more than 50,000 people from 15,000 homes. Los Angeles County faced comparatively smaller blazes in the Rye and Creek fires, both of which erupted Tuesday north of downtown Los Angeles. A new blaze, known as the Skirball Fire, began on Wednesday in Bel Air, temporarily shutting down Interstate 405 — one of the country's busiest freeways — and forcing the evacuation of 1,200 homes across the posh hillside neighborhoods near the University of California Los Angeles campus. Officials confronted that growing fire while continuing to battle the Creek Fire, which had crept into the city on the other side of town. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/nLe-c-jG3Pkues4iL3rz4lWpLa4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TRTYZE7KUI7SBMLPKW2E3Z6YNI.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/nLe-c-jG3Pkues4iL3rz4lWpLa4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TRTYZE7KUI7SBMLPKW2E3Z6YNI.jpg) Los Angeles officials said that 265 schools in the San Fernando Valley and West Los Angeles would be closed for the rest of the week as a safety measure. “Our plan here is to try to stop this fire before it becomes something bigger,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti (Democrat) said at a news briefing. “These are days that break your heart. But these are also days that show the resilience of our city.” That resilience could face serious tests in coming days. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/zwdSj7q7Xyoeu_Q0DlcAjFu_OSM=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MYUFB2DZFQ4ITKQUXOHHNDBKKY.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/zwdSj7q7Xyoeu_Q0DlcAjFu_OSM=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MYUFB2DZFQ4ITKQUXOHHNDBKKY.jpg) A firefighter hoses down flare-ups at a two-story apartment complex that burned to the ground in Ventura, California. — Photograph: Mark Ralston/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/QGo68JFIAg6TxrrbES8obFQHU4M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4J4PNHIRKM4HJHUJMGDIL5N4S4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/QGo68JFIAg6TxrrbES8obFQHU4M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4J4PNHIRKM4HJHUJMGDIL5N4S4.jpg) James and Josie Ralstin carry belongings from their home as the Thomas Fire consumes another residence in Ventura, California. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/6Rey4nZzO50wsz5DJwVoWnJn7vg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YC4VA3QIVUZ2FLIRNEC4DCBERQ.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/6Rey4nZzO50wsz5DJwVoWnJn7vg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YC4VA3QIVUZ2FLIRNEC4DCBERQ.jpg) Horses are evacuated from a ranch in La Canada Flintridge, California, near the Creek Fire. — Photograph: David Crane/Los Angeles Daily News/Associated Press. Officials in Ventura said they expected the fire to grow to the north and west over the next two days, as well as what one Cal Fire official, Tim Chavez, said was a “large probability of spot fires that will spread easily and spread rapidly.” In Los Angeles, officials said they were bracing for another night of extremely strong winds as high as 80 miles per hour, which, combined with dry weather and parched vegetation, made the region particularly vulnerable to new fires. At an afternoon news conference, Los Angeles Fire Department Chief Ralph M. Terrazas said the winds could blow embers as far as 10 miles away. The index that the department uses to assess environmental conditions for the fire risk is at the highest level he has ever seen in his career, Terrazas said. Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell was one of many officials who urged residents in areas near the fires to prepare to evacuate “should the need arise.” Not far from the Skirball Fire, residents and visitors alike were weighing whether to stay or go. Two roommates who live in the Brentwood area packed their bags and were “just hanging tight,” said one of the men, 23-year-old Wes Luttrell. Montevis Price, who was visiting Los Angeles from Miami, promptly checked out of his hotel when he saw the blaze. “I saw the little mountain on fire and that was it,” Price said. “You can prepare for a hurricane, but you can't prepare for something that happens all of a sudden.” California Governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) declared states of emergency in Los Angeles and Ventura counties because of the fires. More than 4,000 firefighters and other first responders fanned out across the region to save lives, protect homes and evacuate residents. Los Angeles County Fire Department Chief Daryl L. Osby said that many of the firefighters who had been working on the fire since Monday had not slept. Hundreds of other firefighters and engines were en route from Northern California and nearby states. “You can probably understand that most of our resources are pretty tapped,” he said. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/ZOP3cWJbX5k1LTyeIqyPLJyCNoI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/DSNXQIRCKU6L3H3W7GVF22S5PI.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/ZOP3cWJbX5k1LTyeIqyPLJyCNoI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/DSNXQIRCKU6L3H3W7GVF22S5PI.jpg) The Thomas Fire burns along a hillside near Santa Paula, California. — Photograph: Kyle Grillot/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/p-2NfARF0FZqJep2fnEURjp2-AA=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/T5TLBRQ3OIYMHDEQEBMIBKX7EA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/p-2NfARF0FZqJep2fnEURjp2-AA=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/T5TLBRQ3OIYMHDEQEBMIBKX7EA.jpg) A resident walks in the remains of an apartment building destroyed by the Thomas Fire. — Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/M2w4lOUxShyR7NVUEcD8jXm9tQM=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/VXOZT2Y7DA3F3LRYBT6BKCUGXA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/M2w4lOUxShyR7NVUEcD8jXm9tQM=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/VXOZT2Y7DA3F3LRYBT6BKCUGXA.jpg) The burned remains of crashed cars are seen on a country road where the Thomas Fire raged. — Photograph: David McNew/Reuters. As of Wednesday evening, officials said no deaths had been recorded as a result of the blazes, but some areas that had burned were not yet accessible. The scenes of areas around the fires in Los Angeles brought to mind the horror of a disaster film. Day appeared as night along the coast, the smoke-masked sun casting a deep red light into the sky. Massive flames rolled down chaparral-covered cliffs toward Highway 101 from Santa Barbara south to Ventura. On the 405 highway near the J. Paul Getty Museum, videos taken from cars passing through showed a hellscape of fire and darkness: black hillsides covered in smoke and burning embers. Palm trees, a symbol of the region's laid-back lifestyle, went up in flames (https://twitter.com/bri_sacks/status/938220426144055296). The smoke from the fires was visible from space, according to photos taken on the International Space Station and posted by NASA (https://twitter.com/Space_Station/status/938546254853951488). “When you get those 40-to 50-mile-per-hour winds, the fire just rolls like a steam train and you have minutes to get to safety,” said Ventura City Councilman Erik Nasarenko. He was in a city council meeting on Tuesday when the evacuation order came. “It was crazy,” Nasarenko said. “In the middle of the council meeting, the city manager tells me our neighborhood is on mandatory evacuation, so I raced home, grabbed the guinea pig and the kids and bolted.” Officials said the wildfire that forced evacuations of portions of Ojai, a popular winter retreat with about 8,000 residents, began burning toward Santa Barbara on Wednesday. For some, the flames had already consumed nearly everything they had. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/QG_-8AOEx_Pt-_E7-LwDtGC-ug4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/COQ7W33KAA6IDNGDKR7OLRIEXE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/QG_-8AOEx_Pt-_E7-LwDtGC-ug4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/COQ7W33KAA6IDNGDKR7OLRIEXE.jpg) A firefighter looks at a house destroyed by the Thomas Fire in Ventura. — Photograph: Mark Ralston/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/xQhNCRw-GBq22PmzLw2KuQILKD8=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/XZ3IVFVAUMY5BJVJYVSW42RPTE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/xQhNCRw-GBq22PmzLw2KuQILKD8=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/XZ3IVFVAUMY5BJVJYVSW42RPTE.jpg) Strong wind blows embers across the smoldering ruins of a house destroyed by the Creek Fire in Sunland, California. — Photograph: David McNew/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/_bXZ_p1QS60N0i04CJGx7pY65rg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TVKCYBBLCA67RMGVKHTBPEXBWQ.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/_bXZ_p1QS60N0i04CJGx7pY65rg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TVKCYBBLCA67RMGVKHTBPEXBWQ.jpg) A man prays as the Creek Fire rages in the Kagel Canyon area of the San Fernando Valley. — Photograph: Gene Blevins/Reuters. The fire began beneath David and Theresa Brock's house in upper Ojai around sundown Monday, jumping the road and sprinting up toward them. But a shifting wind pushed it away within a few hundred yards, and the couple believed their home of 12 years was safe. They stayed up through the night, smoke covering the grounds around them. “I thought we were doing great, real great,” said Brock, a state-certified operator of public water systems. At about 4 a.m. Tuesday, the winds shifted again. The fire raced toward them, covering five miles in 15 minutes. Brock turned to Theresa and said, “Let's get outside in the dirt.” The couple keeps cattle, and the wide, grazed area outside their hilltop home acted as a natural fire break. “At least out here,” he told her, “there's nothing to catch fire.” As the couple watched the flames approach, a transformer blew adjacent to their home, igniting a pepper tree. Sparks were sucked into their attic. “Then we saw smoke coming out of the vent,” Brock, 57, said. “And I thought, ‘well, that's it, we can't save it now’.” Brock pulled his Ford Torino and tractor out of the garage, keeping them in the fire break, and with the help of firemen, managed to pull a few items out of his house. “But what do you take?” he said. He chose a few family photos, but the cedar chest where Theresa kept all the family documents burned. “Then I just stood back and watched,” he said. “You see these people on TV who have lost everything, and you can't imagine it, until it's you. Now I am that person. I have the clothes on my back.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/qH4g6YZDtgOdMUyOEliekneYTnE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MDGZFEPD4IYOHNESHQ2UMBPPOQ.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/qH4g6YZDtgOdMUyOEliekneYTnE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MDGZFEPD4IYOHNESHQ2UMBPPOQ.jpg) A Santa Barbara County Fire official passes a burning home in Ventura. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Q4V7w9oJudVFoqHqLLfDreVhN2g=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UGOAAHQJQU53PPTPLLWVEO6EMU.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Q4V7w9oJudVFoqHqLLfDreVhN2g=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UGOAAHQJQU53PPTPLLWVEO6EMU.jpg) Flames and smoke shroud State Route 33 in Ventura. — Photograph: Daniel Dreifuss/Associated Press. Others felt the fear of what could come next. “I'm scared,” said Beth Dorenkamp, a 25-year Ojai resident. “I saw the fire start at the east end of town, like a plume, but I never thought it would end up like this.” Dorenkamp and Kathe Hanson huddled on a chilly morning at the Riverview Ranch in the Meiners Oaks neighborhood, which had been threatened but spared on Tuesday as the Thomas Fire grew. The women keep horses at the ranch, and spent a mostly sleepless Tuesday night keeping watch over them. “We all have trailers ready to go, but all of the roads are closed,” said Hanson, masked against the falling ash, holding the reins of her horse, Mozart. “So we're sleeping in the barn and waiting to see what happens.” Around the property, F-250s and Tundra pickups were hitched to trailers, ready to evacuate some of the 80 horses stabled there. The escape route had narrowed significantly, though, with some of the roads north into Santa Barbara County threatened by fire. Word of mouth appeared the most common form of neighborhood news-gathering, with cell service spotty in the best of times in these high canyons, the power unstable because of the fire, and the Internet out in parts of the city. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/45Y3iEOjA230NMsUgIlvuerWJcE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ZLODGQUY6Y2EBMYFTPGVJUF4U4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/45Y3iEOjA230NMsUgIlvuerWJcE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ZLODGQUY6Y2EBMYFTPGVJUF4U4.jpg) Fire consumes a home near the Pacific Ocean in Ventura. — Photograph: Jae C. Hong/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/j9nK58Y6P9AjFx7pVW6Y7glvgeg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JZCRS6DAV4Z2JLTHY55MZICSKE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/j9nK58Y6P9AjFx7pVW6Y7glvgeg=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JZCRS6DAV4Z2JLTHY55MZICSKE.jpg) Wind blows embers around a resident attempting to hose his burning property in Sunland. — Photograph: David McNew/Getty Images. The Carver family fled their home in Meiners Oak on Tuesday morning with flames less than half a mile from their property. “We'd been up all night watching it,” said Cindy Carver, who with her husband, Thomas, and their two children, Caleb and Danika, moved to Ojai about eight years ago. The family's power had gone out, and Thomas, a ham radio operator, used a radio repeater on Sulfur Mountain as an indicator of how close the flames were and which direction they were heading. If the repeater failed, he would leave with his family. It remained active all night. Preparations began before dawn. Thomas, a family therapist, let the turkeys, goats and chickens the family raises loose in their pens. He and Cindy grabbed the passports, a couple wedding photos, a little cash and jewelry and corralled the kids into the camper. They also grabbed Hondo and Jetta, two rescue dogs, their four cats and 10 kittens. “There was a point where I just thought I was going to lose it, and then we all said, it's just stuff,” Thomas said. Caleb, 12, and Danika, 8, attend Ojai Valley School, which was closed like the others in the area. The upper campus was damaged on Tuesday, when a girl's dormitory burned down along with several other buildings. But the students had been evacuated early, which Cindy praised. The day off from school seemed by turns fun and frightening, given the uncertainty the afternoon and evening held. The family is keeping their camper in a parking lot, and heading home in quick visits to eat and shower. Caleb said he was amazed that as they left home, everything around him seemed to be taking place as it did any other day — a guy riding his bicycle through the smoke, a hiker on a nearby nature preserve trail. “How are people so normal about this?” he said. • Mark Berman and Eli Rosenberg reported from Washington. Noah Smith in Los Angeles; William Dauber in Van Nuys, California; and Jason Samenow in Washington contributed to this report, which has been updated throughout the day. • Scott Wilson is a senior national correspondent for The Washington Post, covering California and the west. He has previously served as The Post's national editor, chief White House correspondent, deputy Assistant Managing Editor Foreign News and as a correspondent in Latin America and in the Middle East. • Mark Berman covers national news for The Washington Post and anchors Post Nation (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation), a destination for breaking news and stories from around the country. • Eli Rosenberg is a reporter on The Washington Post's General Assignment team. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: View from above: Fires ravage Southern California (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/43b5468c-da11-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • VIDEO: ‘It's devastating’: Ventura evacuees watch homes burn, buildings collapse in wildfires (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/d2fcb06e-daa2-11e7-a241-0848315642d0_video.html) • ‘Armageddon’: Apocalyptic images show the devastation caused by Southern California fires (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/06/armageddon-apocalyptic-images-show-the-devastation-caused-by-southern-california-fires) • Thanks to climate change, the weather roasting California and freezing the East may thrive (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/12/06/thanks-to-climate-change-the-weather-pattern-burning-up-california-and-freezing-the-east-may-thrive) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/06/ferocious-wildfires-burn-across-southern-california-destroying-homes-and-forcing-thousands-to-evacuate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/06/ferocious-wildfires-burn-across-southern-california-destroying-homes-and-forcing-thousands-to-evacuate) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 08, 2017, 11:47:03 am trying to blame these fires on man made global warming is a joke when this place has a history going back thousands of years of droughts and fires
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 08, 2017, 05:04:11 pm Mentally unhinged climate hipsters here also brainlessly claim wild fires here are some testament to the coming warming apocalypse (even when some lefty scientists admit "er no actually there is no connection!!!") 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 10, 2017, 01:54:24 pm (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2017/12/toles12102017.jpg&w=999) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2017/12/08/for-every-action-in-the-us-it-seems-there-will-be-an-equal-and-opposite-reaction) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 10, 2017, 07:35:12 pm (https://static.infowars.com/politicalsidebarimage/trumphitler_large.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 15, 2017, 04:16:02 pm from The Washington Post.... Global warming boosted Hurricane Harvey's rainfall by at least 15 percent, studies find Storms like the one that flooded Houston and a wide area of Texas in August are also much more likely, the studies found. By JOEL ACHENBACH | 10:48AM EST - Wednesday, December 13, 2017 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/izPoQzDTOI4dgOCkzdwgH7e-LCs=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/A32U5V4XLIZINJSEKTUL27KMZQ.JPG) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/izPoQzDTOI4dgOCkzdwgH7e-LCs=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/A32U5V4XLIZINJSEKTUL27KMZQ.JPG) Floodwaters are seen surrounding houses and apartment complexes in West Houston, on August 30th. Hurricane Harvey pushed thousands of people to rooftops or higher ground as they had to flee their homes. — Photograph: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post. NEW ORLEANS — There's a theme lurking under the giant science meeting here along the Mississippi River: Extreme weather really is getting more extreme because of climate change. The human influence on hurricanes and wildfires is increasingly obvious. For years this has been a subject clouded in uncertainties. But now scientists say they have hard numbers. On Wednesday morning two independent research teams, one based in the Netherlands and the other in California, reported that the deluge from Hurricane Harvey was significantly heavier than it would have been before the era of human-caused global warming. One paper put the best estimate of the increase in precipitation at 15 percent. The other said climate change increased rainfall by 19 percent at least — with a best estimate of 38 percent. Meanwhile another team of scientists released a blockbuster report on extreme weather in 2016 (https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/explaining-extreme-events-from-a-climate-perspective), saying that for the first time they could declare that three separate weather events — the weirdly warm “blob” of water off the Alaska coast, a heat wave in Asia and the record global warmth — would have been impossible without human-caused climate change. “This is the first time we've ever had statements like that,” said Stephanie Herring, a climate scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who spoke here at the fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union on Wednesday. And about that “blob”: “The blob is an ongoing phenomenon. It's still sitting there.” “Attribution” research, as it's known, seeks to find and quantify the influence of climate change on a weather event, which has always been problematic. There's a truism: Climate is what you expect and weather is what you get. Weather events emerge from chaotic forces and elements, and there is variability from place to place and year to year. The result has been an ongoing issue for scientists studying extreme weather and journalists reporting on the subject. Definitive statements about causality, or the magnitude of an effect, are hard to come by. The discussion gets mired in caveats, because extreme events can happen with or without a changed climate. That's changing. More scientists are on the case, and a warmer world is delivering more extreme events. “The signal over the noise is larger, so it's getting easier to find it,” said Karin van der Wiel, a researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute who co-wrote one of the papers published on Wednesday. “This job gets easier over time, unfortunately,” added Michael Wehner, senior staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and co-author of the other Hurricane Harvey study. “There is a large, new body of literature about attributing human influence on individual extreme events,” said Wehner. “It's no longer appropriate to say scientists can't say anything about these individual events.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/-zJnx_7qIBKBtksuMIri0qbMCNI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HJ7VEUS4HU447NU44SJD6XAX3A.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/-zJnx_7qIBKBtksuMIri0qbMCNI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HJ7VEUS4HU447NU44SJD6XAX3A.jpg) Earl Williams, 70, sits on the front porch of his flooded home in Nome, Texas, on September 1st. — Photograph: Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post. There's a buy-more-sandbags message lurking amid the sessions here at the AGU meeting. It's a sprawling science meeting, physically and intellectually: As of Wednesday morning 22,500 people had registered and more are coming in, including experts on volcanoes, earthquakes, glaciers, the atmosphere, Mars, Jupiter and so on. When a keg exploded on Tuesday and shot a geyser of beer 20 feet high in the poster hall, a voice called out, “Can someone model that?” Extreme weather is a familiar topic here in the Crescent City. At one panel on Wednesday a city planner warned that the flood control infrastructure is nowhere near adequate for the perils ahead. Many scientists have urged that the government improve flood maps — they're out of date and no longer capture the new reality of the warmer world. “They have not been improving the maps as they should. They're treating that as static,” said Columbia University research professor Suzana Camargo, an expert on extreme weather. And flood maps are just maps, by the way: “I've never met a molecule of floodwater that could read a flood map,” said George Homewood, a planning director for the city of Norfolk. The meeting had numerous sessions on Wednesday devoted to late-breaking research on hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria. Scientific research usually takes longer to cohere, but 2017 was an astonishing year of natural disasters and many people dropped what they were doing to tease out early findings about the hurricanes and other tumult, including western U.S. wildfires (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/12/why-are-californias-wildfires-so-historic-for-starters-a-diablo-is-at-work). Hurricane Harvey hit the Texas coast near Corpus Christi on August 25th after it intensified rapidly in the Gulf of Mexico. The storm then stalled and dropped record rains (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/29/harvey-marks-the-most-extreme-rain-event-in-u-s-history) for the better part of a week on Southeast Texas before finally drifting north and dissipating. The storm flooded Houston (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/08/31/harvey-is-a-1000-year-flood-event-unprecedented-in-scale) and much of the region and was one of several hurricanes that slammed the United States during a volatile 2017 season, including Hurricane Irma in Florida and Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico. “Climate change made this event more likely and heavier,” said van der Wiel. Van der Wiel and her colleagues concluded that a deluge such as Harvey would have occurred in the region once every 2,400 years in the pre-warming period, but that it is now a 1-in-800 year event — and is becoming more likely. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/neCTXMcebgHcKH9B9qz79zbJ-t4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/DUVKWV4QBMZOXKRKG3DBEBPO54.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/neCTXMcebgHcKH9B9qz79zbJ-t4=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/DUVKWV4QBMZOXKRKG3DBEBPO54.jpg) There are uncertainties here — the boost in rainfall could have been somewhere between 8 and 19 percent, according to the scientists based in the Netherlands. That 19 percent figure is at the lower end of the range calculated by the scientists from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. They said their best estimate was 38 percent but cautioned that this is science done on the fly after a major natural disaster. “There's a clear human fingerprint. The numbers will undoubtedly change as more researchers look at this with different techniques, and perhaps different data sets and different methods. But our numbers are kind of big,” Wehner said. “We were stunned.” The teams worked independently and used different methods — for example, examining different geographical areas, different time periods during the week that Harvey struck Texas, and framing their findings with different standards of certainty. Though their numbers are not identical, the scientists on the two teams emphasized that each study bolsters the other, with strikingly similar conclusions and lessons for the future. “We have two independent efforts with essentially the same answer,” said Wehner. The textbooks declare that for every degree Celsius increase in atmospheric temperature there should be 6 to 8 percent more moisture in the air. That's roughly the amount of global atmospheric warming in the past century. Wehner said he guessed, when he started his research, that Harvey might have dropped about 6 to 8 percent more rain than an identical storm would have dropped in 1950. But both the Dutch and Berkeley teams found the actual rainfall to be much higher than expected. Van der Wiel said that indicates that there is some factor, perhaps involving the dynamics of hurricanes, that results in additional precipitation — beyond what you'd expect for the greater atmospheric moisture. As she put it, “There's another extra thing on top of it.” This is not the first time scientists have said an extreme weather event has a signal of climate change. Wehner said the 2010 Texas drought was an event twice as likely due to climate change. And floods in September 2013 in Colorado came after rainfall that was 30 percent heavier that should be expected, he said. “In 2017, climate change slammed the U.S. hard,” he said. “But it's not the first time it's happened.” • Joel Achenbach covers science and politics for the National Desk at The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Floods are getting worse and more frequent. Here's why. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/50111a34-3028-11e7-a335-fa0ae1940305_video.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/13/global-warming-boosted-hurricane-harveys-rainfall-by-at-least-15-percent-studies-find (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/13/global-warming-boosted-hurricane-harveys-rainfall-by-at-least-15-percent-studies-find) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 15, 2017, 09:03:45 pm Oh dear. The usual shit....
"There are uncertainties here — the boost in rainfall could have been somewhere between 8 and 19 percent, according to the scientists based in the Netherlands. That 19 percent figure is at the lower end of the range calculated by the scientists from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. They said their best estimate was 38 percent but cautioned that this is science done on the fly after a major natural disaster." But hey keep mindlessly believing the beatup headlines. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 16, 2017, 11:28:41 am from the Los Angeles Times.... Governor Jerry Brown warns climate change has us ‘on the road to hell’. California's wildfires show he's on to something. By GEORGE SKELTON | 12:05AM PST - Thursday, December 14, 2017 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59d42150/turbine/la-1507074379-soh2dk5ia8-snap-image/950) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-59d42150/turbine/la-1507074379-soh2dk5ia8-snap-image) Governor Jerry Brown has called the wildfire devastation in California the “new normal”. — Photograph: Eric Risberg/Associated Press. WHEN he's lecturing about climate change, Governor Jerry Brown sounds like a street-corner preacher shouting: “Repent. Change your ways. The end is near.” I envision him in a sackcloth robe, arms flailing and chanting at the wind. But it's nearly Christmas and wicked wildfires are devastating California beauty. So Brown is obviously on to something. This traditionally is the season for mudslides and flooding. Until now, no major wildfire has ever ravished California in December, at least since the state began keeping records in 1932. Our fire season has reliably been summer and early fall. Ominously, of the 20 largest California wildfires since 1932, most — 14 — have occurred since 2000. The five largest all have. Brown warned about this in July, long before the October wine country wildfires, the most destructive in state history, and the current Southern California blazes. “Climate change is real,” he warned a state Senate committee. “It is a threat to organized human existence. Maybe not in my life. I’ll be dead. What am I, 79?” Then turning and facing the packed audience, Brown continued: “A lot of you people are going to be alive. And you're going to be alive in a horrible situation. You're going to see mass migration, vector diseases, forest fires, Southern California burning up. That's real, guys.” They didn't have to wait long for Brown's prophecy to come true. Last Saturday, surveying the fire devastation in Ventura, Brown called it “the new normal,” declaring: “This could be something that happens every year or every few years.” The onetime Jesuit seminarian sounded downright spiritual Sunday on CBS' “60 Minutes” while criticizing President Trump for calling global warming a hoax and pulling the United States out of the Paris climate accord. “I don't think President Trump has a fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God,” Brown said. And in Paris this week, at yet another international climate conference attended by the governor, he pointed to California's wildfires as a warning. “This is an example of what we can expect,” he said. “The fires are burning in California. They'll be burning in France, burning all around the world” without a significant reduction in carbon emissions. “The world is not on the road to heaven. It's on the road to hell.” “He sounds ticked off, and I don't blame him,” says Scott Weaver, senior climate scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund. “God bless him.” Neither Brown nor anyone else is claiming that California's escalating wildfires are totally caused by global warming. But it's a contributing factor, they say. “I understand that he's being hyperbolic and ultra-dramatic,” Weaver says. “But when he says ‘all hell is breaking loose’, the governor is right-on. There's a lot of evidence that we’re seeing an increase in extremes of weather and climate.” California examples: sustained drought, then one of the wettest winters on record. Now it's suddenly dry again in the rainy season. There's a “perfect storm” going on, Weaver says. It's global warming combined with a La Niña weather pattern that’s “exacerbating the situation.” The scientist adds: “As Bruce Springsteen said, ‘You can't start a fire without a spark.’ The spark is obviously not related to climate change. But the conditions which exist for burning are consistent with climate change.” The conditions for fire destruction also include people moving into flammable woodlands full of hot-burning chaparral, oaks and pines. And in many of these Southern California blazes, there's also a dreadful Santa Ana wind bellows. The Thomas fire — California's fifth largest on record at 237,500 acres as of Wednesday morning — seems to have charred half of Ventura County and a significant portion of Santa Barbara County. At last count, it had destroyed 921 structures. It surrounded the wonderful little town where I grew up, Ojai. This time of year it's not uncommon for snow to blanket the adjacent mountains. Now there's just fire ash. But the town, with its historic Spanish-style arcade, escaped. “Everybody is very thankful and a lot of people think we came through a miracle,” says Perry Van Houten, a reporter for the Ojai Valley News, where I launched my newspaper career long ago as a teen, melting lead for the linotype machine, cleaning presses and writing high school sports for 10 cents an inch. “There are signs all over town thanking the firefighters.” Ojai has a scary fire history. It was largely destroyed by fire in 1917 and rebuilt. In 1948, a fire leaped down the mountain and threatened the town. My family evacuated. Around 20 homes were destroyed. Not ours. Around 10 million people lived in California then. Now there are about 40 million, providing more homes to burn. But we can't stop building them. There's a shortage of affordable housing. We can, however, be more careful about where we build. We can build on top of each other, even if it's against the California ranch-house lifestyle. We can pay for more fire protection. Joe Edmiston, executive director of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, advocates forcing developers and home buyers to pay for 24-hour fire patrols in extremely risky areas. “If you want to put a $5-million house in the middle of the Santa Monica Mountains, make it a $5.1-million house that's fire protected,” Edmiston says. “Jerry Brown's point is a good one. It's the new normal. All of us have to adjust. We can't pray that the heavens are going to roll back the clock.” Amen. • Political columnist George Skelton has covered government and politics for more than 50 years and for the Los Angeles Times since 1974. He has been a L.A. Times political writer and editor in Los Angeles, Sacramento bureau chief and White House correspondent. He has written a column on California politics, “Capitol Journal”, since 1993. Skelton is a Santa Barbara native, grew up in Ojai and received a journalism degree at San Jose State. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-skelton-jerry-brown-wildfires-20171214-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-skelton-jerry-brown-wildfires-20171214-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 16, 2017, 04:00:04 pm Nah, like so many, he pulled that silly assertion out of his bottom, based on a hunch.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 17, 2017, 09:05:25 am It's pathetic when the (predominantly loony left) media, hippy twit politicians and NGOs make up shit like the idiotic pronouncement by this guy. The science of climate is at best uncertain and complex.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 18, 2017, 11:40:56 am from STUFF/Fairfax NZ.... Government lacks ‘coordinated plan’ for climate change, withheld report shows By CHARLIE MITCHELL and SIMON MAUDE | 4:34PM - Friday, 15 December 2017 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/g/t/v/r/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/g/t/v/r/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) Catastrophic flooding in Edgecumbe earlier this year. — Photograph: Chris McKeen. SEA LEVEL RISES of just centimetres could make some coastal communities intolerable, a NIWA scientist says. NIWA scientist Rob Bell sounded the warning while presenting a report withheld by the previous Government, that shows New Zealand does not have a coordinated plan to address the effects of climate change. Climate change minister James Shaw said the report made “grim reading”. “I don't want to sugar coat this, there are significant risks to property and infrastructure, the whole point [of the report] is to get ahead of those risks so we can anticipate and avoid those risks, forewarned is for forearmed.” New Zealand has “decades of urgent work” ahead of it mitigating climate change's damage. Despite the sobering report, Shaw was hopeful. The report gave New Zealand a “head start” adapting to climate change compared to other countries, he said. The report found there was “limited evidence” that New Zealand had been proactively adapting to the threat of climate change, and many sectors had been trying to adapt on their own within a mismatched framework of policies and legislation. New Zealand had a lot of information about how the climate was changing, but “unlike many countries”, did not have a coordinated plan. The report's authors “found no evidence that climate change risks to New Zealand have been reduced by the actions taken by central government”. Shaw released a stocktake report (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate-change/adapting-climate-change-new-zealand-stocktake-report-climate-change) from the Climate Change Adaptation Technical Advisory Group, which was set up last year to advise the Government on climate vulnerability. The group comprises experts from both public and private sectors. He also released long-delayed coastal hazards guidance for councils, a nearly 300 page document which details how local authorities should consider climate change in planning decisions. It wanted to “shift people from reacting to climate change events” and take a more “anticipatory approach”, technical reference group leader, Victoria University climate scientist Judy Lawrence said at the press conference. New Zealand communities and public/private sectors needed to be able to take “dynamic action” toward climate change risks “over time”. “How do we deal with risk, how do we deal with vulnerabilities?” Some council's are already “picking up on ideas” adapting, Lawrence said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/h/4/8/u/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/h/4/8/u/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) Climate change minister James Shaw, and scientists Judy Lawrence and Rob Bell presented the “grim” report. — Photograph: Simon Maude. NIWA scientist Rob Bell said it could only be a matter of sea rises in centimetres that could “tip-over” coastal communities into taking “adaptive” planning. “It may become intolerable for them.” “You'll know some of these [areas], parts of South Dunedin, Hawkes Bay and Auckland, they're priority areas.” “A couple of decades down the track” some parts of the country may become “uninsurable” as climate change affects filter through to insurance premiums, Shaw warned. DELAYED REPORT The former Government had not released the interim stocktake report when asked by STUFF, and said the final report would be publicly released in March. STUFF asked the new Government to release the interim report shortly after it was sworn in. James Shaw said the report had been ready since May, 2017. “You'll have to ask the previous minister” why the report wasn't released earlier, Shaw told the press conference. National's climate change spokesman Todd Muller said the May report was an “interim draft”. The Stockdale Report's terms of reference meant it “was always going to be released at this time”. “What I'm more concerned about is seeing the final report and recommendations due for release in March, 2018.” “National is open to working with the Government to build on the plan we put in place to tackle and adapt to climate change,” Muller said. The report shows New Zealand has significant information about climate change, but not all of it was in a form that was accessible or was used to aid decision making. The Government had been reactive, not proactive, in adapting to climate change, and agencies had mismatched priorities. “The lack of a nationwide assessment of the climate-related risks means that it is difficult for New Zealand to develop a planned approach for climate change adaptation because priorities for action cannot yet be articulated,” it said. There was an “absence of coordinated leadership on climate change adaptation” and adaptation was not “currently integrated into many central government agency objectives”. There were “few examples of anticipatory action on climate change”. A final report by the group is expected in March, and would contain recommendations for how New Zealand can adapt to climate change. THE EFFECTS Climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of extreme events such as flooding, drought and wildfires, which poses a threat to many communities, the stocktake said. The impacts are likely to accelerate over time, and extend broadly across all sectors of society, including the economy, public health and biodiversity. The stocktake said, for example, “there is a clear possibility that climate change will be a significant driver of biodiversity loss throughout this century and beyond”. Other risks include new, more serious diseases: “A warmer and wetter New Zealand means that we will experience diseases not currently present in New Zealand and potentially more frequent pandemics,” it said. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/g/t/v/t/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/n/g/t/v/t/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1nfzew.png/1513308848811.jpg) Residents in some small West Coast communities are already feeling the effects of sea-level rise. — Photograph: Alden Williams. Under the mid-range sea-level rise projection, within 50 years, a one-in-100 year inundation event would on average happen every year in Wellington, every second year in Dunedin, and every fourth year in Auckland. There were likely to be significant impacts on the economy, including both tourism and agriculture. The drought in 2012-2013, for example, cost the country $1.5b, and was an event partly influenced by climate change. It also posed a threat to low-lying infrastructure and communities. Most of New Zealand's population is either coastal or on a floodplain. A “risk census” of infrastructure by NIWA in 2015 found billions of dollars of infrastructure was in low lying areas that would be prone to flooding. They include nearly 70,000 buildings, 2,000km of road, and five airports. The area carrying the most risk is Christchurch, followed by Hawke's Bay. ‘SIGNIFICANT WORK REQUIRED’ The stocktake looked at work underway to adapt to climate change, and found there was “significant work required” in some areas. It said central Government had played a key role in funding research, but there was a lack of coordination and agreed priorities between agencies. Its actions had “generally been reactive” after a climate-related event had already happened. The former Government defended not releasing the guidance, saying councils had been aware of its contents during the drafting process. The absence of formal advice, however, resulted in the Thames-Coromandel District Council approving a flood-prone subdivision while factoring in 1-metre of sea-level rise, not 2-metres, Newsroom reported this week (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/99770316/billions-at-stake-as-government-mulls-sea-level-rules). Climate change has increased the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, scientists say. A report released this week concluded the extreme rainfall in Houston this year had been 15 percent more intense and three times more likely to happen (https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/99878173) due to climate change. New Zealand is already feeling the effects of a warming climate, the Ministry for the Environment reported in October (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98020081). Some effects are likely to be irreversible. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • EATEN ALIVE (https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2017/04/eaten-alive/) • Insurance woe for Wellington homes (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/98815753) • Low-lying Waikato towns face risk (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/97485178) • Counting the cost of sea level rise (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/96503854) • Sea level rise could swamp NZ cities (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/90657833) https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/99843080 (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/99843080) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 18, 2017, 11:49:14 am In other words, those evil Nats fuckers who were the government in NZ for nine years until tipped out of The Beehive by Jacinda and Winston, deliberately sat on an environment report from one of their own government agencies, warning about the perils of global warming/climate change for our costal communtities and those living on flood plains. Just goes to show what sort of “fuck you” trash & scum the Nats are, prefering to look after their greedy, selfish mates than the interests of all NZers. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 19, 2017, 08:30:50 am The nats may indeed be cynical scum who pander to bottom of the barrel greed, but the science ISN'T settled on climate change.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 19, 2017, 11:09:03 am The first clue is how hysterical climate models measure up against the satellite records. They fail. That means their hysterical theory is disproven.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 20, 2017, 07:05:40 am Climate hysteria is primarily supposedly propped up by "models". That is, computerised constructions of what these mostly eco activist scientist believe *should* happen based on their *theory* of human induced global warming.
They have been proven wrong. Hard satellite and balloon data nails it.... (https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/christy_dec8.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2017, 11:12:46 am Keep pushing your head deeper into the sand while you continue to drag up “fake science” in order to justify your selfishness towards future generations. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2017, 11:14:55 am Oooooooh....I can see this thread oozing closer towards the “1111” palindrome. I “bags” claiming it when we get there....;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 21, 2017, 11:16:01 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 21, 2017, 12:53:28 pm "Fake science" from some of the most experienced climatolagists on the planet. Isn't it time you extracted your head from your arse and started engaging braincells? 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 27, 2017, 08:32:12 pm from The Washington Post.... Tesla's enormous battery in Australia, just weeks old, is already responding to outages in ‘record’ time Elon Musk vowed to deliver the battery in less than 100 days. By BRIAN FUNG | 10:52AM EST — Tuesday, December 26, 2017 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2017/12/Capture-01.jpg&w=999) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2017/12/Capture-01.jpg&w=2500) South Australia's huge new lithium-ion backup power system battery. — Photograph: Neoen/Tesla/HornsdalePowerReserve.com.au. LESS THAN a month after Tesla unveiled a new backup power system (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/07/07/south-australia-could-soon-be-powered-by-an-enormous-tesla-built-battery) in South Australia, the world's largest lithium-ion battery is already being put to the test. And it appears to be far exceeding expectations: In the past three weeks alone, the Hornsdale Power Reserve (https://hornsdalepowerreserve.com.au/overview) has smoothed out at least two major energy outages, responding even more quickly than the coal-fired backups that were supposed to provide emergency power. Tesla's battery last week kicked in just 0.14 seconds after one of Australia's biggest plants, the Loy Yang facility in the neighboring state of Victoria, suffered a sudden, unexplained drop in output, according to the International Business Times (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/elon-musks-massive-backup-battery-took-just-140-milliseconds-respond-crisis-power-plant-1652736). And the week before that, another failure at Loy Yang prompted the Hornsdale battery to respond in as little as four seconds — or less, according to some estimates (http://reneweconomy.com.au/tesla-big-battery-outsmarts-lumbering-coal-units-after-loy-yang-trips-70003) — beating other plants to the punch. State officials have called the response time “a record,” according to local media (http://www.afr.com/business/energy/electricity/tesla-battery-responded-to-south-australian-power-failure-in-140-miliseconds-20171220-h08apx). The effectiveness of Tesla's battery is being closely watched in a region that is in the grips of an energy crisis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/technology/tesla-to-build-giant-battery-in-australia-amid-energy-crisis/2017/07/07/8e2782e2-62d5-11e7-80a2-8c226031ac3f_story.html). The price of electricity is soaring in Australia (http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/the-real-reasons-why-our-power-prices-are-going-up/news-story/c61b12ecd56001bfbcd2b9f45c581d7b), particularly in the state of South Australia, where a 2016 outage (http://www.powermag.com/after-blackout-south-australia-wrests-control-of-its-power-security) led 1.7 million residents to lose power in a blackout. Storms and heat waves have caused additional outages, and many Australians are bracing for more with the onset of summer in the Southern Hemisphere. The Hornsdale battery system, which uses the same energy-storage tech found in Tesla's electric cars, is one of chief executive Elon Musk's newest projects. In March, Musk, who is known for setting high goals and only sometimes meeting them, vowed on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/839762954887180289) to deliver a battery system for South Australia's struggling grid within 100 days or it would be free. By early July, the state had signed a deal with Tesla and the French-based energy company Neoen to produce the battery. And by December 1st, South Australia announced that it had switched on the Hornsdale battery (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/australia/elon-musk-south-australia-battery.html). Fed by wind turbines at the nearby Hornsdale wind farm, the battery stores excess energy that is produced when the demand for electricity isn't peaking. It can power up to 30,000 homes, though only for short periods (https://qz.com/1165314/elon-musks-giant-tesla-battery-in-australia-proves-it-can-power-the-grid-when-coal-plants-fail) — meaning that the battery must still be supported by traditional power plants in the event of a long outage. A spokesman for Tesla didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Nonetheless, the Hornsdale reserve has already shown that it can provide what's known as “contingency” service — keeping the grid stable in a crisis and easing what would otherwise be a significant power failure. And, more important, the project is the biggest proof-of-concept yet that batteries such as Tesla's can help mitigate one of renewable energy's most persistent problems: how to use it when the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing. “When you think about energy storage, it's not a [power] generation resource,” said Stephen Coughlin, the vice president of energy storage platforms at the Arlington-based AES Corporation, which is behind several battery projects in California, the Netherlands and several other countries. “What it's really doing is providing a much-needed injection of reliability and resiliency into the network overall.” Where it can take as much as 10 minutes to spin up a traditional turbine in a pinch, added Coughlin, it's not uncommon to see systems such as Tesla's intervene in fractions of a second. This isn't Musk's only experiment with large-scale batteries. Last year, Tesla said it had equipped a small island in American Samoa (https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/22/13712750/tesla-microgrid-tau-samoa) with thousands of solar panels and batteries that could serve the area's 600 inhabitants, shifting them almost entirely off fossil fuels. In October, Musk responded to the hurricane crisis in Puerto Rico by offering to discuss building a solar grid (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/10/06/why-musk-is-pitching-solar-panels-to-puerto-rico-even-as-residents-struggle-to-get-clean-water) for the island. Parts of Puerto Rico are still without power (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/us/puerto-rico-power-outage.html), months after Hurricane Maria ripped down power lines and other energy infrastructure. An electric grid consisting of distributed solar panels, paired with a large battery, could prove transformative for some island economies, analysts say. Under normal circumstances, the price of imported fossil fuels can become a drain on local businesses. But the abundant sunshine at tropical latitudes makes solar energy extremely cost-efficient. “[Big batteries] definitely can be a game changer for island or island-type economies,” said Ravi Manghani, director of energy storage at GTM Research, a market analysis firm. “Hawaii, for instance, has one of the highest retail rates in the U.S. [for electricity], and that's because of the cost of shipping diesel or other fuel oils which currently are used by a lot of the existing facilities.” What's more, he added, spreading solar panels out across an island reduces the likelihood of the entire grid going down because of storms. Other battery projects, including in the United States, have already helped manage spikes in demand. For example, a major 2015 gas leak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliso_Canyon_gas_leak) near Los Angeles that kept some gas-fired plants from producing energy at peak times prompted Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric to announce energy storage projects that were completed earlier this year, according to Sam Wilkinson, an industry analyst at IHS (https://technology.ihs.com/590967/global-battery-energy-storage-pipeline-reaches-34-gw-in-q1-2017). In an April report, Wilkinson highlighted the rapid rise of China and Australia as energy storage leaders. “For the first time Asia accounts for more than one third of the global pipeline for energy storage,” the report read. “This underscores the importance that China, Australia, South Korea and India are all predicted to have in the global market.” • Brian Fung covers technology for The Washington Post, focusing on telecommunications, Internet access and the shifting media economy. Before joining The Post, he was the technology correspondent for National Journal and an associate editor at The Atlantic. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/26/teslas-enormous-battery-in-australia-just-weeks-old-is-already-responding-to-outages-in-record-time (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/26/teslas-enormous-battery-in-australia-just-weeks-old-is-already-responding-to-outages-in-record-time) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 27, 2017, 10:05:39 pm Didn't read your usual Washington post crapola, but what delusional believers in unreliable energy never properly calculate is "at what cost?"
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 27, 2017, 11:19:23 pm Yep, not only are you IGNORANT, but you CHOSE to REMAIN IGNORANT. I guess that means you are as dumb and fucked-in-the-head as Donald J. Trump. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 30, 2017, 06:00:38 am Are you stupid?? Wind and solar have been around for decades. If they are so economical why aren't governments simply switching over. The reason is they AREN'T economical. Any govt dumb enough to deploy them as anything more than window dressing to please screeching lefties is going to go bankrupt!
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 30, 2017, 06:04:44 am Germany went on a delusional bender with wind and solar and learned the hard way it was simply way way to fucking expensive and unreliable. They are now building coal plants and importing nuclear power from neighbouring countries.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on December 30, 2017, 02:26:01 pm (https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/mckee-cartoon-warmer-colder-winters.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 02, 2018, 12:11:08 pm NINE YEARS AGO... Al Gore Predicted North Pole Would Be Completely Ice Free by Today
hey ktj do you want to buy a bridge it's going for a song ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 06, 2018, 05:25:33 am ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 06, 2018, 09:36:58 am Yet more extreme 500-year weather events happening in New Zealand over the past day or so. How many extreme 500-year weather events have we now had over the past couple of years? Remind me. I bet you'll whinge & scream like stuck pigs when your insurance company bangs up your property insurance premiums to cover the ever-increasing cost of these 500-year and 1000-year weather events which are occuring with almost monotonous regularity. IDIOTS!!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 06, 2018, 08:53:14 pm extreme 500-year weather events bahahaha ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 11, 2018, 04:37:57 pm from The Washington Post.... New York City sues Shell, ExxonMobil, and other oil majors over climate change By CHRIS MOONEY and DINO GRANDONI | 4:30PM EST — Wednesday, January 10, 2018 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1200w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/10/29/National-Enterprise/Images/Superstorm_Sandy-04872.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/10/29/National-Enterprise/Images/Superstorm_Sandy-04872.jpg) Waves wash over the sea wall near high tide at Battery Park in New York, on October 29th, 2012, as Hurricane Sandy approaches the East Coast. — Photograph: Craig Ruttle/Associated Press. THE NEW YORK CITY GOVERNMENT is suing the world's five largest publicly traded oil companies, seeking to hold them responsible for present and future damage to the city from climate change. The suit, filed on Tuesday against BP, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell, claims the companies together produced 11 percent of all of global-warming gases through the oil and gas products they have sold over the years. It also charges that the companies and the industry they are part of have known for some time about the consequences but sought to obscure them. “In this litigation, the City seeks to shift the costs of protecting the City from climate change impacts back onto the companies that have done nearly all they could to create this existential threat,” reads the lawsuit, brought by New York corporation counsel Zachary Carter and filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The legal strategy has already been embraced by several California cities and counties, but prior lawsuits seeking to blame companies for their role in causing climate change have foundered. It remains unclear whether a new wave of litigation — propelled by stronger climate science, reports about how much some companies knew about climate change decades ago, and somewhat divergent legal strategies — will succeed where those efforts failed. In California last year, Marin County, San Mateo County and the city of Imperial Beach similarly sued a group of fossil fuel companies (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/20/this-could-be-the-next-big-strategy-for-suing-over-climate-change) over damage related to climate change — citing a theory called “public nuisance,” which basically argues that companies are causing an injury to the localities under common law. The cities of San Francisco and Oakland and the city and county of Santa Cruz have also filed suit. “I think the significant development here is that this is the first of these cases in this last year that’s filed outside of California,” said Michael Burger, who directs the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. If more and more localities sue, “we might be able to see adequate pressure applied to these companies to inspire action on climate change,” he said. So far, that has not been the response. ExxonMobil has instead reacted strongly (http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/09/investing/exxon-climate-change-california-san-francisco-oakland/index.html) to the claims, seeking in Texas court (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4345487-Exxon-Texas-Petition-Jan-2018.html) to depose California state officials and others involved in bringing the cases for “potential claims of abuse of process, civil conspiracy, and violation of ExxonMobil's civil rights.” Climate change “is a complex societal challenge that should be addressed through sound government policy and cultural change to drive low-carbon choices for businesses and consumers,” Curtis Smith, head of U.S. media relations for Shell, wrote by email, “not by the courts.” BP and ConocoPhillips, two other defendants named in the lawsuit, declined to comment. Exxon responded to New York's lawsuit (https://energyfactor.exxonmobil.com/perspectives/better-approach-climate-change) on its blog, where the firm has also challenged investigative reports from InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times that showed the company was an early pioneer in climate-change science in the 1980s, reports that were cited in the suit. “ExxonMobil welcomes any well-meaning and good faith attempt to address the risks of climate change,” wrote Suzanne McCarron, Exxon's vice president of public and government affairs. “Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a global issue and requires global participation and actions. Lawsuits of this kind — filed by trial attorneys against an industry that provides products we all rely upon to power the economy and enable our domestic life — simply do not do that.” Chevron spokesman Braden Reddall said in an email: “This lawsuit is factually and legally meritless, and will do nothing to address the serious issue of climate change. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a global issue that requires global engagement. Should this litigation proceed, it will only serve special interests at the expense of broader policy, regulatory and economic priorities.” Several prior cases challenging individual companies based on a public-nuisance theory have failed — including at the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2011 (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-174.pdf) that climate action by the Environmental Protection Agency in effect removed the ability to use the courts as a remedy. But the difference now, Burger said, is that the claims are being brought under state, rather than federal, common law — and that strategy remains to be tested. New York charges in the lawsuit that it is “spending billions of dollars” to protect its coastlines, its infrastructure and its citizens from climate warming. “To deal with what the future will inevitably bring, the City must build sea walls, levees, dunes, and other coastal armament, and elevate and harden a vast array of City-owned structures, properties, and parks along its coastline,” the lawsuit says. “The costs of these largely unfunded projects run to many billions of dollars and far exceed the City's resources.” The suit does not specify precisely how much money it is asking for from the oil companies in what it calls “compensatory damages,” saying that should be established in the case. At a news conference on Wednesday afternoon, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio focused on the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy in 2012, calling it “a tragedy wrought by the actions of the fossil fuel companies.” He detailed the 44 people who died in New York as a result of Sandy, as well as the estimated $19 billion in damage it caused. “That is the face of climate change,” de Blasio said. “That is what it means in human and real terms.” De Blasio claimed fossil fuel companies were complicit in worsening climate change, because they knew of the problem decades ago but continued to sell a product to Americans that contributed to only more greenhouse-gas emissions. “The city of New York is taking on these five giants because they are the central actors, they are the first ones responsible for this crisis and they should not get away with it anymore,” he said, adding: “We're going after those who have profited. And what a horrible, disgusting way to profit — the way it puts so many people's lives in danger.” “It's time that they are held accountable,” de Blasio said. “It's time that things change in the way we do business.” In addition to the litigation, officials said they expect to divest up to $5 billion in investments from as many as 190 companies with fossil fuel ties, even as they promised to maintain their fiduciary duty to New York’s pensioners. “We're using this moment to send a message to the world,” said New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer. “We believe a green economy is a thriving economy.” Bill McKibben, an author and co-founder of the climate advocacy group 350.org (https://350.org), praised the city's actions on Wednesday. “I've been watching the climate fight for the last 30 years,” McKibben told reporters. “This is one of the handful of most important moments in that 30-year fight.” But the oil and gas lobby said that by not investing in their industry, New York was doing city workers a disservice. “Today Mayor de Blasio turned his back on millions of first responders, police officers and public employees who depend on their pensions to provide for themselves and their families in retirement,” said Karen Moreau, New York executive director for the American Petroleum Institute, the largest U.S. oil and gas lobbying group. “Government pension managers have a responsibility by law to seek the greatest return for their investors and pensions that invest in oil and natural gas companies have historically delivered a stronger return than other investments.” • Brady Dennis contributed to this story. • Chris Mooney reports on science and the environment for The Washington Post. • Dino Grandoni is an energy and environmental policy reporter at The Washington Post and the author of PowerPost (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost)'s daily tipsheet on the beat, The Energy 202 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/newssearch/?query=The%20Energy%20202). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Extreme hurricanes and wildfires made 2017 the most costly U.S. disaster year on record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/08/hurricanes-wildfires-made-2017-the-most-costly-u-s-disaster-year-on-record) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/10/new-york-city-sues-shell-exxonmobil-and-other-oil-majors-over-climate-change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/10/new-york-city-sues-shell-exxonmobil-and-other-oil-majors-over-climate-change) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 12, 2018, 03:25:39 pm It's good to see “rich pricks” being affected by extreme climate events caused by global warming, eh? After all, “rich pricks” tend to be the greatest polluters ('cause they can afford to pollute), so it tends to be karma when they get affected. from The New York Times.... Climate Change in My Backyard Will the flooding and mudslides that ravaged California — the latest in a series of climate disasters this year — lead to action on global warming? By LEAH C. STOKES | Thursday, January 11, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/12/opinion/12stokes/12stokes-master768.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/01/12/opinion/12stokes/12stokes-superJumbo.jpg) Illustration: Mark Pernice. SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA — On Tuesday morning, half an inch of water fell in nearby Montecito — half an inch in five minutes. Even in the best of conditions, this pace could cause flooding. But it wasn't the best of conditions. Last month, we endured the largest wildfire in California history. For two and a half weeks straight, the fire burned closer every day. Air quality turned unhealthy and forced schools to close. Businesses had to shut their doors during the peak holiday season. The local economy was decimated. I moved out of my home for weeks, as did many others. But at least I had a home to return to. Hundreds of others lost theirs. Thousands more lost their livelihoods. As a climate policy researcher, I was seeing the consequences of climate inaction in my own backyard. Life was just beginning to get back to normal when the rains came this week, hard and fast. The scorched land could not absorb the water, and so the mudslides began (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/us/montecito-mudslides-california.html). Many residents, exhausted from weeks of displacement, were at home that night despite evacuation warnings. The forecast called for heavy rains, and the county was persistent in its preparation for mudslides and flooding. But the rain's intensity was extreme. Rain was not supposed to fall this fast, not in our memory. No one thought it would be so bad. Houses were ripped from their foundations. City streets were unrecognizable. Helicopters flew back and forth in a near continuous line for days, hoisting people from roofs. The names of the missing and the dead swelled. We say the extreme rain caused this disaster. We say it was the fire. And we say that multiple years of drought didn't help. But what caused the rain, the fire and the drought? There is a clear climate signature in the disaster in Santa Barbara. We know that climate change is making California's extreme rainfall events more frequent (https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing-climate/heavy-downpours-increasing). We know it's worsening our fires (http://www.pnas.org/content/113/42/11770.abstract). We know that it contributed substantially (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL064924/abstract;jsessionid=B90C61BA1040A3DF435BAEB230B8AA1D.f02t01) to the latest drought. There are simpler stories we could tell. Stories with more proximate causes: Those people bought in dangerous places. Those people should have left their homes. Those people are somehow to blame. These events are normal. These things just happen there. But these simple stories mask a larger truth. How many times do we need to hear adjectives in their superlative form before we spot a pattern: largest, rainiest, driest, deadliest? Records, by their nature, are not meant to be set annually. And yet that's what is happening. The costliest year for natural disasters in the United States was 2017. One of the longest and most severe droughts in California history concluded for most parts of the state in 2017. The five warmest years on record have all occurred since 2006, with 2017 expected to be one of the warmest yet again. I have researched climate change policy for over a decade now. For a long time, we assumed that climate policy was stalled because it was a problem for the future. Or it would affect other people. Poorer people. Animals. Ecosystems. We assumed those parts of the world were separate from us. That we were somehow insulated. I didn't expect to see it in my own backyard so soon. Climate change devastated ecosystems, species and neighborhoods in Houston and much of struggling Puerto Rico last year. Now climate change has ravaged one of the wealthiest ZIP codes in the country. We know now that even the richest among us is not insulated. These extreme events are getting worse. But when I read the news after each fresh disaster, I rarely see a mention of climate change. Whether it's coverage of a fire in my backyard or a powerful hurricane in the Caribbean, this bigger story is usually missing. To say that it is too soon to talk about the causes of a crisis is wrongheaded. We must connect the dots. Climate change helped cost my friends' businesses' revenue. Climate change helped put my community in chaos for weeks. Climate change paved the way for lost lives next door. If climate victims here and across the globe understood that carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels played a role in their losses, perhaps they would rise up to demand policy changes. We know this could happen because research (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/crime-victimization-and-political-participation/869FE42104FD02272845F47BA09886A4) from the political scientist Regina Bateson, now a congressional candidate in California, shows that being a crime victim can spur people into activism. Perhaps some of the people affected by the fires in California, the hurricanes in Puerto Rico and Texas, and the drought in the Dakotas will be similarly motivated. Maybe some of these climate change victims will become the climate policy champions we sorely need. It is never too soon after one of these disasters to speak truth about climate change's role. If anything, it is too late. If we do not name the problem, we cannot hope to solve it. For my community, as much as yours, I hope we will. __________________________________________________________________________ • Leah C. Stokes is an assistant professor (http://www.polsci.ucsb.edu/people/leah-stokes) of political science at the University of California, Santa Barbara. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/opinion/california-floods-mudslides-climate.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/opinion/california-floods-mudslides-climate.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 20, 2018, 05:51:42 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 20, 2018, 11:19:55 am from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times.... 2017 one of 3 hottest years on record Warming was seen even without El Niño. NASA and NOAA data show ‘long-term trends are very clear’. By AMINA KHAN | Friday, January 19 2018 (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a60d620/turbine/la-1516295708-tpryznct0q-snap-image/1111) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a60d620/turbine/la-1516295708-tpryznct0q-snap-image) This color-coded map shows that most of the Earth was warmer than average for the calendar year 2017. — Source: NOAA/NCEI. EVEN WITHOUT the help of El Niño, 2017 was a top-three scorcher for planet Earth. Global temperatures last year were the third-highest since scientists began keeping records in 1880, according to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Measurements from NASA placed it even higher, coming in second over the last 138 years. Both agencies said the average global surface temperature in 2017 was only slightly below the record-high temperature seen in 2016. Two years ago, the average temperature across land and ocean surfaces jumped 1.69 degrees above the 20th century average of 57 degrees, according to NOAA. It remained high last year, coming in at 1.51 degrees above the previous century’s average. That makes the last three years — 2015, 2016 and 2017 — the hottest ones since 1880. In fact, both analyses agree that five of the hottest years have occurred just since 2010. “The fact that 2017 was so warm in a year without El Niño should make very clear how rapidly Earth's global temperature is increasing,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University who was not involved with the either NASA's or NOAA’s report. Although the NASA and NOAA data announced on Thursday have slight statistical differences, they clearly show that global warming continues its climb, scientists said. “The annual change from year to year can bounce up and down … but the long-term trends are very clear, especially since the mid-20th century,” said Derek Arndt, chief of the monitoring branch of NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information. The results were buttressed by analyses from the United Kingdom Met Office and the World Meteorological Organization, which also ranked 2017 as a top-three year for recorded global temperatures. Apart from a few cold spots, “the planet is warming remarkably uniformly,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which uses satellites to monitor Earth's climate. Although global temperatures differed across continents, virtually all of them felt the heat. South America experienced its second-warmest year since continental records began in 1910, according to NOAA data. Asia felt its third-warmest, Africa its fourth-warmest and Europe its fifth-warmest year on record. North America and Oceania, a region that includes Australia, Polynesia and several other island chains, felt their sixth-warmest years on record. The record-breaking temperatures in 2016 were fueled slightly by El Niño, a multiyear weather pattern that can result in higher regional temperatures. But 2017 was warm even without that additional help, going through a fairly “neutral” year as the pattern transitioned toward the cooler La Niña phase. “It was the warmest non-El Niño year on record,” said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who was not involved with either government analysis. Data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center showed that Arctic sea ice last year covered 4.01 million square miles. That marks the second-smallest extent since 1979, when records began. Antarctic sea ice covered only 4.11 million square miles in 2017, breaking the previous record set in 1986 by 154,000 fewer square miles. Global temperatures have been rising steadily over the last several decades, fueled in large part by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that result from burning fossil fuels, cutting down forests and other human activity. (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a60d6c3/turbine/la-1516295871-vgqxltjlpj-snap-image/1111) (http://www.trbimg.com/img-5a60d6c3/turbine/la-1516295871-vgqxltjlpj-snap-image) A map of some noteworthy climate and weather events that occurred around the world in 2017. — Source: NOAA/NCEI. The warming trend has caused sea levels to rise and led to an uptick in extreme weather events, scientists said. “We are now clearly seeing the impact of human-caused climate change in the form of unprecedented droughts, wildfires, floods and superstorms,” Mann said. He pointed to a heavy-hitting 2017 season that included Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria. Each of those storms cost the United States far in excess of $1 billion, according to NOAA. “The effects of climate change are no longer subtle,” he said. The excess carbon dioxide has also made oceans more acidic, causing long-termdamage to corals and many other marine species, research shows. Members of the Trump administration have indicated a reluctance to recognize and respond to the threats associated with human-caused climate change. President Trump announced last year that he would be pulling the United States out of the 2015 Paris climate accord. His administration has also pushed to remove protections from some public lands and to open waters to drilling. Meanwhile, civil servants with climate science and environmental expertise say they're being sidelined. __________________________________________________________________________ • Amina Khan is a science writer covering a broad range of topics, from Mars rovers to linguistics to bio-inspired engineering — but she's perhaps best known for her repeated and brutal attacks on the office snack table. She surfs and snowboards in her spare time. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_popover_share.aspx?guid=0535b327-50aa-4343-8a23-158ef9b2a746 (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_popover_share.aspx?guid=0535b327-50aa-4343-8a23-158ef9b2a746) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 22, 2018, 10:35:11 pm (https://media.guim.co.uk/7868ef7e1a73e8280c8c911b5badb0932d7fcdf9/0_0_3508_5131/1367.jpg) (https://media.guim.co.uk/7868ef7e1a73e8280c8c911b5badb0932d7fcdf9/0_0_3508_5131/1367.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 22, 2018, 11:57:37 pm time to send the global warm scam to the cartoon graveyard ?
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 26, 2018, 05:54:08 am Is Global Warming Science Just A Fraud?
Climate Change: We're often told by advocates of climate change that the "science is settled." But in fact, "science" itself is in a deep crisis over making claims it can't back up, especially about climate. As BBC News Science Correspondent Tom Feilden noted last week, "Science is facing a 'reproducibility crisis' where more than two-thirds of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, research suggests." This isn't just his journalistic opinion, but the conclusion of the University of Virginia's Center for Open Science, which estimates that roughly 70% of all studies can't be reproduced. And this includes the field of climate change, by the way. It's a disaster. Being able to reproduce others' experiments or findings from models is at the very heart of science. Yet, radical climate change advocates would have us spend 2% of global GDP, or roughly $1.5 trillion a year, to forestall a minuscule amount of anticipated warming based on dubious modeling and experiments. Meanwhile, the federal government spends literally billions of dollars a year on climate change, with virtually none of the money funding scientists who doubt the climate change threat. There is no serious debate. This is a problem for all of science. Worse, our government's own science fraud is a big problem. Dr. John Bates, a former top scientist at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, recently detailed how a government paper that called into question the 18-year "pause" in global warming was based on "experimental" data and politicized. That "paper" was used to justify President Obama's signing of the Paris climate agreement. Meanwhile, Georgia Institute of Technology climatologist Judith Curry recently retired, blaming the "CRAZINESS (her emphasis) in the field of climate science." Even so, mythical claims of a "consensus" among scientists about climate change continue in an effort to shut up critics. Those who dissent, and literally thousands of scientists and engineers do, are shouted down and harassed. As Princeton University physicist Will Happer told the left-wing British newspaper the Guardian earlier this week: "There's a whole area of climate so-called science that is really more like a cult. ... It will potentially harm the image of all science." It's time for some science Glasnost. New EPA Director Scott Pruitt has called for an open debate on climate science, rather than the name-calling and outright dishonesty of the past. Real science has nothing to fear from more openness and discussion, but everything to fear from more politicized dishonesty. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/is-global-warming-science-just-a-fraud/ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 27, 2018, 08:06:59 pm A brain fart from President Donald J. Trump aka the gutless, yellow-bellied, cowardly, draft-dodging Cadet Bone Spurs…… (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTYBSZhVMAA6cB_.jpg) (https://twitter.com/davidhorsey/status/951950116084097024) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on January 30, 2018, 12:01:11 pm (http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Climate_Change_Scam.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 30, 2018, 04:31:40 pm from The Washington Post.... Debunking the claim ‘they’ changed ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ because warming stopped Scientific and government institutions called for the name to be changed; it never stopped warming. By JASON SAMENOW | 3:52PM EST — Monday, January 29, 2018 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2018/01/2671_18-003-1280px.jpg&w=1150) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2018/01/2671_18-003-1280px.jpg) Via NASA: “This map shows Earth's average global temperature from 2013 to 2017, as compared to a baseline average from 1951 to 1980, according to an analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Yellows, oranges, and reds show regions warmer than the baseline”. — Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio. “THEY” changed the term “global warming” to “climate change” because the planet is not warming is an oft-repeated talking point of those, such as President Trump, who cast doubt on the reality of rising temperatures. This claim is demonstrably incorrect, never mind that it's unclear who “they” are. The gradual change in preferred terminology from “global warming” to “climate change” began about a decade ago because that's what the scientific community and governmental institutions called for. It also happened to be the preference of the George W. Bush White House. Temperatures never stopped rising. No matter the reality, Trump has now twice uttered this falsehood. In 2013, he tweeted (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/316252016190054400): “They changed the name from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ after the term global warming just wasn't working (it was too cold)!” Then, in an interview with Piers Morgan last week (https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/01/donald-trumps-interview-with-piers-morgan-full-transcript), when asked about his belief in climate change, he responded: “There is a cooling, and there is a heating, and I mean, look — it used to not be climate change. It used to be global warming…. That wasn't working too well, because it was getting too cold all over the place.” Trump apparently missed the joint NOAA and NASA news release earlier this month that showed the four warmest years on record have occurred in the past four years. “The planet is warming remarkably uniformly,” Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, told reporters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/18/2017-was-among-the-planets-hottest-years-on-record-government-scientists-report). When the preferred terminology for the planet's rising temperatures pivoted some years ago, it had nothing to do with thermometers. In 2005, the National Academies of Sciences published a pamphlet (https://www.preventionweb.net/files/2276_climatechangefinal.pdf) that expressed the viewpoint that “climate change” was a more scientifically comprehensive description of what was happening to the planet. “The phrase ‘climate change’ is growing in preferred use to ‘global warming’ because it helps convey that there are changes in addition to rising temperatures,” it said. Shortly thereafter, in 2006, the Environmental Protection Agency changed the name of its Web site on the issue from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”. It plastered the National Academies quote on the superiority of “climate change” on the front page (https://web.archive.org/web/20061221103820/http://www.epa.gov/climatechange) to explain the rationale. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2018/01/epa-front-02092007.png&w=1150) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/files/2018/01/epa-front-02092007.png) EPA “Climate Change” website, from February 2007. — Credit: Wayback Machine. “The contentious phrase global warming, first used by United Press International in 1969, seems to be undergoing a certain cooling; contrariwise, the more temperate phrase climate change is getting hot,” The New York Times' William Safire wrote in his On Language column (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/14/magazine/upordown.html) in 2005. In the years prior, the Bush administration had expressed a clear preference for the term “climate change”. In speeches on the issue (https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html), Bush referred to “global climate change” and never mentioned “global warming”. His administration formed “climate change” science and technology programs. There may well have been political motivation to change the name, as The Washington Post's Philip Bump wrote on Monday: Quote In 2002, Republican consultant Frank Luntz wrote a memo arguing that Republicans start using the latter term. “Climate change is less frightening than global warming,” he wrote. “While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge.” Even years before that, international institutions had paved the way for “climate change” to eventually become the prevalent term. The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change was negotiated in 1992, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established in 1988. “Global warming” had its ascension (https://pmm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change) in 1988 when NASA scientist James E. Hansen testified before Congress that “global warming has reached a level such that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause-and-effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and the observed warming.” His testimony generated massive media coverage and popularized the term. While “global warming” was eclipsed by “climate change” decades later, it remains a valuable term that accurately and directly describes what's happening to the planet's temperature over time. __________________________________________________________________________ • Jason Samenow is The Washington Post's weather editor and Capital Weather Gang (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang)'s chief meteorologist. He earned a master's degree in atmospheric science, and spent 10 years as a climate change science analyst for the U.S. government. He holds the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/01/29/debunking-the-claim-they-changed-global-warming-to-climate-change-because-its-cooling (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/01/29/debunking-the-claim-they-changed-global-warming-to-climate-change-because-its-cooling) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on January 30, 2018, 08:05:01 pm Didn't read the wapo predictable crap. Wapo are just more watermelon media lemmings promoting the narrative of Co2 induced Armageddon. Sadly the same species of enviro-lemming has infiltrated orgs like NOAA.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on January 30, 2018, 08:10:32 pm https://youtu.be/Z8r-hNfHXXY
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 01, 2018, 10:30:06 am https://youtu.be/eR1xgXWlClc
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 01, 2018, 11:09:39 am I see the previous poster has been posting “FAKE SCIENCE!” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 01, 2018, 07:29:36 pm Grow a brain. These highly credentialed scientists are pointing out the facts on Eco lunatics faking science.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 01, 2018, 07:38:20 pm They sound like “fake scientists” to me. Either that, or they are being paid by polluting industries. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 04:00:04 pm You need to start thinking for yourself. Many of the scientists critical of the theory of man-made climate disaster are highly published and credentialed members of the IPCC! The IPCC was created to spread panic about this theory and is the bedrock institution of climate alarmism! That should ring alarm bells for any rational thinking person.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 05:15:26 pm 50 former IPCC experts....
1. Dr Robert Balling: “The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” (This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers). 2. Dr. Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.” 3. Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.” 4. Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.” 5. Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.” 6. Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.” 7. Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers.” 8. Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996, the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3,000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernable human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.” 9. Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the longstanding claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.” 10. Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.” 11. Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.” 12. Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.” 13. Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.” 14. Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) concept until the furor started after [NASA’s James] Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980’s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting at first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.” 15. Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.” 16. Dr Vincent Gray: “The (IPCC) climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.” 17. Dr Kenneth Green: “We can expect the climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority.” 18. Dr Mike Hulme: “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous … The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen.” 19. Dr Kiminori Itoh: “There are many factors which cause climate change. Considering only greenhouse gases is nonsense and harmful. When people know what the truth is they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” 20. Dr Yuri Izrael: “There is no proven link between human activity and global warming. I think the panic over global warming is totally unjustified. There is no serious threat to the climate.” 21. Dr Steven Japar: “Temperature measurements show that the climate model-predicted mid-troposphere hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them.” 22. Dr Georg Kaser: “This number (of receding glaciers reported by the IPCC) is not just a little bit wrong, but far out of any order of magnitude … It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing,” 23. Dr Aynsley Kellow: “I’m not holding my breath for criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: there is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.” 24. Dr Madhav Khandekar: “I have carefully analysed adverse impacts of climate change as projected by the IPCC and have discounted these claims as exaggerated and lacking any supporting evidence.” 25. Dr Hans Labohm: “The alarmist passages in the (IPCC) Summary for Policymakers have been skewed through an elaborate and sophisticated process of spin-doctoring.” 26. Dr. Andrew Lacis: “There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department.” 27. Dr Chris Landsea: “I cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.” 28. Dr Richard Lindzen: “The IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. It uses summaries to misrepresent what scientists say and exploits public ignorance.” 29. Dr Harry Lins: “Surface temperature changes over the past century have been episodic and modest and there has been no net global warming for over a decade now. The case for alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated.” 30. Dr Philip Lloyd: “I am doing a detailed assessment of the IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science. I have found examples of a summary saying precisely the opposite of what the scientists said.” 31. Dr Martin Manning: “Some government delegates influencing the IPCC Summary for Policymakers misrepresent or contradict the lead authors.” 32. Stephen McIntyre: “The many references in the popular media to a “consensus of thousands of scientists” are both a great exaggeration and also misleading.” 33. Dr Patrick Michaels: “The rates of warming, on multiple time scales have now invalidated the suite of IPCC climate models. No, the science is not settled.” 34. Dr Nils-Axel Morner: “If you go around the globe, you find no sea level rise anywhere.” 35. Dr Johannes Oerlemans: “The IPCC has become too political. Many scientists have not been able to resist the siren call of fame, research funding and meetings in exotic places that awaits them if they are willing to compromise scientific principles and integrity in support of the man-made global-warming doctrine.” 36. Dr Roger Pielke: “All of my comments were ignored without even a rebuttal. At that point, I concluded that the IPCC Reports were actually intended to be advocacy documents designed to produce particular policy actions, but not as a true and honest assessment of the understanding of the climate system.” 37. Dr Jan Pretel: “It’s nonsense to drastically reduce emissions … predicting about the distant future-100 years can’t be predicted due to uncertainties.” 38. Dr Paul Reiter: “As far as the science being ‘settled,’ I think that is an obscenity. The fact is the science is being distorted by people who are not scientists.” 39. Dr Murray Salby: “I have an involuntary gag reflex whenever someone says the “science is settled. Anyone who thinks the science is settled on this topic is in fantasia.” 40. Dr Tom Segalstad: “The IPCC global warming model is not supported by the scientific data.” 41. Dr Fred Singer: “Isn’t it remarkable that the Policymakers Summary of the IPCC report avoids mentioning the satellite data altogether, or even the existence of satellites–probably because the data show a (slight) cooling over the last 18 years, in direct contradiction to the calculations from climate models?” 42. Dr Hajo Smit: “There is clear cut solar-climate coupling and a very strong natural variability of climate on all historical time scales. Currently I hardly believe anymore that there is any relevant relationship between human CO2 emissions and climate change.” 43. Dr Roy Spencer: “The IPCC is not a scientific organization and was formed to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Claims of human-cause global warming are only a means to that goal.” 44. Dr Richard Tol: “The IPCC attracted more people with political rather than academic motives. In AR4, green activists held key positions in the IPCC and they succeeded in excluding or neutralising opposite voices.” 45. Dr Tom Tripp: “There is so much of a natural variability in weather it makes it difficult to come to a scientifically valid conclusion that global warming is man made.” 46. Dr Robert Watson: “The (IPCC) mistakes all appear to have gone in the direction of making it seem like climate change is more serious by overstating the impact. That is worrying. The IPCC needs to look at this trend in the errors and ask why it happened.” 47. Dr Gerd-Rainer Weber: “Most of the extremist views about climate change have little or no scientific basis.” 48. Dr David Wojick: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.” 49. Dr Miklos Zagoni: “I am positively convinced that the anthropogenic global warming theory is wrong.” 50. Dr. Eduardo Zorita: “Editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations, even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed. By writing these lines… a few of my future studies will not see the light of publication.” Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 05:57:58 pm So in the last post I've given you FIFTY HIGHLY CREDENTIALED CLIMATE SCIENTISTS (so highly credentialed they were accepted as IPCC climate experts) who have called bullshit on the global warming hysteria/scam.
This does not give you some pause for thought??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 02, 2018, 06:04:29 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 02, 2018, 06:06:36 pm So in the last post I've given you FIFTY HIGHLY CREDENTIALED CLIMATE SCIENTISTS (so highly credentialed they were accepted as IPCC climate experts) who have called bullshit on the global warming hysteria/scam. This does not give you some pause for thought??? Only fifty “fake scientists”?? Is that the best you can do? There are multiple tens of thousands of scientists who view human-induced global-warming and subsequent climate change as REAL. IDIOT!!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 07:28:53 pm OK I can see you are a cult member and incapable of rational thought. 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 02, 2018, 08:57:06 pm we had a hot summer so ktj has changed his warming scam from climate change to global warming (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-U7QwhOKECpI/VNjgqkzBycI/AAAAAAAAslE/_AQyJiqmG80/s1600/Settled-Science-600-LA.jpg) (http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/climatology-al-gore.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 08:57:12 pm There are not thousands of climate expert scientists in the IPCC. Speaking out against the hysterical cult of climate alarmism usually means having social justice moonbats trying to destroy your career and slandering you in multiple ways.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 02, 2018, 09:22:27 pm You have zero evidence those 50 highly credentialed IPCC scientists are "fake". Like a typical brainwashed cult member you are just mindlessly parroting a meme.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 10:04:59 am (http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/wheel-of-climate.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 03, 2018, 10:46:24 am All it is-is a way to tax the air lol
i think only the left should be taxed on air because they are useless air breathers Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 11:51:35 am Models vs reality = clownmate scientist fail...
(https://alfinnextlevel.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/michaels-102-ipcc-models-vs-reality.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 11:53:27 am The failure of clownmate activist "scientists" to prove their little theory is settled 😁
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 12:25:05 pm Meanwhile at climate moonbat infested universities...
(http://chronicle.augusta.com/sites/default/files/styles/slideshow__640x360/public/images/2629048_web1_052717MCKEETOON_web.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 03, 2018, 01:31:10 pm ;D lmao
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 03, 2018, 05:43:19 pm Tom Scott summed up the situation perfectly a few days ago in The Dominion Post…… (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Cartoons%20Tom%20Scott/20180131_Records_zpsnk9l9gcv.jpg~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 06:15:26 pm Newsflash.
The earth has been steadily warming since the end of the little ice age. The "record" this that or other things are either not records or they are minuscule and not able to be distinguished from natural climate variability. You really must stop mindlessly believing left wing media crap! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 06:18:28 pm "Record" heat in Wanaka hey? Since when? Do tell.
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 03, 2018, 06:49:42 pm Right on cue....the group's other “flat-earther” oozes out of his hole. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on February 03, 2018, 09:05:07 pm And again for the pertinent question evader...
"Record" heat in Wanaka hey? Since when? Do tell. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 09, 2018, 10:41:27 am Dumbarse....don't you take any notice of the news media reports of record temperatures in Wanaka? Faaaaaaark, you're stupid. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 09, 2018, 10:41:57 am 1149 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 09, 2018, 10:42:36 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 09, 2018, 10:42:48 am (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/cf95f923-fce1-4a18-8b42-cc6e518fbc9a.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/cf95f923-fce1-4a18-8b42-cc6e518fbc9a.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 11, 2018, 10:59:08 am (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/00d5521f-62d6-4068-a300-ac5d482dc020.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/00d5521f-62d6-4068-a300-ac5d482dc020.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 18, 2018, 10:47:12 am Yep....“flat-earthers” and “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” are as dumb as dog-shit, alright.... (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/17738134-2c60-45db-816b-d95b4929a970.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/17738134-2c60-45db-816b-d95b4929a970.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 20, 2018, 11:39:13 pm from The Washington Post.... Some places flourished in the Little Ice Age. There are lessons for us now. Adaptations to climate change helped give the Dutch a golden age. By DAGOMAR DEGROOT | 10:00AM EST — Monday, February 19, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Er75h_aZH9Sy8BsOTv8sgsQp-AY=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JDZVNCQSQII6RJUM5E3UDCAXBY.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Er75h_aZH9Sy8BsOTv8sgsQp-AY=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JDZVNCQSQII6RJUM5E3UDCAXBY.jpg) To adjust to new weather patterns, the Dutch developed such inventions as the “sailing car” or ”land yacht”, which used wind power to haul people and goods along beaches. — Illustration: Rijksmuseum. WE ARE changing Earth's climate with terrifying speed. In the past, natural forces provoked slower climate changes. We now know that they were still big and fast enough to shape the fates of past societies. Climate change then brought disaster to most societies, but a few prospered. Perhaps the most successful of all emerged in the coastal fringes of the Netherlands, and it has left us with lessons that may help us prepare for our warmer future. Based on glacial ice samplings, stalagmites, ocean- and lake-bed sediments, tree rings and other assessments, it's clear that sometime in the 13th century, Earth's climate cooled. Huge volcanic eruptions lofted dust high into the stratosphere, blocking sunlight just as the sun slipped into a less-active phase, sending less energy to Earth. Sea ice expanded, wind patterns changed and ocean currents shifted. In many regions, torrential rains alternated with unprecedented droughts. A period called the “Little Ice Age” had begun, reaching its coldest point in the 16th century. The timing could not have been worse. In empire after empire, population growth had left millions dependent on crops cultivated in arid, unproductive farmland. When weather extremes interrupted growing seasons, harvests failed, time and again. Famine and starvation gripped the heartland of the Spanish Empire, the jungles of the Mutapa Kingdom in southern Africa, the steppes of the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the rice fields of the Ming Dynasty. The worst was yet to come. Changing weather patterns altered the range of insects that carried pathogens, bringing new and deadly ailments to the previously unexposed. Because malnourished bodies have weak immune systems, farmers and their livestock soon fell sick. Refugees from the famine-stricken countryside spread diseases to cities, where epidemic outbreaks often inflicted a fearsome toll. In one empire after another, the sick and starving blamed governments for their misery. As a result, the coldest stretch of the Little Ice Age brought an unprecedented surge of revolts and civil wars. Rebel and state armies alike conscripted farm laborers who joined refugees in spreading disease. In the end, millions died. Yet remarkably, inhabitants of the Dutch Republic — the precursor state to today's Netherlands — enjoyed a golden age that perfectly coincided with the chilliest century of the Little Ice Age. Somehow, a country with a small population emerged as a great power, with a navy that went from victory to victory and a commercial fleet that dwarfed all others. The Dutch Republic was an oddball in the 17th-century world. A surge in urbanization The overwhelming majority of people in most societies of the time toiled in rural fields, growing crops for local markets. Many Dutch farmers, by contrast, cultivated cash crops for distant consumers. The republic therefore depended on grain imports from farms scattered along the Baltic Sea, which rarely all suffered at the same time from cold snaps or precipitation extremes. Over time, a growing share of Dutch citizens worked in commercial interests and industries in port cities protected by an extensive network of dikes and sluices. Urbanization was soon more common in the republic than just about anywhere else in Europe. Tens of thousands of sailors plied trade routes that reached into the Arctic, the Americas, Africa and Asia. These sailing ships depended on two things: favorable winds and ice-free water. By changing currents and cooling temperatures in the atmosphere and oceans, the chilliest stretches of the Little Ice Age therefore affected sailing as much as farming. Yet the impact was very different. New wind patterns actually sped up ships that left the republic for Asia or America, shortening their journeys. Seaworthy ships In the waters off northern Europe, storms were unusually frequent in the coldest stretches of the Little Ice Age. The republic's biggest merchant ships were more seaworthy than similar ships fielded by other European powers. Portuguese ships bound for Asia were four times as likely to sink as their Dutch counterparts, and English ships were twice as likely to go down. Even sea ice aided the Dutch, including in the Arctic. Expanding sea ice redirected Dutch voyages of northern exploration into bowhead whale feeding grounds off Norway's Svalbard archipelago. Whalers from all over Europe eventually set up shop there was well. But for a long time, the edge of the Arctic pack ice lingered near Dutch whaling stations, and because whales gathered along the edge of the ice, the Dutch benefited. The Dutch fought most of their wars on or around water, and climatic cooling helped their armies and fleets. They flooded their own farmland to thwart Spanish and French invasions. Some of these floods would not have succeeded without torrential rains that reflected new atmospheric realities. Shifting wind patterns, shaped by the cooling climate, gave Dutch sailors the benefit of favorable winds in naval wars with England and France. Climate change did not always aid the Dutch. In the Arctic, sea ice crushed ships, drowned sailors and screened whales from whalers. Small ships that carried grain and timber from the Baltic Sea endured deadly storms and confronted thick sea ice. Cold snaps in the Baltics occasionally led to harvest failures that imperiled the republic's grain imports. Ice repeatedly choked the waterways of the republic, halting ferry services between cities. Time and again, the Dutch responded creatively. Shipmakers fortified the hulls of whaling ships and greased them until they slid off ice. Guilds and city governments bought icebreakers that not only kept waterways open but also produced ice blocks for wine cellars. When the ice was too thick to break, the Dutch used skates and sleds to turn frozen canals into busy thoroughfares. To manage the risk of mishaps, merchants divided their goods among ships and invested in marine insurance. They stockpiled Baltic grain in good years and sold it for healthy profits when food shortages plagued Europe. The Dutch, in short, were lucky to benefit from environmental changes that favored their unusual economy. But they also made their own luck. The society they built ended up being remarkably resilient in the face of new weather patterns that spelled disaster elsewhere in Europe. In fact, they may have consciously adapted their technologies and policies to exploit the Little Ice Age. Their long history of draining and damming the Low Countries, which helped them deal with weather well before the coldest stretch of the Little Ice Age, probably helped them recognize that environments can change and that societies can either adapt or succumb. What, then, can the history of the republic's golden age teach us today? First and perhaps most important, it shows us that even relatively small changes in Earth's average temperature can have enormous social consequences. The world has already warmed more, relative to average temperatures in the 20th century, than it cooled in the chilliest stretches of the Little Ice Age, and there is far more warming on the horizon. Histories of the Little Ice Age, therefore, are an urgent call to arms. We have technologies that our ancestors could not have imagined. But there are far more of us, consuming unimaginably more plants and animals, metals and fuels. And we, too, depend on a huge network of fields and fisheries that may not survive drastic changes in temperature and precipitation. Unequal consequences That leads us to our second lesson: Climate change has had, and probably will have, very unequal consequences for different societies, communities and individuals. Many assume that rich societies cope best with climate change. Yet some of the wealthiest 17th-century empires — from Ming China to the Ottoman sultanate — actually fared worst in the coldest decades of the Little Ice Age. The Dutch prospered not because their republic was rich but because much of its wealth derived from activities that benefited from climate change. Today, we can learn from the republic by strengthening social safety nets, by investing in technologies that exploit or reduce climate change and, more broadly, by thinking proactively about how we will adapt to the warmer planet of our future. Ultimately, the lessons of the past come to us in the form of parables, stories that hint at deeper truths but do not tell us exactly what to do. That does not make them any less valuable. We now know that we cannot ignore our changing climate, that it will shape our fortunes in the decades to come. __________________________________________________________________________ • Dagomar Degroot is a professor of environmental history at Georgetown University and author of the book “The Frigid Golden Age. Climate Change, the Little Ice Age, and the Dutch Republic, 1560-1720” (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1108419313). He is the co-founder of the Climate History Network (http://www.environmentandsociety.org/mml/climate-history-network-chn). https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/some-places-flourished-in-the-little-ice-age-there-are-lessons-for-us-now/2018/02/16/455fb2d8-0c25-11e8-8b0d-891602206fb7_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/some-places-flourished-in-the-little-ice-age-there-are-lessons-for-us-now/2018/02/16/455fb2d8-0c25-11e8-8b0d-891602206fb7_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 06, 2018, 05:31:10 pm from the Los Angeles Times.... Once a Trump favorite, EPA chief Scott Pruitt might not be able to save his job By EVAN HALPER | 2:40PM PDT — Thursday, April 05, 2018 (http://www.latimes.com/resizer/1f6rt2UVdtCuV3pd24Ds8ZEEtXw=/1400x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UOGDJZKFTFF6VAVOGFUVQM4YS4.jpg) (http://www.latimes.com/resizer/1f6rt2UVdtCuV3pd24Ds8ZEEtXw=/1400x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UOGDJZKFTFF6VAVOGFUVQM4YS4.jpg) EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has energetically pursued the administration's deregulation agenda, but ethical lapses have endangered his tenure. — Photograph: Andrew Harnik/Associated Press. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY chief Scott Pruitt once seemed immune from the Trump Cabinet chaos. No more. Questions are dogging Pruitt over first-class plane trips at taxpayer expense, a housing deal from a lobbyist's wife and big government payouts for his friends. The anti-regulatory crusader's days in the Trump administration may be numbered. By midweek, even Pruitt looked rattled by how fast things were unraveling as he struggled to explain on national television how two aides he recruited from his home state of Oklahoma came to receive immense pay hikes — one of almost $57,000 — that the White House had refused to authorize. He bristled when asked how accepting a below-market room-rental from the wife of a Washington lobbyist whose firm does business before the EPA fit with President Trump's vow to "drain the swamp." Worse of all, the on-air shaming came from the president's favorite conservative cable channel, Fox News. Pruitt has found little refuge at the White House. Asked on Wednesday whether Trump was comfortable with the alleged ethics lapses swirling around Pruitt, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was unexpectedly frank. “The president's not,” she said. “We're reviewing the situation.” On Thursday, the White House repeated its concern. “We expect that administrator Pruitt [will] answer those questions,” said Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley. But Pruitt, who denies any ethical lapses or abuse of taxpayer money, may yet hang onto his job at the EPA. As Trump boarded Air Force One Thursday, he was asked if he had confidence in Pruitt: “I do,” he said. Later Trump told reporters he would “look at” the reports about Pruitt and “make that determination.” But he added, “I think he's done a fantastic job. I think he's done an incredible job. He's been very courageous. It hasn't been easy.” Still, Pruitt's abrupt transformation into the black sheep of the Cabinet has Washington abuzz. Buffered by the adoration that oil and coal industries heap upon him as he dismantles Obama-era environmental policies, Pruitt had avoided the turbulence and turnover gripping Trump's inner circle. His supporters had once even floated his name as a possible attorney general replacement. An unapologetic skeptic of climate change, Pruitt takes an approach that's unnuanced and unyielding. The myriad actions he launched against clean air and water rules, and limits on greenhouse gas emissions — such as this week's attack on the fuel economy standards championed by California — have won him approval from conservatives. Even if the courts ultimately block most of his rollbacks, as environmentalists predict, the legal frenzy and protests that Pruitt's actions have created in liberal states delight Trump allies. Some of those allies are rushing to Pruitt's defense as he confronts charges that he abused his office and showed poor ethical judgment. But even before the controversies over pay hikes and housing deals, White House confidence in Pruitt was eroded by headlines about Pruitt's penchant for flying first-class at taxpayer expense. He insisted security concerns mandated first-class tickets, but vowed to scale it back in the future. Pruitt's luxury plane travel, demands for a large personal security detail and other spending at the agency triggered alarms for some of the EPA staffers who managed such things. Several of them, according to The New York Times, were reassigned or demoted when they brought their concerns to Pruitt. The head of Pruitt's security detail was reportedly reassigned soon after refusing Pruitt's request to use a government vehicle's sirens and flashing lights to cut through Washington traffic during a nonemergency trip. EPA officials said Pruitt had no role in when sirens were used. Pruitt says the cascade of allegations about his ethics is part of a conspiracy against him and the Trump policy agenda. The former Oklahoma attorney general is confronting it the way he has confronted most every issue during his short tenure in Washington: by avoiding the mainstream media and taking his story to conservative outlets like Fox and the Washington Examiner. As those calling for his resignation grew midweek to include two House Republicans, Pruitt told the Examiner it was all much ado about nothing. “It's toxic here,” he said of Washington. “There are people that have long in this town done business a different way and this agency has been the poster child of it,” Pruitt said. “And so, do I think that because we are leading on this agenda that there are some who want to keep that from happening? Absolutely. And do I think that they will resort to anything to achieve that? Yes.” The drama around Pruitt is reviving another storyline the White House hoped to move past. The trade publication Inside EPA reported on Thursday that a key source of the damaging information circulated about Pruitt is former White House staffer Rob Porter, who resigned amid allegations he had been physically abusive with women, including two ex-wives. The report cites anonymous sources. Porter has not commented. But one of Pruitt's top confidants is an ex-girlfriend of Porter's who informed the White House about his alleged history of violence against women. That Pruitt aide, policy advisor Samantha Dravis, resigned from the EPA last week. Just before she left the agency, Senator Thomas R. Carper (Democrat-Delaware) had begun raising questions about Dravis' work history. Last week, he asked the EPA's inspector general to investigate reports he had heard that Dravis was absent from work for much or all of November, December and January. Pruitt and the EPA did not respond to requests for comment from the Los Angeles Times. Whether the White House will have his back for long is far from certain. Top officials there are making known their frustration that Pruitt's controversies are undermining the president's promise to root out corruption in Washington. If the EPA chief hangs on, it may be because Trump can't afford to add yet more turmoil to a Cabinet already filled with it. He abruptly dismissed his secretary of State and his Veterans Affairs chief over Twitter in recent weeks. And since Trump's appointment of CIA Director Mike Pompeo to the secretary of State job leaves the CIA post to be filled, that means three Senate confirmation battles are looming as the Republican-led Congress tries to hang on to power in this year's mid-term elections. A contentious fight over EPA leadership would create more problems for the party. There were already three open EPA inspector general investigations into Pruitt before this week, involving his first-class travel, his hiring practices and his installation of a $43,000 phone booth in his office to deter eavesdroppers. And the inspector general is now considering the launch of a fourth investigation, this one into the deal he negotiated for a condo owned by the wife of Washington lobbyist J. Steven Hart, whose practice incudes energy and transportation issues. Under the arrangement, first reported by ABC News and Bloomberg, Pruitt spent $50 a night to lease a bedroom in the Capitol Hill unit for the first half of 2017. Pruitt paid only for the nights he stayed. “This was like an Airbnb situation,” Pruitt told Fox. “When I was not there, the landlord, they had access to the entirety of the facility. When I was there, I only had access to a room.” But most people wanting to stay a block from the Capitol for $50 a night are more likely to end up on a pullout couch. Pruitt said the EPA ethics office was okay with the arrangement. But the office issued a written clarification pointing out that it was only okay with the facts it was informed about. It did not consider, for example, the propriety of the landlord also providing housing for no additional charge to Pruitt's daughter, who reportedly stayed in the unit while interning in Washington. While many Republicans are defending Pruitt, some say it has all become too much. “Major policy differences aside, @EPAScottPruitt's corruption scandals are an embarrassment to the administration, and his conduct is grossly disrespectful to American taxpayers,” tweeted Representative Carlos Curbelo (Republican-Florida). “It's time for him to resign or for @POTUS to dismiss him.” Pruitt, meanwhile, has some explaining to do to the White House about how two of his confidantes came to get giant pay raises against its instructions. After getting turned down by the White House, the EPA granted the raises by invoking a provision of the Safe Drinking Water Act that allowed Pruitt to make up to 30 hires without White House or congressional approval. The salary of one of the aides was boosted to $164,200 from $107,435. The other saw their salary go to $114,590 from $86,460. Soon after The Atlantic broke the story on Tuesday, Pruitt rescinded the raises. He said he had no idea they had been given and that it was not appropriate. Pruitt revealed all this on Fox News. The network was unimpressed. Its reporter followed up with scolding questions and suggested Pruitt should be embarrassed. __________________________________________________________________________ • Evan Halper writes about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C. for the Los Angeles Times, with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California’s epic budget mess and political dysfunction. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-pruitt-epa-controversy-20180405-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-pruitt-epa-controversy-20180405-story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 28, 2018, 03:47:18 pm Yep....this just about sums it up perfectly.... (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/toles4-10-18.0001.jpg&w=888) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/04/09/donald-trumps-mark-on-the-climate-is-becoming-unmistakable) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Psfja9EFRprLfsWBPmhBW9COK0Y=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/NBATOBIK2Y4ORC2BYPRB36ZPZM.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/16/deniers-club-meet-the-people-clouding-the-climate-change-debate) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 27, 2018, 02:22:04 pm from The Washington Post.... The catastrophe that killed the dinosaurs created a global hothouse for 100,000 years, study says Earth got roasted, frozen and then slow-cooked in cascading disasters after the Chicxulub impact. By JOEL ACHENBACH | 9:15AM EDT — Thursday, May 24, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2Ao1N52ZxqsV3pBV1f0Jy8RoDoI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HW3DLGQFXM3TXGCK3P5MRJISHI.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/2Ao1N52ZxqsV3pBV1f0Jy8RoDoI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/HW3DLGQFXM3TXGCK3P5MRJISHI.jpg) Artwork depicting a scene at the end of the Cretaceous period, with a triceratops dinosaur surveying a volcanic landscape. — Illustration: Mark Garlick/Getty Images. ON A very bad day 66 million years ago, a mountain-sized object from space slammed into the Earth, initiating a cascade of calamities that eradicated three-fourths of the species on the planet, including the non-avian dinosaurs. The buried remnants of the 125-mile-wide crater have been identified on the Yucatan Peninsula and in the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists have long theorized that an initial pulse of heat was followed by a devastating global winter. After that, as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere surged, the planet became a hothouse. A new study published on Thursday in the journal Science (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2018/05/23/science.aap8525) has produced hard data to support that global warming hypothesis, and it may have unnerving implications for the world we live in today. The effects of the Chicxulub impact, named for a Yucatan town, produced 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit) average warming in a subtropical sea, and this heating persisted for 100,000 years, the researchers concluded. “This is crocodiles at the poles and large areas of the tropics uninhabitable on land,” explained lead author Ken MacLeod, a University of Missouri paleontologist. The study suggests that even a relatively brief pulse of CO² can have a lingering effect. That's relevant today given many countries' massive greenhouse-gas emissions, which are creating a spike in atmospheric carbon dioxide and associated global warming. “The cascading implication of our finding is that carbon dioxide loading would have occurred for just maybe a decade, and the greenhouse warming persisted for 100,000 years,” MacLeod said. “Even if we go back to 1850 levels of CO² emissions today, we're locked into 100,000 years of the Earth responding to the CO² we've already put in.” The research is based on fish debris — bones, teeth, scales — retrieved from an outcropping in Tunisia known as El Kef. It's a famous site, featuring a geological formation with sedimentary layers from the end of the Cretaceous period (when dinosaurs roamed the Earth) and the start of the Paleogene period. This is known now to scientists as the K/Pg boundary. The fish debris serves as a kind of thermometer, said Page Quinton, who began the work as a doctoral student with MacLeod and is now a professor at the State University of New York at Potsdam. The sand-sized fragments of fish contain isotopes of oxygen — atoms that have different numbers of neutrons and different atomic weights. Water temperature affects the relative abundance of those isotopes. When the fragments show a shift in the isotopic ratio, that signals a change in temperature, Quinton said. Preliminary investigation of some samples from El Kef produced a “wow” moment four years ago, with clear indication of long-term global warming, she said. The researchers then obtained more samples and continued scrutinizing the debris, and the pattern initially detected held up over time. “We're providing the first empirical evidence that there's actually warming after the impact,” she noted. It appears the dinosaurs and much of life on Earth died out in a triple whammy, or maybe a quadruple whammy, depending on how you're counting. First came the impact itself, with shock waves and tsunamis. In the minutes and hours that followed, the frictional heating from debris falling back into the atmosphere was so intense that “the sky became an oven,” MacLeod said. Wildfires broke out globally. Then came years of cold and darkness as sulfates, dust and soot in the upper atmosphere blocked light from the sun. “The first six months, it was almost a blackout,” said NASA planetary scientist Adriana Ocampo, who was not involved in the new study. If not for the warmth retained in Earth's vast oceans, she said, “our planet would have frozen.” MacLeod painted a bleak picture: “Anything that's not killed by the thermal heat pulse likely had to deal with years of very little, if any, vegetation, and anything that survived that then had to survive 100,000 years of quite substantial greenhouse conditions.” This is a contentious scientific field, and the new paper quickly generated pushback from Gerta Keller, a Princeton geologist who has long argued that the end-Cretaceous mass extinction was triggered by volcanism in India — a huge flood of basaltic lava that created a vast geological formation known as the Deccan Traps. Keller, who read the study in advance of publication, said her interpretation of the El Kef formation and the sedimentation rate that created it suggests a much longer period of greenhouse warming, about 500,000 years. That could not have been caused by a single injection of carbon dioxide, such as by the Chicxulub impact, but would be consistent with a protracted volcanic era, she said. Paul Renne, a geologist with the Berkeley Geochronology Center who has argued that the shock wave from the Chicxulub impact may have intensified the Deccan Traps volcanism (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/10/01/scientists-suggest-a-new-earth-shaking-twist-on-the-demise-of-the-dinosaurs), said in an email: “It is most extraordinary that the authors don't even mention volcanism. That is really bizarre.” But Brian Huber, a research geologist at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, said he was impressed by the new report. “It's a pretty tight study that's telling us a pretty important story about the longevity of CO²,” he said. “The lesson is here for us with regard to future warming, and what burning fossil fuels at the rate we're doing is doing to the atmosphere.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Joel Achenbach writes about science and politics for The Washington Post's National desk. He has been a staff writer for The Post since 1990. He started the newsroom's first online column, Rough Draft, in 1999, and started washingtonpost.com's first blog, Achenblog, in 2005. He has been a regular contributor to National Geographic since 1998, writing on such topics as dinosaurs, particle physics, earthquakes, extraterrestrial life, megafauna extinction and the electrical grid. A 1982 graduate of Princeton University, he has taught journalism at Princeton and at Georgetown University. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Did a killer rock and volcanism deliver a one-two punch to the dinosaurs? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/10/01/scientists-suggest-a-new-earth-shaking-twist-on-the-demise-of-the-dinosaurs) • A maverick theory for what killed the dinosaurs (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2014/12/11/did-a-massive-volcanic-eruption-in-india-kill-off-the-dinosaurs) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2018/05/24/the-catastrophe-that-killed-the-dinosaurs-created-a-global-hothouse-for-100000-years-study-says (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2018/05/24/the-catastrophe-that-killed-the-dinosaurs-created-a-global-hothouse-for-100000-years-study-says) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 29, 2018, 11:12:15 pm climate-change deniers
really where are they ? Idiot leftwingnuts love twisting words and talking bullshit welcome to global cooling Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 29, 2018, 11:27:26 pm Yeah, I see you're still full-of-shit. Hey....they just had another 1,000-year flood took out a town in Maryland, U.S.A. That's only a couple of years after the last 1,000-year flood took out the town. Hilarious, eh? (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/TooFunny_zps2gz4suf2.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingPinkPanther_zpsy6iu8yso.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ROFLMAO_Dog_zpsc4esrpyc.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingHard_zpswco6umsu.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ItchyBugga_zpsebzrttez.gif~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on May 30, 2018, 08:52:03 pm No statistically significant rise in global storms, floods or droughts in the last century. Meanwhile the media and cult members from the alarmist religion are pissing their pants with hysteria induced fear. 😂
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 30, 2018, 08:59:37 pm Hahaha.....the other flat-earther is back. Well.....one of the other flat-earthers. Reality/Donald fled when his beloved Nats didn't end up remaining the government. What a wanker he turned out to be, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 15, 2018, 12:45:57 pm MEGA “iceberg versus village” collison coming? (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/07/15/climate/15CLI-GREENLAND/merlin_141203067_79522dc4-2bcc-4087-adb0-e14be904e08a-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/07/15/climate/15CLI-GREENLAND/merlin_141203067_79522dc4-2bcc-4087-adb0-e14be904e08a-superJumbo.jpg) Innaarsuit, on the west coast of Greenland, this week. The iceberg rises about 300 feet above the water level. — Photograph: Scanpix Denmark/Reuters. from The New York Times… • A Giant Iceberg Parked Offshore. It's Stunning, but Villagers Hit the Road. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/climate/greenland-giant-iceberg.html) A village in Greenland is on alert amid fears that a huge iceberg could break apart and send a flood wave over the settlement. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 29, 2018, 02:32:54 pm from The Washington Post… The sinking state This is what happens when climate change forces an entire country to seek higher ground. By JOSHUA KEATING | 10:45PM EDT - Thursday, July 26, 2018 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/o-kiribati-featured.jpg&w=919) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/o-kiribati-featured.jpg) Illustration: Andrea Ucini/for The Washington Post. THE central Pacific nation of Kiribati has a few claims to fame. Its flag-bearer at the past two summer Olympics won international attention and became a meme because of his memorable dancing. The country — known under British colonial rule as the Gilbert Islands (the name Kiribati, pronounced KI-ri-bahss, is a local transliteration of “Gilberts”) — has 33 islands spread over more than 1.3 million square miles, making it one of the world’s largest nations in terms of sea area, though one of the smallest in terms of land. But what it gets the most attention for these days is its impending doom: The nation may be one of the first in line to be wiped out by the effects of climate change. In the century to come, we’re likely to see dramatic alterations to the physical shape of the world as we know it, thanks to rising sea levels and other environmental changes. But the immediate challenges faced by most countries pale in comparison to those of Kiribati, which has an average elevation of less than six feet. The atoll of Tarawa, where nearly half the country’s 110,000 residents live, could soon be substantially underwater. “By 2050, 18-80% of the land in Buariki, North Tarawa, and up to 50% of the land in Bikenibeu, South Tarawa could become inundated,” the government told the United Nations (http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry/PublishedDocuments/Kiribati%20First/INDC_KIRIBATI.pdf) in 2015. Kiribati's smaller outlying islands could be wiped out even sooner. “The results of sea level rise and increasing storm surge threaten the very existence and livelihoods of large segments of the population,” officials wrote. Small island states like Kiribati and the Maldives have become symbols of the potential impacts of global warming. At the 2015 Paris climate summit, they pressured larger countries to accept the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, rather than two degrees, over preindustrial levels. (It was mostly a symbolic victory: Barring unforeseen circumstances, particularly since the Trump administration pulled the United States out of the accord, both targets will be exceeded (https://www.businessinsider.com/climate-change-earth-two-degrees-warming-2100-new-studies-2017-7).) They are also working to develop first-line defenses against the effects of sea-level rise, including planting mangroves to prevent coastal erosion and improving rainwater-collection systems to protect water quality. But if none of that works, they may have to consider more drastic options. And so, in 2014, Kiribati purchased about eight square miles (http://www.climate.gov.ki/2014/05/30/kiribati-buys-a-piece-of-fiji) on the Fijian island of Vanua Levu for a little less than $9 million, potentially for the purpose of moving its population there one day. “We would hope not to put everyone on one piece of land,” the country's then-president, Anote Tong, said (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/island-nation-kiribati-considers-moving-populace). “But if it became absolutely necessary, yes, we could do it.” Fiji would become the new home of the nation's inhabitants, known as the I-Kiribati. The relocation of people due to climate change isn't unprecedented. Papua New Guinea has already begun moving the population (https://blogs.unicef.org/east-asia-pacific/the-last-islanders) of the Carteret Islands, a group of low-lying atolls, to the mainland. But this would be the first time an entire country had to relocate because the land on which it was built no longer existed. This raises a new and frightening question: If a country no longer exists in physical form, can it still exist as a political entity? Can a nation just up and move? (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/AP_040330118403.jpg&w=1111) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/AP_040330118403.jpg) About half the population of Kiribati lives on Tarawa atoll. In the next 30 years, officials say, substantial portions of Tarawa could be submerged by rising seas. — Photograph: Richard Vogel/Associated Press. I KNEW Tong by reputation from the impassioned speeches he delivered at U.N. General Assemblies and climate change conferences during his time as president, from 2003 to 2016. So when I visited Kiribati in 2016 to research a book (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0300221622) about border changes and the future of the world map, I called him. When we met one afternoon in Tarawa, he had just come in from fishing and was relaxing in shorts and a sleeveless T-shirt in the maneaba, or meeting house, outside his family's home in a crowded residential neighborhood. John Denver played softly from a Bluetooth speaker. But the former president was troubled. “One of the most difficult things I've had to expect is planning for the demise of my country,” Tong told me. He wants the I-Kiribati to stay if it's even remotely possible. But, he rued, relocation is probably unavoidable. “The science is pretty clear: zero emissions, we'll still go underwater. Unless some drastic work is undertaken, there will be no option. That's the reality. It's not a hope. It's not a desire. It's the brutal reality.” Yet no one's quite sure what that reality will look like. When I visited Secretary of Foreign Affairs Akka Rimon, she cracked the joke I'd been afraid to make: “Climate change really put us back on the world map. The irony is that we're being erased from the world map.” Rimon had tried to think through what relocation could entail, though she didn't really know how Kiribati's nationhood could be preserved. “We don't have the answer. There doesn't seem to be any entity that looks after that. Sovereignty exists within the borders of your nation, but what happens when that changes? Nobody has the answer,” she said. Historically, countries are not physically destroyed; they simply become other countries, the land they occupy controlled by someone else. But at a minimum, to exist, a country needs a government, a population and a piece of real estate within a defined territory — the boot of Italy, the hanging triangle of India, the narrow strip of Chile. The shape of a nation has long been defined by two kinds of lines: the borders that separate it from other countries and the coasts that separate it from the sea. We may understand why political borders are subject to change, but in an era of rising seas and increasingly extreme weather and natural disasters, we have to get used to the fact that coastal boundaries can't be taken for granted, either. Indeed, our land-water borders are changing quickly and significantly, and in ways that will probably never be reversed. Environmental-law scholars have begun to discuss the notion of “ex-situ nationhood” (https://www.law.hawaii.edu/files/content/coliver/345-374%20Burkett.pdf), under which governments, with some financial support from the international community, would continue to represent their populations on an international level at bodies like the United Nations, without any connection to a physical territory. Under one model, the I-Kiribati would retain some rights as citizens, even as they dispersed around the globe. As Maxine Burkett of the University of Hawaii, who has written extensively on the political dilemmas facing small island states, told me in 2014: “A number of us understand the modern notion of citizenship, where people have ties to more than one country. But the notion of that happening without a physical territory is quite novel.” In a 2013 essay (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1107025761), Jenny Grote Stoutenburg, a law professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, recommended that, to maintain international recognition, island states facing destruction should reinforce their territory to keep at least some physical structure above water and keep a small group of inhabitants behind, even if the bulk of the population has relocated. The Kiribati of the future, in other words, may be little more than a skeleton crew, a reinforced platform with a flag perched in the open ocean after the rest of the population has moved to another piece of land or to several of them. This is a very different notion of national sovereignty than anything the world has seen before. There are understandable motivations behind plans like these: The people of small island states want to continue to have political representation in the international community, and they have economic interests to protect — rights to fisheries and natural resources in their territory, for instance. But these plans also offer a version of cartographical stasis taken to the point of parody: the erection of a fig-leaf physical presence in the middle of the ocean just so that maps showing a country in a particular place will be technically correct. Still, a nation ending entirely, with no successor, might be a wholly new event in human history. In grappling with the possibility, some scholars have dusted off models and concepts that predate the modern nation-state. One is the Sovereign Order of Malta — a Catholic order that controls no physical territory but has existed in multiple locations, including Jerusalem, Cyprus, Malta and Rome, throughout its nearly 1,000-year history. In an odd geopolitical quirk, despite controlling no territory today, the order has diplomatic relations, including embassies, with dozens of countries and observer status at the United Nations. The order's sovereign status makes it a throwback to an earlier, more fluid era of international politics, when sovereignty was tied more closely to ruling families or dynasties than to territories with fixed locations. Today, for instance, the historical kingdom of Burgundy is associated with the central French region of that name. But in his book “Vanished Kingdoms” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0143122959), British historian Norman Davies identifies 15 kingdoms of Burgundy dating back to 410 and occupying locations from the west bank of the Rhine to what is now Switzerland to the Netherlands. Describing the disintegration of Burgundy in the 13th century, Davies writes: “The typical Burgundian count was no longer the ruler of one straightforward fief dependent on one overlord. More often he was head of a complex clutch of lands, titles and claims, assembled over the generations by the combined efforts of his family's knights, wives, children and lawyers.” If the vanishing countries of the future are to survive in any form, they're likely to look less like contemporary nation-states and more like the Knights of Malta or medieval Burgundy, political creations set up to represent a group of people, and their political interests, who will be increasingly dispersed geographically and culturally. (https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/RTX10LQH.jpg&w=1111) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp-content/uploads/sites/63/2018/07/RTX10LQH.jpg) Young boys cover each other in reef mud near the village of Ambo, Kiribati, in 2013. Many of the islands' residents don't express concern about the potentially dire effects of climate change. — Photograph: Richard Vogel/Associated Press. THESE are not scenarios you're likely to hear much about in Kiribati. For all that countries like Kiribati have done to bring urgency to the fight against climate change, many locals seem no more troubled about the issue than people in the United States are. When I visited on my reporting trip, people for the most part agreed that the climate was changing, pointing to shifting rainy seasons and irregular fishing patterns. But they usually didn't believe that the islands would come to an end. I heard several odd pseudoscientific arguments from Kiribati people during my time there, including that hotter weather would evaporate all the water released by the melting polar ice caps and that the coral in the Kiribati atolls would help the islands float as the water rose. Many people pointed out, correctly, that the shape of the islands regularly shifted before sea-level rise — and that the impacts of climate change so far had been difficult to disentangle from other factors. Most people I met weren't making plans to relocate anytime soon. In contrast to Tong, the new government has not made the evacuation of Kiribati a priority, even a theoretical one. Instead, I heard a lot of frustration that the rest of the world seems to take notice of the I-Kiribati only to tell them they're doomed. Several people I spoke with had already given interviews about climate change to foreign reporters. “In my case, you are the fifth person,” remarked Teewata Aromata, the director of Te Toa Matoa, an organization for people with disabilities. “People come and ask us the same questions. They see pictures of us and think we are drowning in the ocean.” Yet the stubborn facts remain. Countries like the Maldives and Kiribati are probably disappearing — and not that long from now. I came to Kiribati expecting to find a place planning for its own destruction, but instead I found something more dispiriting: a place that, with a few exceptions, wasn't even contemplating that destruction. “Who wants to believe that their home won't be here?” said Tong. It was an understandable sentiment. “People here don't even like to plan for next week. But we've got to be hardheaded about it.” The mental block that prohibits thinking about what will happen when the islands are no longer inhabitable seems to be a major impediment to planning for that eventuality. In this regard, too, Kiribati is a microcosm of the world's unwillingness to face the reality of the future. A nation disappearing off the map is something that's never happened before and, so far, is something people seem unable to imagine. __________________________________________________________________________ • Joshua Keating (https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300221626/invisible-countries) is a staff writer and editor at Slate. He is the author of “Invisible Countries” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0300221622), from which this essay is adapted. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The military paid for a study on sea level rise. The results were scary. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/04/25/climate-change-could-make-thousands-of-tropical-islands-uninhabitable-in-coming-decades-new-study-says) • We're not even close to being prepared for the rising waters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/were-not-even-close-to-being-prepared-for-the-rising-waters/2017/11/09/441f4752-97d7-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html) • America is the worst polluter in the history of the world. We should let climate change refugees resettle here. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/america-is-the-worst-polluter-in-the-history-of-the-world-we-should-let-climate-change-refugees-resettle-here/2015/06/25/28a55238-1a9c-11e5-ab92-c75ae6ab94b5_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/07/26/feature/this-is-what-happens-when-climate-change-forces-an-entire-country-to-seek-higher-ground (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/07/26/feature/this-is-what-happens-when-climate-change-forces-an-entire-country-to-seek-higher-ground) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 02, 2018, 12:31:42 pm from The New York Times… • Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change (http://) It is well worth clicking on the above link and learning the TRUTH about how human beings have fucked-up our planet's climate. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 02, 2018, 02:02:51 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjjH0VVU4AASeYW.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 04, 2018, 02:41:53 pm from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times… California defends mileage rules; Automakers seek compromise State rejects bid by Trump officials to freeze standards for fuel economy in 2020. By EVAN HALPER, TONY BARBOZA and DAVID LAUTER | Friday, August 03, 2018 (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3055278_la-me_epa_2_1_JI43B2Q6.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-3055278_la-me_epa_2_1_JI43B2Q6.jpg) California and 13 other states with stringent rules account for over a third of new vehicles sold in the U.S. — Photograph: Photograph: Al Seib/Los Angeles Times. WASHINGTON D.C. — The Trump administration pushed ahead on Thursday with plans to unravel the federal government's most effective action to fight climate change — aggressive fuel economy standards aimed at getting the nation's cars and trucks to average more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025. After months of discussion and drafts, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration formally unveiled their plan to rewrite those rules and replace them with some so lax that even automakers are wary. The administration's plan would freeze mileage targets in 2020 for six years. It would also move to end California's power to set its own tougher greenhouse gas emissions standards and nullify the state mandate that automakers sell a specified number of electric vehicles. EPA officials sought to portray the proposal as the administration's opening bid in a negotiation with California. State officials, however, denounced the plan as too extreme and threatened to fight it in court. California and the 13 other states that follow its more stringent rules say the Clean Air Act empowers them to keep the Obama-era standards in place in their markets. Together, California and the other 13 states account for more than a third of the new vehicles sold nationwide. The rollback would undermine those states' efforts to meet commitments the U.S. made in the Paris agreement on climate change. It would also worsen air quality problems in Southern California and other areas where officials are already struggling to reduce smog and ease rates of asthma and other illnesses. The administration asserts that the fuel economy rules should not be used to attempt “to solve climate change, even in part,” because such a goal is “fundamentally different” from the Clean Air Act's “original purpose of addressing smog-related air quality problems.” Administration officials acknowledged that flat-lining fuel economy improvements would come at the expense of pollution reductions and public health. “If we lock in the 2020 standards, we're not getting as much emissions reductions as we otherwise would, and that translates into incrementally less protection of health and the environment,” said EPA Assistant Administrator Bill Wehrum, who oversees air and radiation issues. “But balanced against that … we get substantial improvement in vehicle and highway safety,” he said. The administration argues that fuel economy and safety are inevitably in “tension,” as Wehrum put it. The Obama administration's higher efficiency rules would raise vehicle prices and “restrict the American people from being able to afford newer vehicles with more advanced safety features,” they assert. “More-realistic standards can save lives while continuing to improve the environment,” said acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler. Environmental advocates and many outside scientists dispute that reasoning, pointing to extensive studies done during President Obama's administration that found higher fuel standards could be achieved without compromising safety. The EPA's own scientists also have questioned the administration's position. Wheeler, who took over the agency after Scott Pruitt resigned in early July, warned during recent internal debates that the evidence behind the proposal was questionable and might not stand up in court, administration officials have said. The release of the administration's proposal was repeatedly delayed in recent weeks as officials debated how aggressively to push. In the end, the White House approved taking a hard line. California Governor Jerry Brown vowed to push back, saying the state would fight the new plan “in every conceivable way possible.” “For Trump to now destroy a law first enacted at the request of Ronald Reagan five decades ago is a betrayal and an assault on the health of Americans everywhere,” Brown said, referring to the Clean Air Act. “Under [Trump's] reckless scheme, motorists will pay more at the pump, get worse gas mileage and breathe dirtier air.” That combative stance seems likely to have broad support in the state. For example, Brown's Republican predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has championed efforts to combat global warming, blasted in an online post “fake conservatives” who “believe in states' rights to make their own policies — as long as state policy is to pollute more.” By contrast, the Trump administration's internal tensions were on display during a call with reporters on Thursday as transportation officials steadfastly defended the proposal while the EPA emphasized that it was not final and that a compromise with California and the auto industry could be reached. “There's nothing about how greenhouse gases and potential climate change affects California that's any different than any other state in the country,” Wehrum said, adding, “There's no justification for California to have its own standards.” But he left room for compromise: “Having said that, this is just a proposed rule, and on the other hand we are committed to working with California to try to find a mutually agreeable set of regulations.” The California Air Resources Board will submit comments on the proposal but has no meetings planned with the administration, a spokesman said. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said the state would “use every legal tool at its disposal to defend today's national standards and reaffirm the facts and science behind them.” The prospect of an extended legal fight has discomfited automakers, who had asked the administration to relax the Obama-era rules but don't want to see the U.S. market split in two, with different models of cars required in blue and red states. In letters to Brown and Trump, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers, the industry's two lobbying groups, repeated their desire for changes in the Obama-era rules but notably did not endorse the administration's proposal to freeze the fuel standards in 2020. The groups urged both sides to negotiate. “In our eyes, a negotiated settlement is preferable to a bifurcated system and years of litigation,” they wrote in the letter to Trump. Vehicles are the single largest source in the U.S. of emissions that cause global warming, recently surpassing the electricity sector. The plunge in natural gas prices and other market forces have steadily lowered utilities' impact on the climate, but transportation is proving more stubborn. Electric cars and trucks still account for a tiny fraction of those sold, and driver preference for SUVs, along with relatively low gas prices, have inhibited progress. The existing federal fuel economy targets, which were championed by California, ensure automakers keep moving toward higher-efficiency vehicles, as other nations also require. Those rules require automakers to meet fleet-wide averages of more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025, which when factoring in credits and other flexibility options translates to about 36 mpg in real-world driving conditions. In comparison, the Trump proposal would freeze real-world fuel economy at about 30 miles per gallon, according to projections by the Rhodium Group, a research firm that tracks the progress nations are making in meeting climate goals. The emissions impact of freezing those targets, as the administration favors, could be enormous. Official projections show the plan would increase daily fuel consumption by 2% to 3%, or about 500,000 barrels per day, increasing greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to the rise in global temperatures. The Bay Area firm Energy Innovation, which models the environmental impact of energy policies, projects the proposal would increase U.S. fuel use 20% by 2035. The firm projects the policy would cost the U.S. economy $457 billion and cause 13,000 deaths by 2050 as air quality suffers. The administration projects the efficiency rules would drive up the price of cars enough to push some buyers out of the market, leaving them to remain in older vehicles lacking life-saving new technologies like assisted braking and blind-spot warning. Flat-lining emissions standards, officials contend, would allow the auto industry to sell cars at lower prices, resulting in an additional 1 million new vehicle sales over the next decade. The argument may prove a tough sell in court, where attorneys for states and environmental groups will come armed with a wealth of data undermining it. “The fleet of new vehicles today is the most fuel-efficient ever, and they have gotten safer every year,” said Luke Tonachel, director of clean vehicles and fuels at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “These arguments are not new. They have failed before.” Federal data show the increased cost consumers would pay for the more-efficient vehicles is dwarfed by the amount of money they would save at the pump, undermining the argument that drivers will stay in older, unsafe vehicles, advocates for the tougher rules say. Trump administration officials conceded on Thursday that labor, parts and other costs — not fuel economy rules — are the main reasons cars and trucks are getting more expensive. Automakers themselves have also confirmed that they can build lighter cars to meet tougher emissions standards without sacrificing safety, UCLA environmental law professor Ann Carlson wrote on Thursday. “The arguments about cost and safety are makeweights designed to provide cover for a proposal that is likely to be struck down in court.” At a May meeting at the White House, auto firms appealed to Trump to tap the brakes on the administration's aggressive rollback plan. He assured them he would, ordering his EPA chief and Transportation secretary to try to broker a deal with California. Those negotiations have gone nowhere. California is confident the administration has no legal authority to revoke the waiver the state has been granted under the Clean Air Act allowing it to keep the Obama-era rules in place. In May, California and 16 other states filed a preemptive lawsuit arguing the rollback would be illegal. “There is no precedent for revoking California's waiver,” said Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign of the Center for Auto Safety, an advocacy group in Washington. “There is no provision in the Clean Air Act for revoking a waiver…. The world is looking to California to hold its ground.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Evan Halper writes about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C. for the Los Angeles Times, with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. • Tony Barboza is a reporter who covers air quality and the environment with a focus on Southern California. He has been on staff at the Los Angeles Times since 2006, is a graduate of Pomona College and completed a Ted Scripps Fellowship in Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado. • David Lauter is the Los Angeles Times' Washington bureau chief. He began writing news in Washington in 1981 and since then has covered Congress, the Supreme Court, the White House under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton and four U.S. presidential campaigns. He lived in Los Angeles from 1995 to 2011, where he was the L.A. Times' deputy Foreign editor, deputy Metro editor and then assistant managing editor responsible for California coverage. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=c8c2a988-5eb3-4372-ba30-94678835c0b8 (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=c8c2a988-5eb3-4372-ba30-94678835c0b8) http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=ee5a0ec9-081a-4806-ad39-dd2288689e52 (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=ee5a0ec9-081a-4806-ad39-dd2288689e52) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 04, 2018, 02:42:17 pm from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times… EDITORIAL: Trump steps on the gas pedal By THE EDITORIAL BOARD | Friday, August 03, 2018 OF ALL the Trump administration's assaults on the environment, there may be none more destructive than the decision to weaken fuel economy standards and let cars, passenger trucks and SUVs burn more gas and spew more pollution. The fuel economy standards adopted by the Obama administration in 2012 were a central part of the United States' efforts to reduce the greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. The regulations pushed automakers to move faster, requiring the new cars and trucks they sold to average more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025. The Trump plan announced on Thursday would freeze average fuel economy at 37 miles per gallon in 2021. Worse, it seeks to revoke California's longstanding authority to set its own standards for cleaner vehicles. If successful, the Trump administration would be stunting decades of progress in California and other states toward cleaner, healthier air, and it would be hobbling the worldwide effort to combat climate change. The administration's decision to roll back the standards is especially appalling now. We're already feeling the effects of global warming in more extreme weather events, from prolonged droughts, endless wildfire seasons and unprecedented heat waves to severe hurricanes and floods. And cars and trucks are the nation's largest source of greenhouse gas emissions. Yet despite the grave risk of delay, the Trump administration has put forth the flimsiest of justifications for the rollback. The plan, developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, asserts that lower fuel economy standards will save lives — the higher price of more fuel-efficient vehicles (about $2,300 more per car, they say) encourages some people to continue driving older, less-safe vehicles, the agencies say. That ignores the fact that more fuel-efficient vehicles are cheaper to operate since drivers have to buy less gas. It also ignores the very significant impact President Trump's threatened tariffs could have on imported cars. Automakers estimate the tariffs could increase the average cost of a car by more than $5,000, dwarfing any potential bump in cost from fuel efficient technology. Manufacturers are clearly capable of producing more fuel efficient vehicles. In fact, most of the major car companies have already pledged to develop more electric vehicles in response to demands by China and European countries. The Trump administration would leave Americans stuck in gas-guzzling vehicles and breathing smoggy air while the rest of the world enjoys the benefits of automotive innovation. And it would be yet another sign that the current president and his allies in Congress have totally abdicated their responsibility to protect the health of Americans and the environment. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=1ab373f6-270a-4b1e-806e-3ab92195075c (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=1ab373f6-270a-4b1e-806e-3ab92195075c) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 05, 2018, 01:56:34 pm This sums up perfectly the situation in America these days… (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjoDKv9UUAAm26s.jpg) (https://twitter.com/cathywilcox1/status/1025135367064715264) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 05, 2018, 01:57:01 pm from The New York Times… Scorching Summer in Europe Signals Long-Term Climate Changes Hot weather has touched all of the continent, but it has had the most impact in northern countries, unaccustomed to sustained heat, suggesting that hard years lie ahead. By ALISSA J. RUBIN | Saturday, August 04, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope/merlin_141807915_fae7dc54-b451-449b-bd86-d7fe778aced6-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope/merlin_141807915_fae7dc54-b451-449b-bd86-d7fe778aced6-superJumbo.jpg) People trying to cool down in the Trocadero Fountain in front of the Eiffel Tower in Paris. — Photograph: Ludovic Marin/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. PARIS — In Northern Europe, this summer feels like a modern-day version of the biblical plagues. Cows are dying of thirst in Switzerland, fires are gobbling up timber in Sweden, the majestic Dachstein glacier is melting in Austria. In London, stores are running out of fans and air-conditioners. In Greenland, an iceberg may break off a piece so large that it could trigger a tsunami that destroys settlements on shore. Last week, Sweden's highest peak, Kebnekaise mountain (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/world/europe/sweden-kebnekaise-heat-wave.html), no longer was in first place after its glacier tip melted. Southern Europe is even hotter. Temperatures in Spain and Portugal are expected to reach 105-110 degrees Fahrenheit this weekend. On Saturday, several places in Portugal experienced record highs, and over the past week, two people have died in Spain from the high temperatures, and a third in Portugal. But in the northern-most latitudes, where the climate is warming faster than the global average, temperatures have been the most extreme, according to a study (http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-07-27-heatwave-made-twice-likely-climate-change) by researchers at Oxford University and the World Weather Attribution (https://www.worldweatherattribution.org) network. By analyzing data from seven weather stations in northern Europe, the researchers found that the closer a community is to the Arctic Circle, the more this summer's heat stood out in the temperature record. A number of cities and towns in Norway, Sweden and Finland hit all-time highs this summer, with towns as far north as the Arctic Circle recording nearly 90-degree temperatures. Not only is much of northern and western Europe hotter than normal, but the weather is also more erratic. Torrential rains and violent thunderstorms have alternated with droughts in parts of France. In the Netherlands, a drought — rather than the rising seas — is hurting its system of dikes because there is not enough fresh water countering the seawater. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope2/merlin_141968955_d5f0e57e-b29f-4446-a16c-d7d79c52b77d-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope2/merlin_141968955_d5f0e57e-b29f-4446-a16c-d7d79c52b77d-superJumbo.jpg) A crowded beach in Nazaré, Portugal, on Thursday. The Portuguese Institute of the Sea and Atmosphere warned that the maximum temperatures will be well above normal. — Photograph: Paulo Cunha/European Pressphoto Agency/Shutterstock. The preliminary results of the Oxford study found that, in some places, climate change more than doubled the likelihood of this summer's European heat wave. “In the past, we had this kind of heat wave once every 10 years, and now we have them every two years or something like that,” said François-Marie Bréon, a climatologist and deputy director of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Science, a research institute affiliated with France's National Center for Scientific Research. “That's really the sign of climate change: We have heat waves that aren’t necessarily more intense but that are more and more frequent.” Temperatures that used to be seen as outliers — like those in the summer of 2003 when at least 70,000 people died across Europe — will become “the norm for summer” after 2060, said Jean Jouzel, who was vice chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007 when it won the Nobel Prize. Occasional heat waves could push temperatures in Europe toward 120 degrees unless there is a dramatic slowdown in global warming trends, he said. “This really is to enter into another world,” Mr. Jouzel said. “This is a world that France and Western Europe are not used to. For Western Europe, this is truly a major change of climate if we do not fight efficiently against global warming.” (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope3/merlin_141400422_bdf96449-b0c7-4ef1-8dbf-15f30bf3c294-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05hoteurope3/merlin_141400422_bdf96449-b0c7-4ef1-8dbf-15f30bf3c294-superJumbo.jpg) A wildfire in Karbole, Sweden, in July. Forest fires have destroyed more than 61,000 acres of timber in the country. — Photograph: Tt News Agency/Reuters. The Dachstein glacier is one of the more dramatic symptoms. The glacier “is melting so fast you can see it with your naked eye,” the meteorologist Klaus Reingruber told journalists. It has been melting incrementally for many years, but the change became more visible this summer after the hottest June on record since 1767, when the country started keeping track, according to researchers at Innsbruck University. For Europeans living with the heat day to day, a raft of practical problems has become worrisome — difficulties that might have happened elsewhere or rarely, but never before seemed likely to become facts of daily life. Climate change is gradually becoming understood here as something that will alter many aspects of how Europeans live, potentially destroy or diminish some parts of the economy, and halt beloved local traditions such as the summer barbecue, which was banned this year in public spots in parts of Sweden to reduce the chance of fire. “In Europe, each year about 5 percent of Europeans have to face an extreme climate event — be that a heat wave, a flood, a drought. But in the second half of this century, if the global warming is not checked, we could see two Europeans out of every three who have to face extreme climate events,” said Mr. Jouzel, citing a recent study (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(17)30082-7/fulltext) in The Lancet — Planetary Health. It used to be winter storms that closed down airports and delayed flights. But this summer in the northern German city of Hannover, the 50-year-old runways buckled in the 93-degree heat and travelers were delayed for hours. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope2/merlin_141991440_385ede97-0701-46e4-ac91-541e41d4dd3a-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope2/merlin_141991440_385ede97-0701-46e4-ac91-541e41d4dd3a-superJumbo.jpg) Jumping in a pond on Hampstead Heath in London. — Photograph: Henry Nicholls/Reuters. Across northern Germany, trees, especially saplings, have been hard hit by the drought and cities have been calling on citizens to help local trees. They have responded by dragging garden hoses from their houses or sloshing pails of water to nearby trees. Throughout the Alps but especially in eastern Switzerland and western Austria, as well as in Ireland, the water shortages have been so severe that there is not enough hay in the pastures to feed local milk cows. So farmers are having to dip into their winter feed stocks, diminishing what they will have for their livestock later in the year. In Switzerland, where the herds are led to the high pastures in summer to graze, the drought has stranded cows without water. Farmers have turned to the country's helicopter association and the Swiss Air Force to transport tens of thousands of gallons of water every week to keep the herds alive. “The situation is very serious,” said Christian Garmann, a spokesman for the Swiss Helicopter Association. “For thousands of years, the cows could get water at small watering holes. Now they are dry in many places.” The last time the association undertook an aid mission was in the summer of 2003, but this year “the situation is more extreme” with some farmers considering slaughtering their herds, Mr. Garmann said. The association's managing director, Reto Rüesch, said they are running 30 to 40 trips a day, transporting 250 gallons on each run. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope5/merlin_141937896_cf0dca3b-0226-4d98-8d95-7efa4dda3749-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope5/merlin_141937896_cf0dca3b-0226-4d98-8d95-7efa4dda3749-superJumbo.jpg) A parched section of the Wayoh Reservoir near Bolton, England. Drought has already increased food prices in England. — Photograph: Paul Ellis/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. In France, the hot weather has not broken records so far. But it is part of an overall trend — this July was one of the three hottest on record — and subtle changes are taking place countrywide. Among them are rising sea levels, which Mr. Bréon, the climate scientist, fears are being underestimated. “Today, the sea level is increasing by three millimeters per year, or between three and four millimeters,” Mr. Bréon said. “One might think that's not very much, but I would insist otherwise because it is completely irreversible.” “Even if we respect the Paris climate accord and manage to stabilize the temperatures at two degrees higher than in the preindustrial era, the level of the sea will continue to rise for many hundreds of years. There are coastal cities that are already condemned,” Mr. Bréon said. Among them are areas of the Camargue on the Mediterranean, in Brittany both on the English Channel and along the Atlantic coast and in the Vendée and Gironde, the area near Bordeaux. In some places, that is already affecting land and house values as well as bird habitats. In England, as in almost all of Europe, growing patterns are changing. The drought has increased food prices, and staples may be in short supply this fall. In July, farmers had to fly in lettuce from overseas to meet contracts with supermarkets. One cargo firm said it flew in (https://www.aircargoweek.com/iag-cargo-prevents-lettuce-shortage-uk) 30,000 heads of lettuce from Los Angeles during one hot July weekend alone. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope4/merlin_141766722_a89b067d-4f59-416b-846d-46dda94a0e87-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/08/05/world/05heateurope4/merlin_141766722_a89b067d-4f59-416b-846d-46dda94a0e87-superJumbo.jpg) Cooling down in the Katzensee Lake in Zurich in July. — Photograph: Melanie Duchene/European Pressphoto Agency/Shutterstock. The drought in Ireland means that income for dairy farmers is likely to be cut in half this year, said Teagasc, the state's farming advisory body. Sweden has faced some of the most severe repercussions from the hot weather, starting with the forest fires that destroyed more than 61,000 acres of timber, according to David Sundström of the Swedish Contingencies Agency. Wildfires are still burning, although significantly fewer than when they were at their height. The drought has also severely hurt production of the iconic Scandinavian bilberries (similar to blueberries), cloudberries (similar to raspberries and blackberries, but often yellow or orange), and red lingonberries. Sylve Bjorkmanm, 62, said he buys berry crops from farmers and brings 1,000 workers from Thailand each year to pick them. In a telephone interview from Vasterbotten in Sweden’s north, where he was looking for berries for his pickers, he said bilberry prices are up 30-35 percent because the hot weather has meant a smaller harvest. The cloudberry harvest was down as well because it was too hot for the beautiful alpine fruit. “We had an early season and the cloudberries ripened really fast,” said Mr. Bjorkmann, adding that the berry season had outstripped the arrival of the pickers, who came too late. __________________________________________________________________________ • Reporting was contributed by Aurelien Breeden and Emma Bubola in Paris; Melissa Eddy and Christopher Schuetze in Berlin; Elisabetta Povoledo in Rome; Milan Schreuer in Brussels; Rafael Minder in Madrid; Christina Anderson in Stockholm; Ceylan Yeginsu and Palko Karasz in London; Ed O'Loughlin in Dublin; and Niki Kitsantonis in Athens. • Alissa Johannsen Rubin (https://www.nytimes.com/by/alissa-j-rubin) is the Paris bureau chief for The New York Times. She joined The Times in January 2007 as a correspondent in Baghdad and covered Iraq and Afghanistan, becoming bureau chief in Baghdad in the fall of 2008, and then moving to Afghanistan in October 2009, becoming bureau chief there a couple of months later. She was in Kabul for almost four years, leaving in the late summer of 2013 to take up the job as Paris bureau chief. However, she continued to work on projects in Afghanistan and joined the team covering the Islamic State's takeover of northern and western Iraq in 2014. That August, she was seriously injured and nearly killed in a helicopter crash in Kurdistan, covering the beleaguered Yazidis. Before joining The N.Y. Times, she was the Los Angeles Times co-bureau chief in Baghdad, and its bureau chief for the Balkans for five years. She started at the L.A. Times' Washington bureau in 1997, covering health care policy and financing, abortion politics and legislation, and the fight over tobacco legislation on Capitol Hill. Before the Los Angeles Times, she was a reporter for Congressional Quarterly magazine, where she covered health care and then taxes and trade on Capitol Hill. She came to Washington after working for four years as a reporter in Wichita, Kansas, for the Knight-Ridder newspaper then known as The Wichita Eagle-Beacon. She also covered taxes there as well as the troubled farm economy. Her career in journalism started at The American Lawyer magazine where she was a researcher. While in Washington, D.C., she freelanced for The New Republic, The Washington Monthly and The Washington Post's Outlook section as well as The Washington Post Magazine. Ms. Rubin, was born and brought up in New York City and graduated Phi Beta Kappa in 1980 from Brown University with an honors degree in Renaissance studies and a minor in classics (Latin). She received a Mellon Fellowship in the Humanities to pursue her graduate studies in modern European history (with a focus on the history of the Catholic Church) at Columbia University, where she received an M.A. in 1986. She is a winner of a 2016 Pulitzer Prize for international reporting; the 2015 John Chancellor Award for journalistic achievement; a 2010 Overseas Press Association award for a piece on women suicide bombers titled “How Baida Wanted to Die”, and a 1992 Washington Monthly award for a piece that appeared in the Washington City Paper, “What People Talk About When They Talk About Abortion”. In 1992 she won an Alicia Patterson Fellowship to report on the medical and religious roots of the abortion controversy in the wake of the United States Supreme Court's 1989 Webster decision. She was twice part of teams that won the National Farm Writers of America Award at the Wichita Eagle in 1986 and 1988 for their coverage of farm issues. She also won the William Allen White Award in 1989 for her coverage of Kansas' overhaul of its real estate taxes. Her college thesis, which was a translation and annotation of some of the letters of Lionardo Bruni, a Renaissance humanist, was published in Allegorica, an academic journal. Ms. Rubin lives in Paris with her husband, James E. Castello, a lawyer who specializes in international arbitration. • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Sunday, August 5, 2018, on Page A6 of the New York print edition with the headline: “A Miserably Hot Europe Is Fast Becoming the Norm”. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Sweden's Tallest Peak Shrinks in Record Heat (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/world/europe/sweden-kebnekaise-heat-wave.html) • ‘Furnace Friday’: Ill-Equipped for Heat, Britain Has a Meltdown (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/27/world/europe/uk-hot-weather.html) • U.K. ‘Heat Wave’? Irish ‘Drought’? Unfamiliar Words for Unfamiliar Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/04/world/europe/uk-ireland-heat-wave.html) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/04/world/europe/europe-heat-wave.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/04/world/europe/europe-heat-wave.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2018, 09:04:47 pm from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times… SCIENCE FILE: Call these farms ‘the rainmakers’ Wind turbines, solar panels can be used to bring more moisture to Sahara, study says. By KAREN KAPLAN | Monday, September 10, 2018 (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-GettyImages-50110_2_1_OT48MRLA.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-GettyImages-50110_2_1_OT48MRLA.jpg) Solar mirrors at a power plant in Ouarzazate, Morocco. A new study examined the effect of wind turbines and solar panels in the Sahara and Sahel regions to create more rain and plants in the massive desert. — Photograph: Fadel Senna/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. YOU ALREADY KNOW that using solar and wind power can influence the climate by reducing our dependence on heat-trapping fossil fuels. Now scientists say these renewable forms of energy can change the climate more directly — and do it in ways that might surprise you. If wind turbines and solar panels were deployed across the Sahara, more rain would fall and more plants would grow in the massive African desert, according to research published Friday in the journal Science. “Renewable energy can have multiple benefits for climate and sustainable development,” wrote a team led by researchers from the University of Maryland's Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science. To figure this out, the researchers imagined three scenarios for the Sahara and the Sahel, a semi-arid region immediately to the south. In one, the area is studded with wind turbines more than 300 feet high. In another, solar panels cover 20% of the land. The third case combines wind and solar farms — a setup that would produce about 82 terawatts of electrical power. That's far more power than the world currently needs, study co-leader Yan Li said. Once their hypothetical energy farms were built, the researchers fed the details into a sophisticated computer program that simulates Earth's dynamic climate. Then the program made predictions about how the farms would change the environment. In the case of wind farms, the giant turbines would cause warmer air from above to mix with cooler air below, bringing more heat close to the surface. Air temperatures near the ground would increase by nearly 4 degrees Fahrenheit. In addition, the turbines would interrupt the smoothness of the desert surface. Winds blowing through the area would move more slowly. That, combined with the added heat, would change the atmospheric conditions over the Sahara and bring more moisture to the area. Average rainfall would increase by up to 0.25 of a millimeter per day — about double what it would have been otherwise, according to the study. The additional water would fuel plant growth, and those extra plants would reduce the amount of sunlight that's reflected off the desert surface. From there, it's a positive feedback loop: The reduced reflectivity, or surface albedo, enhances precipitation, which fuels plant growth, which reduces albedo, and so on. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-GettyImages-50833_2_1_OT48MRUA.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-GettyImages-50833_2_1_OT48MRUA.jpg) The extra water from energy farms may have major ecological, environmental and societal effects, scientists say. Above, solar mirrors in Morocco. — Photograph: Fadel Senna/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. The story is a little different for solar farms. Instead of slowing the wind or causing hot and cool air to mix, the solar panels reduce albedo. That would increase average daily precipitation by about 0.13 of a millimeter in the Sahara and 0.59 of a millimeter in the Sahel. The additional water would induce more plant growth, further reducing albedo and allowing the cycle to continue. These changes were predicted to increase the maximum temperature by more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit, the researchers reported. If wind and solar farms were combined, these effects would be “enhanced,” they said. Average daily precipitation would increase to 0.59 of a millimeter. That's nearly 1.5 times higher than the Sahara would be in its natural state. But the rain wouldn't be spread evenly everywhere. The computer simulations predicted that parts of the Sahel could get as much as nearly 20 inches of additional precipitation per year. All that extra water could have “major ecological, environmental, and societal impacts,” Li and his colleagues wrote. Average temperature would also rise, by nearly 5 degrees Fahrenheit. Changes like these wouldn't necessarily happen everywhere solar farms are built, the researchers cautioned. In the Sahara, the key is that today's typical solar panels would increase the surface albedo. But if the landscape were different, that might not be true. Ditto if the solar panels were more efficient — that could cause temperatures to fall instead of rise. Without added heat, rainfall wouldn’t increase. It might even decrease, the researchers noted. These are all factors to consider when building a wind or solar farm, they wrote. If placed just so, these power plants could generate more rain and plants in addition to more clean energy. __________________________________________________________________________ • Karen Kaplan is science and medicine editor at the Los Angeles Times. Before joining the science group in 2005, she covered technology in the Business section for 10 years. In a parallel universe without journalism, she'd have a career in economics, genetics, biostatistics or some other field that describes the world in math. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=57b81841-f4db-4777-80ba-137f698a5d88 (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=57b81841-f4db-4777-80ba-137f698a5d88) from Science journal… • REPORT: Climate model shows large-scale wind and solar farms in the Sahara increase rain and vegetation (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6406/1019) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 13, 2018, 09:05:03 pm from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times… At climate summit, state to give the U.S. an uphill push California will show whether it can lead the fight when Washington won't. By EVAN HALPER | Wednesday, September 12, 2018 (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2455230_ME_0301___2_1_M4494KQQ.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-2455230_ME_0301___2_1_M4494KQQ.jpg) California's commitment to 100% renewable energy, enshrined in a new law, could motivate cities and states to make similar pledges at the summit in San Francisco this week. Above, the Phillips 66 refinery in Wilmington is seen from Emden Street in 2016. — Photograph: Rick Loomis/Los Angeles Times. WASHINGTON D.C. — Even as California forged its own path for years to battle global warming, pressing forward whether Washington agreed or not, skeptics have persistently scolded that it is just a state — it can't set policy for the nation, much less the world. If California ever had a moment to prove them wrong, it is now. At the international climate summit Governor Jerry Brown will kick off on Wednesday in San Francisco, the state is playing a role none ever has, pushing the rest of the country to join other nations in enforcing a landmark agreement on climate change that President Trump has quit. Put simply, the three-day environmental summit will test whether California can bring the country to a place Congress and the White House won't. “This is a very odd challenge we have,” Brown said in an interview in his office. “It is coming at us from all over the planet. Everyone is contributing and everyone has got to do something to combat it. It is a totally unique world challenge, never before faced. There is nothing like this.” Indeed, as the Trump administration prepared this week to ease regulations on methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases, many states are looking to follow California and Colorado in pursuing policies that require energy firms to capture the methane their drilling operations release and convert it into electricity. In other sectors, more ambitious commitments may be made. California's new law — signed Monday — putting the state on a path to 100% renewable energy could motivate others to make similar pledges this week. Brown had not planned the summit as an act of defiance. The idea emerged soon after the Paris climate change accord was signed in 2015, with strong support from President Obama, and the world assumed the United States would take a lead role in cutting carbon emissions in an effort to ease global warming. It made perfect sense then that California — America's leader in clean tech innovation and climate action — would host a high-stakes gathering of political leaders to cement the Paris benchmarks, assess progress and form new partnerships. The state already has demonstrated how aggressive climate action can boost a large economy. In the Trump era, however, the event morphed into something else. The president has made clear his administration does not agree with mainstream climate science and sees no need to cut emissions at the pace the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change warns will be crucial to dodge catastrophic warming. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-AFP-Getty_US-ENVI_2_1_M4494LAP.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-AFP-Getty_US-ENVI_2_1_M4494LAP.jpg) Marchers in San Francisco last week join “Rise for Climate,” a global day of action demanding solutions from local leaders. — Photograph: Amy Osborne/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. Yet roughly half of Americans live in states that are racing to meet goals in the Paris agreement. Half of America's largest cities have made commitments to go beyond state action. And according to a Quinnipiac poll last month, 64% of U.S. voters believe the nation should do more to combat global warming. With Congress up for grabs in November, candidates are being grilled about Trump's decision to disavow the Paris accord. “The Trump administration is visibly dismantling Obama-era climate programs, and doing it loudly in a way people see and can understand, and it is attacking science more generally in very visible ways,” said Ann Carlson, an environmental law professor at UCLA. “California is big enough and splashy enough, and Jerry Brown is famous enough, that people are paying attention to what California is doing about it.” Brown said the state has been preparing since President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act, one of the nation's first and most important environmental laws, in 1970. After that, “we developed the institutional capacity and the bureaucratic understanding to combat pollution and carbon emissions,” Brown said. “We are positioned well to deal with the problem. Not to take advantage of this would be a tragedy.” During the summit, San Francisco will be swarmed with climate thinkers, crusading celebrities and political leaders racing to and from events that range from cerebral to spectacle. Conferees attending a deep dive in methane reductions in the morning can groove to the Grateful Dead's Bob Weir at an evening concert. But much of the summit will be a grind. Inching toward the Paris goals involves government officials collaborating on and finding new paths for often mundane tasks, from using more sustainable cement to procuring electric buses. Even before the opening ceremony, summit leaders announced a breakthrough on garbage. Cities involved pledged to find alternatives to landfills and incineration for at least 70% of their trash by 2030. Local efforts to zero out coal emissions will also be on display, along with plans to advance technologies that capture industrial emissions and store them underground. “The point is to get people to think about doing more, and then to join with others who have gone through that process and, through that encounter with others, to up the general commitment of the world,” Brown said. It adds up. A recent study published by Yale University found that all the “subnational” actions around the world — and most acutely in the U.S. — are on target to bring the planet halfway to meeting the Paris goals. (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-AFP-Getty_US-ENVI_2_1_M4494LGD.jpg) (http://origin.misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/IMG_LA-AFP-Getty_US-ENVI_2_1_M4494LGD.jpg) Climate change activists march in San Francisco last week. Climate thinkers, celebrities and political leaders will gather in the city this week. — Photograph: Amy Osborne/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. That still leaves a long way to go. The summit will test how much cities, states and the private sector can do to fill the gap. “There are many cities that can do more,” said Niklas Hoehne, one of the study's authors. “And there are many more companies that want to do more.” Although many summit attendees may view Trump as a villain, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said climate change should not be seen as a partisan issue. More than a few Republicans will attend. And he notes that the largest American city running on 100% renewable power now is Georgetown, Texas, a conservative community of 67,000 people with a Republican mayor. “This is not just a California, blue-state thing,” Garcetti said. “Across party lines, people are taking action. I think most people see Trump as an aberration.” Mayors are particularly motivated to act, Garcetti said. Many already battle the fallout of a warming planet: raging forest fires, devastating floods, more destructive hurricanes and heat emergencies. “We know this is happening,” he said. “In the past, these summits were about information. Now it is about action…. Some of us already know how to do this technical work, how to measure emissions and commit [to cutting them]. Now, we are bringing it to other cities.” The challenge for summit organizers is building a system to track and monitor all the pledges made by the thousands of states, cities and businesses determined to do their part to meet the Paris goals. “We have the wisdom, the commitment, the experience and the collaborative spirit to work in ways that may not exist anywhere on the planet,” Brown said. “We've got to take advantage of it.” Still, he said, the task is daunting. “This is like rolling a gigantic boulder up Mount Everest,” Brown said. “And we are at the bottom.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Los Angeles Times Times staff writer John Myers in Sacramento contributed to this report. • Evan Halper writes about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C. for the Los Angeles Times, with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=e8d5152b-9e35-47a8-a75d-185bb110f08a (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=e8d5152b-9e35-47a8-a75d-185bb110f08a) http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=9949f940-9a71-43f3-8696-3913a7ee84fa (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=9949f940-9a71-43f3-8696-3913a7ee84fa) from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times… Deadline for electric cars hangs over climate event By EVAN HALPER | Wednesday, September 12, 2018 WASHINGTON D.C. — The political leaders coming from around the world for Governor Jerry Brown's climate action summit this week will grapple with a lot of urgent deadlines to drive down emissions, but one date is especially exasperating. It is 2035 — the year advocates aim to kill off production of gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles. Keeping global warming to levels society can tolerate could hinge on meeting that target. But even clean-technology capital California has no clear path for getting there. The question of whether drivers should be gently persuaded or forced out of their internal combustion engine cars and trucks over the next 17 years will weigh heavily on the landmark summit, which runs from Wednesday through Friday in San Francisco. States, cities and companies will try to chart a course to carry the country and the world toward meeting the goals in the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, which President Trump has disavowed. Transportation is the most vexing problem the summit will confront. The sector sends more greenhouse gases into the air than any other, recently outpacing power plants, which are getting cleaner every year. Internal combustion engine cars need to be off the roads altogether by 2050 to meet the Paris goals. Dealers would need to stop selling new models 15 years earlier. “Even during the Obama administration, when the country was pushing as hard and fast as it could on climate policy, it still wasn't enough” to meet the goals on auto emissions, said Kate Larsen, a director at Rhodium Group, a Bay Area research firm. Rhodium's modeling shows that just 8% of U.S. drivers will be in zero-emission cars, pickups or SUVs by 2025, a depressing projection for the climate movement. The urgency is not lost on Brown. Last year, he directed the state's chief air regulator, Mary Nichols, to look into stepping up the state's timetable to phase out gas and diesel vehicles. It gnaws at him that other nations are already catapulting ahead. Electric vehicles account for 5% of cars sold in California and 1% nationwide. In Norway, they make up 40%. Bans on the sales of new gasoline- and diesel-powered cars are scheduled to take effect there and in several other countries as soon as 2025. China has put automakers on notice that a ban is on the horizon. But it is a much tougher sell in America, even in California. A state legislative proposal this year to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars and trucks by 2040 went nowhere. “You want me to issue a press release saying, ‘No more combustion engines’?” Brown said in an interview on Monday. “There are 32 million in California. It doesn't work that way. We have to provide an alternative…. We have to get that in place.” The shift toward electric vehicles in parts of Europe and Asia is bolstered by government subsidies and tax structures that few American politicians would consider. They include tough gas-guzzler penalties for those who drive high-horsepower, climate-unfriendly pickups and SUVs, and large cash grants and tax breaks for those who buy electric. The U.S. approach is grounded in requiring automakers to meet steadily more ambitious mileage-per-gallon targets, a process that has gone a long way in cutting carbon emissions. But fuel economy standards will fall short unless the government sets a near-term target of zero miles per gallon — the point when all new cars run on no gasoline or diesel at all. “Even if we were to double our fuel economy targets, we still don't get there,” said Niklas Hoehne, an author of studies for the United Nations Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change and co-founder of NewClimate Institute, a German think tank. “The transition won't happen in a way that is compatible with the goals agreed to in Paris.” No one is talking about doubling fuel economy targets in the U.S. The Trump administration is in the process of trying to freeze current targets in place for six years. Yet the clean-tech optimists trying to push California — and by extension, the rest of the country — say there is still hope. “We saw the same thing with renewable energy,” said Simon Mui, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a non-partisan environmental advocacy group. “We went, in the course of a decade, from a plan that didn't require any of our power to come from renewables to a plan that requires 100% renewable energy by 2045. We are at the same place [with transportation] that we were with wind and solar 10 or 15 years ago.” California, in particular, has shown a capacity for rapid adaptation. The Toyota Prius first was manufactured in 1997 in response to California's clean-car policies, and spawned a hybrid revolution. The California Air Resources Board estimates there will be 70 electric vehicle models available by 2022, and much of the innovation is coming from labs in California. California and like-minded states have been aggressively building charging stations and other infrastructure to coax drivers to go electric. And cities, counties and other bodies have transitioned fleets to zero-emission buses and trucks. Los Angeles will roll out an ambitious “Zero Emissions 2028 Roadmap” this week, a plan that aims to accelerate electrification and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the region by an additional 25% by the time the 2028 Summer Olympics come to town. The plan includes building tens of thousands of charging stations and sets ambitious targets for getting drivers and shippers into zero-emission vehicles. Up to 45% of cars in Los Angeles could be electric if the road map holds up. “This is us saying we need to go further and do everything we can to get people behind the wheel of an electric car or an electric truck,” said Matt Petersen, chief executive of Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator, a government-funded nonprofit that's helping lead electrification efforts. Driverless vehicles, still in their early stages, could also push electrification forward. The models that ultimately hit the streets are likely to be electric since they are easier for computers to drive and for companies to maintain — and local officials are demanding the change. “We will be pushing for any autonomous vehicles that hit our streets to be electric,” said Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. “It sends a signal to the Ubers and Lyfts, who then turn to the manufacturers with a very strong message.” Other countries aren't waiting to go electric. And some analysts say that could spur Washington and the auto industry to act, particularly as Chinese manufacturers develop their own electric car models to meet booming demand. The Chinese market is already approaching the size of the entire U.S. and European markets combined, and soon will dwarf them. If auto companies fail to reorient their strategies toward electrification, they risk losing huge market share to upstart Chinese competitors, says Joern Buss, a Detroit-based auto industry consultant with the firm Oliver Wyman. Brown says Trump needs to wake up to that threat. “He is building the Chinese auto industry and destroying the future American auto industry,” the governor said. Skeptics say waiting to be nudged ahead by more forward-thinking nations amounts to fiddling as the world burns. The idea that the internal-combustion engine can be phased out in the next 20 years without government intervention on a massive scale and an unprecedented social awakening among the driving public is foolish, said Peter Tertzakian, executive director of the Arc Energy Research Institute, a Canadian group that analyzes energy investments. He said most leaders assume the average driver will embrace electric as technology improves, much as parts of the power industry gave up fossil fuels as better systems emerged. But giving up gas-powered cars requires complex shifts in the way people live that don’t come into play when a coal power plant is replaced with a solar or gas plant. “The Paris agreement was signed three years ago,” Tertzakian said. “The years keep passing, and the substitution [of gas-powered vehicles] is not happening. Look at oil and gas use. It is not decelerating. It is accelerating.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Los Angeles Times Times staff writer John Myers in Sacramento contributed to this report. • Evan Halper writes about a broad range of policy issues out of Washington D.C. for the Los Angeles Times, with particular emphasis on how Washington regulates, agitates and very often miscalculates in its dealings with California. Before heading east, he was the L.A. Times bureau chief in Sacramento, where he spent a decade untangling California's epic budget mess and political dysfunction. http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=50cb2f62-51b2-4e3e-910a-efd3ea77e1a5 (http://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=50cb2f62-51b2-4e3e-910a-efd3ea77e1a5) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 14, 2018, 01:35:56 pm is that steam pretending to be smoke
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 21, 2018, 12:39:48 am meanwhile in china damn climate change is chinas fault
Why is the smog in China so bad? It’s getting harder and harder to breathe https://www.popsci.com/why-is-smog-in-china-so-bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnucKpBiM74 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 21, 2018, 11:41:50 am You're showing your ignorance again. Just like that needle-dick Donald J. Trump does when it comes to the health of our planet. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 21, 2018, 11:42:30 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 23, 2018, 02:18:55 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnO0sRtW0AEwAFh.jpg) (https://twitter.com/RubenBolling/status/1041374880799895553) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 25, 2018, 08:48:04 pm i was a fan of fred flintstone
your cartoons are dumb does climate change yes get over it nutbar Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 08, 2018, 07:08:26 pm from The Washington Post… The world has barely 10 years to get climate change under control, U.N. scientists say “There is no documented historic precedent” for the scale of changes required to hold the planet's warming to just 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found. By CHRIS MOONEY and BRADY DENNIS | 9:00PM EDT — Sunday, October 07, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/jg4m90dKsYRRgq4ViGVRzInwU7M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5QX4V3QTLII6RJUM5E3UDCAXBY.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/jg4m90dKsYRRgq4ViGVRzInwU7M=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5QX4V3QTLII6RJUM5E3UDCAXBY.jpg) The Eiffel Tower is lit up with the slogan “Action Now” in December 2015, as countries signed the landmark Paris climate accord. — Photograph: Michel Euler/Associated Press. THE WORLD stands on the brink of failure when it comes to holding global warming to moderate levels, and nations will need to take “unprecedented” actions to cut their carbon emissions over the next decade, according to a landmark report (https://www.ipcc.ch) by the top scientific body studying climate change. With global emissions showing few signs of slowing and the United States — the world's second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide — rolling back a suite of Obama-era climate measures, the prospects for meeting the most ambitious goals of the 2015 Paris agreement look increasingly slim. To avoid racing past warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels would require a “rapid and far-reaching” transformation of human civilization at a magnitude that has never happened before, the group found. “There is no documented historic precedent” for the sweeping change to energy, transportation and other systems required to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) wrote in a report requested as part of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. At the same time, however, the report is being received with hope in some quarters because it affirms that 1.5 degrees Celsius is still possible — if emissions stopped today, for instance, the planet would not reach that temperature. It is also likely to galvanize even stronger climate action by focusing on 1.5 degrees Celsius, rather than 2 degrees, as a target that the world cannot afford to miss. “Frankly, we've delivered a message to the governments,” said Jim Skea, a co-chair of the IPCC panel and professor at Imperial College London, at a press event following the document's release. “It's now their responsibility … to decide whether they can act on it.” He added, “What we've done is said what the world needs to do.” The transformation described in the document is breathtaking, and the speed of change required raises inevitable questions about its feasibility. Most strikingly, the document says the world's annual carbon dioxide emissions, which amount to more than 40 billion tons per year, would have to be on an extremely steep downward path by 2030 to either hold the world entirely below 1.5 degrees Celsius, or allow only a brief “overshoot” in temperatures. Overall reductions in emissions in the next decade would probably need to be more than 1 billion tons per year, larger than the current emissions of all but a few of the very largest emitting countries. By 2050, the report calls for a total or near-total phaseout of the burning of coal. “It's like a deafening, piercing smoke alarm going off in the kitchen. We have to put out the fire,” said Erik Solheim, executive director of the U.N. Environment Program. He added that the need to either stop emissions entirely by 2050 or find some way to remove as much carbon dioxide from the air as humans put there “means net zero must be the new global mantra.” The radical transformation also would mean that, in a world projected to have more than 2 billion additional people by 2050, large swaths of land currently used to produce food would instead have to be converted to growing trees that store carbon and crops designated for energy use. The latter would be used as part of a currently non-existent program to get power from trees or plants and then bury the resulting carbon dioxide emissions in the ground, leading to a net subtraction of the gas from the air — bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, or BECCS. “Such large transitions pose profound challenges for sustainable management of the various demands on land for human settlements, food, livestock feed, fibre, bioenergy, carbon storage, biodiversity and other ecosystem services,” the report states. The document in question was produced relatively rapidly for the cautious and deliberative IPCC, representing the work of nearly 100 scientists. It went through an elaborate peer-review process involving tens of thousands of comments. The final 34-page “summary for policymakers” was agreed to in a marathon session by scientists and government officials in Incheon, South Korea, over the past week. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/eRmdHPfH12GQOXNoo5UlqIx9FRI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/LK2B3BCMOJFVDEPSOQ26KWCSMM.png) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/eRmdHPfH12GQOXNoo5UlqIx9FRI=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/LK2B3BCMOJFVDEPSOQ26KWCSMM.png) The report says the world will need to develop large-scale “negative emissions” programs to remove significant volumes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Although the basic technologies exist, they have not caught on widely, and scientists have strongly questioned whether such a program can be scaled up in the brief period available. The bottom line, Sunday's report found, is that the world is woefully off target. Current promises made by countries as part of the Paris climate agreement would lead to about 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming by the end of the century, and the Trump administration recently released an analysis assuming about 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trump-administration-sees-a-7-degree-rise-in-global-temperatures-by-2100/2018/09/27/b9c6fada-bb45-11e8-bdc0-90f81cc58c5d_story.html) by 2100 if the world takes no action. The IPCC is considered the definitive source on the state of climate science, but it also tends to be conservative in its conclusions. That's because it is driven by a consensus-finding process, and its results are the product of not only science, but negotiation with governments over its precise language. In Sunday's report, the body detailed the magnitude and unprecedented nature of the changes that would be required to hold warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, but it held back from taking a specific stand on the feasibility of meeting such an ambitious goal. (An early draft had cited a “very high risk” of warming exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/02/13/leaked-draft-summary-un-special-report-1-5c-climate-goal-full); that language is now gone, even if the basic message is still easily inferred.) “If you're expecting IPCC to jump up and down and wave red flags, you're going to be disappointed,” said Phil Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center. “They're going to do what they always do, which is to release very cautious reports in extremely dispassionate language.” Some researchers, including Duffy, are skeptical of the scenarios that the IPCC presents that hold warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, particularly the reliance on negative-emissions technologies to keep the window open. “Even if it is technically possible, without aligning the technical, political and social aspects of feasibility, it is not going to happen,” added Glen Peters, research director of the Center for International Climate Research in Oslo. “To limit warming below 1.5 C, or 2 C for that matter, requires all countries and all sectors to act.” Underscoring the difficulty of interpreting what's possible, the IPCC gave two separate numbers in the report for Earth's remaining “carbon budget,” or how much carbon dioxide humans can emit and still have a reasonable chance of remaining below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The upshot is that humans are allowed either 10 or 14 years of current emissions, and no more, for a two-thirds or better chance of avoiding 1.5 degrees Celsius. The already limited budget would shrink further if other greenhouse gases, such as methane, aren't controlled, or if and when Arctic permafrost becomes a major source of new emissions. But either way — in a move that may be contested — researchers have somewhat increased the carbon budget in comparison with where the IPCC set it in 2013, giving another reason for hope. The new approach buys some time and “resets the clock for 1.5 degrees Celsius to ‘five minutes to midnight’,” said Oliver Geden, head of the research division of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. The report is sure to be the central focus of attention this December in Poland when the next meeting of the parties to the Paris climate agreement is held, and countries begin to contemplate how they can up their ambition levels, as the agreement requires them to do over time. Meanwhile, the report clearly documents that a warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius would be very damaging and that 2 degrees — which used to be considered a reasonable goal — could approach intolerable in parts of the world. “1.5 degrees is the new 2 degrees,” said Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, who was in Incheon for the finalization of the report. Specifically, the document finds that instabilities in Antarctica and Greenland, which could usher in sea-level rise measured in feet rather than inches, “could be triggered around 1.5°C to 2°C of global warming.” Moreover, the total loss of tropical coral reefs is at stake because 70 to 90 percent are expected to vanish at 1.5 degrees Celsius, the report finds. At 2 degrees, that number grows to more than 99 percent. The report found that holding warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius could save an Alaska-size area of the Arctic from permafrost thaw, muting a feedback loop that could lead to still more global emissions. The occurrence of entirely ice-free summers in the Arctic Ocean goes from one per century to one per decade between 1.5 and 2 degrees, it found — one of many ways in which the mere half a degree has large real-world consequences. Risks of extreme heat and weather events just rise and rise as temperatures do, meaning these would be worse worldwide the more it warms. To avoid that, in barely more than 10 years, the world's percentage of electricity from renewables such as solar and wind power would have to jump from the current 24 percent to something more like 50 or 60 percent. Coal and gas plants that remain in operation would need to be equipped with technologies, collectively called carbon capture and storage (CCS), that prevent them from emitting carbon dioxide into the air and instead funnel it to be buried underground. By 2050, most coal plants would shut down. Cars and other forms of transportation, meanwhile, would need to be shifting strongly toward being electrified, powered by these same renewable energy sources. At present, transportation is far behind the power sector in the shift to low-carbon fuel sources. Right now, according to the International Energy Agency (https://www.iea.org/media/publications/mtrmr/Renewables2017ExecutiveSummary.PDF), only 4 percent of road transportation is powered by renewable fuels, and the agency has projected only a 1 percent increase by 2022. The report's statements on the need to jettison coal were challenged by the World Coal Association. “While we are still reviewing the draft, the World Coal Association believes that any credible pathway to meeting the 1.5 degree scenario must focus on emissions rather than fuel,” the group's interim chief executive, Katie Warrick, said in a statement. “That is why CCS is so vital.” That's an approach largely embraced by the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, which under President Trump has taken numerous steps to roll back regulations on the coal industry. In an interview with The Washington Post last week, the EPA's acting administrator, Andrew Wheeler, said the United States will “continue to remain engaged in the U.N.'s effort,” despite the fact that Trump has said he intends to withdraw from the Paris climate accord as soon as legally possible. But asked specifically about what it would take to keep the world below a dangerous level of climate change, Wheeler declined to identify a specific level. The agency's regulatory approach is that it would allow the coal industry “to continue to innovate on clean coal technologies, and those technologies will be exported to other countries." And turning off most coal plants may not be the most radical change required. For instance, the document also contemplates rapid changes to agriculture, where methane emissions, produced by livestock, rice cultivation and other sources, also would have to plummet even as the world will have to feed a growing population. Meanwhile, instead of continuing to deforest large areas for livestock and other uses, humans would have to embark on a large-scale program of reforestation, planting or restoring trees over enormous areas. In the end, “one thing is for sure,” Niklas Hohne, a scientist who heads the New Climate Institute, said in a statement. “If we give up the goal and do not even try, we will certainly miss it a long way.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report. • Chris Mooney (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/chris-mooney) writes about energy and the environment at The Washington Post. He previously worked at Mother Jones, where he wrote about science and the environment and hosted a weekly podcast. Mooney spent a decade before that as a freelance writer, podcaster and speaker, with his work appearing in Wired, Harper's, Slate, the Los Angeles Times and The Boston Globe, to name a few. He also has published four books about science, politics and climate change. • Brady Dennis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/brady-dennis) is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. He previously spent years covering the nation's economy. Dennis was a finalist for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for a series of explanatory stories about the global financial crisis. Before that, he was a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times (Florida). https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 09, 2018, 12:17:28 am gores beachfront home is still not under water yet wtf
it proves he is full of bullshit just like you you lie everybody believes in climate change Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 09, 2018, 09:58:27 am Go and visit Hector, or Granity, or Carters Beach in the Buller region. Or go and visit Haumoana, or Te Awanga, or Clifton in Hawke's Bay. Then stand in front of the residents of those localities and tell them that “they are full of shit and their properties and homes AREN'T being taken by the sea and they are delusional” and I betcha they'll either beat the crap out of you, or else they'll get it a couple of shrinks and get you locked up in a rubber room. And there are plenty of other places around NZ's coastline in the same predicament. In Palliser Bay, there are even the remains of baches amongst the rocks below where there used to be solid land. Your stupidity and ignorance is astounding. When I die, I shall do so extremely happy in the knowlege that your grandchildren will be destined for a life of hell on this planet, all thanks to their grandfather's ignorance & greed. It will bring a smile to my face as I become extinct. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 09, 2018, 07:42:19 pm from The New York Times… Dire Climate Warning Lands With a Thud on Trump's Desk A day after the U.N. issued a call to arms for the world to confront climate change, President Trump, who has mocked the science around it, did not broach the topic, even in vulnerable Florida. By MARK LANDLER and CORAL DAVENPORT | Monday, October 08, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate1/merlin_145033692_725d693b-2fe3-4b8c-ac30-b3d88d3c77a9-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate1/merlin_145033692_725d693b-2fe3-4b8c-ac30-b3d88d3c77a9-superJumbo.jpg) President Trump on Monday in Orlando, Florida, where he spoke to a convention of police chiefs. He did not mention a United Nations report on the threat of climate change. — Photograph: Tom Brenner/for The New York Times. WASHINGTON D.C. — A day after the United Nations issued its most urgent call to arms yet (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-climate-report-2040.html) for the world to confront the threat of climate change, President Trump boarded Air Force One for Florida — a state that lies directly in the path of this coming calamity — and said nothing about it. It was the latest, most vivid example of Mr. Trump's dissent from an effort that has galvanized much of the world. While the United Nations warned of mass wildfires, food shortages and dying coral reefs as soon as 2040, Mr. Trump discussed his successful Supreme Court battle (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/us/politics/trump-kavanaugh-accusations-hoax.html) rather than how rising seawaters are already flooding Miami on sunny days. The president's isolation is not just from the world: In California, New York, Massachusetts and other states, governments and companies are pushing ahead with regulations and technological innovations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That bottom-up activism is a source of hope for those who have watched in despair since last year when Mr. Trump declared he would pull the United States out of the Paris climate accord (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html). But experts say it is no substitute for the world's largest economy, and second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide, turning its back on the fight. “You have this enormous discrepancy between the White House and, essentially, everyone else,” said Johan Rockström, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “The leadership in Washington is really moving against the whole agenda.” The United Nations report paints a far more dire picture of the immediate consequences of climate change than previously thought and says that avoiding the damage requires transforming the world economy at a speed and scale that has “no documented historic precedent.” It describes a world of worsening food shortages and poverty; more wildfires; and a mass die-off of coral reefs as soon as 2040 — a period well within the lifetime of much of the global population. Among climate-change scientists, there were increasing fears that Mr. Trump's withdrawal from the Paris accord, which at first seemed a lonely act of defiance, may embolden other countries to leave it as well. In Brazil, voters are on track to elect a new president (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/world/americas/jair-bolsonaro-brazil-election.html), Jair Bolsonaro, who has vowed to withdraw his country, the world's seventh-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, from the pact. Mr. Trump's announcement last year prompted a show of solidarity from the other 194 countries that signed the accord, not to mention American political and business leaders who rallied under the slogan, “We are still in!” But to populists like Mr. Bolsonaro, Mr. Trump's demands that the United States be given a better deal could prove appealing. “To the extent that we get these narrow-minded, so-called nationalist, populist leaders, we could have a big problem,” said John P. Holdren (https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/us/politics/21science.html), who served as President Barack Obama's chief science adviser. “Brazil, with its huge area of forests, is going to suffer terribly from climate change.” Beyond the domino effect, Mr. Holdren, who is now a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School, said there were other immediate costs to what he called “the squandering of U.S. leadership on an acute global issue.” Mr. Trump, who has mocked the science of human-caused climate change, cut the American contribution to a global fund that supports climate mitigation and assistance efforts in developing countries by two-thirds, to $1 billion. He has tried to cut government funding of climate-related research — an effort that Congress has so far resisted. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate2/merlin_131017397_ed04f2f0-da28-4433-a4d5-57413e3e3128-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate2/merlin_131017397_ed04f2f0-da28-4433-a4d5-57413e3e3128-superJumbo.jpg) A wildfire burning last year near Casitas Springs, California. The United Nations report warns of mass wildfires, food shortages and dying coral reefs as soon as 2040. — Photograph: Hilary Swift/for The New York Times. The White House issued no public response to the United Nations report, which was issued on Monday in South Korea at a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to guide world leaders. “Not today,” said Bill Shine, the White House communications director. “It's a Kavanaugh night.” After Mr. Trump returned on Monday from Orlando, Florida, where he spoke to a convention of police chiefs and referred to the hurricane now approaching that state, he attended a White House ceremony to swear in Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Following the ceremony, Lindsay E. Walters, a deputy press secretary, said, “The United States is leading the world in providing affordable, abundant and secure energy to our citizens, while protecting the environment and reducing emissions through job-creating innovation.” She noted that carbon dioxide-related emissions declined 14 percent in the United States from 2005 to 2017, while they rose 21 percent globally during the same period. On Saturday, an American delegation in South Korea joined more than 180 countries in accepting the report's summary for policymakers, but a statement from the State Department added that it “does not imply endorsement by the United States of the specific findings or underlying contents of the report.” The report “is quite a shock, and quite concerning,” said Bill Hare, an author of previous Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and a physicist with Climate Analytics, a non-profit organization. “We were not aware of this just a few years ago.” The authors found that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate, the atmosphere will warm by as much as 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, or 1.5 degrees Celsius, above pre-industrial levels by 2040. The Paris accord set a goal of preventing warming of more than 3.6 degrees above pre-industrial levels — long considered a threshold for the most severe social and economic damage from climate change. But the heads of small island nations, fearful of rising sea levels, had also asked scientists to examine the effects of 2.7 degrees of warming. Without aggressive action, many effects that scientists once expected to happen further in the future will arrive by 2040, and at the lower temperature, the report shows. “It's telling us we need to reverse emissions trends and turn the world economy on a dime,” said Myles Allen, an Oxford University climate scientist and an author of the report. To prevent 2.7 degrees of warming, the report said, greenhouse emissions must be reduced by 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, and by 100 percent by 2050. It also found that use of coal as an electricity source would have to drop from nearly 40 percent today to 1 to 7 percent by 2050. “This report makes it clear: There is no way to mitigate climate change without getting rid of coal,” said Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University and an author of the report. Mr. Trump has vowed to increase the burning of coal. “It makes me feel angry when I think about the U.S. government,” Mr. Shindell said. “My kids feel like it's their future being destroyed.” He watched as the grounds of his son's high school in Durham, North Carolina, and the roads around it flooded last month after Hurricane Florence. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate3/merlin_143947755_79dfb192-1a45-4c76-a84a-617bc8eb5d80-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/09/us/politics/09dc-trumpclimate3/merlin_143947755_79dfb192-1a45-4c76-a84a-617bc8eb5d80-superJumbo.jpg) Flooded homes last month in Lumberton, North Carolina, after Hurricane Florence hit. — Photograph: Johnny Milano/for The New York Times. Dr. Allen said there was little question the report will be ignored in Washington. “The current administration doesn't seem interested in it all,” he said, although he added that as a scientist, he takes the long view. “One way or another,” he said, “the facts do win out.” Mr. Trump encouraged scientists recently when he nominated Kelvin Droegemeier, a well-respected meteorologist who is an expert on extreme weather, to lead the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The post had been vacant since Mr. Trump took office. But it is unlikely that Mr. Droegemeier will change the president's views on climate change, and other influential aides are hardly going to challenge him. For example, the Trump administration's counter-terrorism strategy, released last week, made no mention of climate change as a cause for extremism. The Obama administration regularly cited it in threat assessments because of its effect on migration and the competition for food and water. “I don't think climate change is a cause of international terrorism,” said the national security adviser, John R. Bolton. For all that, scientists said that they saw a few rays of sunshine amid the clouds. A Democratic takeover of the House would raise the odds that Congress would continue blocking cuts to research. And despite his criticism of the Paris accord as “very unfair” to the United States, Mr. Trump has left the door open to staying in the deal, if the terms were improved. “I have been of the opinion all along that we can definitely see the U.S. back in the Paris agreement, even under Trump,” Mr. Rockström said. Legally, he noted, the United States cannot formally withdraw from the pact until 2020, and the agreement's terms are voluntary. “He can sit there in the White House and draw up his own plan,” Mr. Rockström said. __________________________________________________________________________ • Mark Landler reported from Washington, and Coral Davenport from Incheon, South Korea. Further reporting was contributed by Somini Sengupta. • Mark Landler (https://www.nytimes.com/by/mark-landler) is a White House correspondent at The New York Times. In 24 years at The N.Y. Times, he has been diplomatic correspondent, bureau chief in Hong Kong and Frankfurt, European economic correspondent, and a business reporter in New York. He is the author of “Alter Egos: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Twilight Struggle over American Power” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0812998855) (Random House). • Coral Davenport (https://www.nytimes.com/by/coral-davenport) covers energy and environmental policy for The New York Times, with a focus on climate change, from The Times's Washington bureau. She has covered these issues since 2006, reporting for Congressional Quarterly, Politico and National Journal before joining The N.Y. Times in 2013. Her coverage at The Times has included reporting from atop the Greenland ice sheet, breaking the news of Volkswagen's illegal use of software devices to evade pollution regulations, and a 2016 interview with President Obama about his efforts to build an environmental legacy. Before covering environmental policy, she worked as a freelance reporter and food and travel writer in Athens, Greece, covering culinary trends, arts and culture, the economy, terrorism and security, and the 2004 Athens Olympics for publications from the Christian Science Monitor to Conde Nast Traveler. She got her start at the Daily Hampshire Gazette in Hampshire County, Massachusetts, after graduating from Smith College with a degree in English literature. • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Tuesday, October 9, 2018 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Climate Warning Hits Silent Wall On Trump's Desk”. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/us/politics/climate-change-united-nations-trump.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/us/politics/climate-change-united-nations-trump.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 09, 2018, 10:16:49 pm from The New York Times… EDITORIAL: Coal Is Killing the Planet. Trump Loves It. Scientists issued a new alarm on the devastating impacts of continued burning of fossil fuels. But the Trump E.P.A. keeps propping up coal. By THE NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | Monday, October 08, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/08/opinion/EPA-edt/merlin_145032552_fdc27403-f91d-473f-b352-7b900dc9f386-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/10/08/opinion/EPA-edt/merlin_145032552_fdc27403-f91d-473f-b352-7b900dc9f386-superJumbo.jpg) — Illustration: Celia Jacobs. IF WE keep burning coal and petroleum to power our society, we're cooked — and a lot faster than we thought. The United Nations scientific panel on climate change issued a terrifying new warning (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-climate-report-2040.html) on Monday that continued emissions of greenhouse gases from power plants and vehicles will bring dire and irreversible changes by 2040, years earlier than previously forecast. The cost will be measured in trillions of dollars and in sweeping societal and environmental damage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-report-half-degree.html), including mass die-off of coral reefs and animal species, flooded coastlines, intensified droughts, food shortages, mass migrations and deeper poverty. The worst impacts can be avoided only by a “far-reaching and unprecedented” transformation of the global energy system, including virtually eliminating the use of coal as a source of electricity, the panel warned. Yet President Trump, who has questioned the accepted scientific consensus on climate change, continues to praise “clean beautiful coal” and has directed his Environmental Protection Agency to reverse major strides undertaken by the Obama administration to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants. This is unbelievably reckless. In addition to undermining the fight against climate change, the president's efforts to prop up the dirtiest of all fuels will also exact a significant toll on public health, on the hearts and lungs of ordinary Americans. The Environmental Protection Agency's bedrock mission is to protect public health and welfare. Its basic tools are 50 years of federal clean air and water laws meant to limit Americans' exposure to environmental poisons and pollutants. Every so often an administration comes along that seems to forget this mission. We have one now. Andrew Wheeler (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/climate/andrew-wheeler-epa-lobbying.html), the agency's acting administrator, is clearly a great improvement in moral terms over his ethically challenged and thankfully departed predecessor, Scott Pruitt (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/climate/scott-pruitt-resigns.html). Mr. Wheeler's ideology and policies, however, are much the same, weighted in favor of the industries Mr. Wheeler once represented as a handsomely paid lobbyist, and against the health needs of Americans. Like the president he serves, Mr. Wheeler displays little concern for climate change and its epochal challenges. The latest example is a proposal (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/climate/epa-trump-mercury-rule.html) his agency sent to the White House for review and approval that would, in broadest terms, greatly devalue the public health benefits (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/07/climate/epa-mercury-life-cost-benefit.html) of reducing air pollution. The proposal is specifically aimed at a 2011 finding by the Obama administration that when the agency devises rules to control a particular pollutant — mercury, in this case — it must take into account not only the compliance costs to industry but the additional health benefits that arise from the reduction in other harmful gases like soot and smog that occur as a side effect. Though the health benefits of controlling mercury alone were quite small, and the costs to industry large, those costs were outweighed by savings to the country in annual health costs and lost workdays when the co-benefits were factored in. The Wheeler proposal would disallow any calculation of these side benefits and allow only those associated with the regulated pollutant. Mr. Wheeler promises that existing mercury emissions limits will remain in place. He also acknowledges that industry has already invested billions of dollars on new technology to comply with the mercury rule, and that many companies have done so. But weakening the foundation on which that rule was promulgated could invite lawsuits to overturn it entirely, and — even more ominously — could make it easier for the Trump administration or a like-minded one to ignore important ancillary public health benefits when devising other environmental regulations in the future. So chalk up another win for Robert Murray (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/climate/coal-murray-trump-memo.html), the far-right Trump confidante and chief executive of the Murray Energy Corporation, a big coal producer for which Mr. Wheeler served as an attorney and lobbyist. Mr. Murray requested the mercury rollback as one of 16 items on a wish list (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/09/climate/document-Murray-Energy-Action-Plan.html) he presented last year to the Trump administration. He is one of several coal barons who lobbied the administration to revisit the cost-benefit rules to set a precedent for future regulations. Near the top of Mr. Murray's to-do list, higher even than mercury, was the repeal and replacement of the Clean Power Plan (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/climate/clean-power-plan-replacement.html), a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's strategy to fight global warming. Here, too, Mr. Wheeler has faithfully delivered, and here, too, he and his agency have given short shrift to human health. The Clean Power Plan was aimed mainly at reducing carbon dioxide, the principal global warming gas, from coal-fired power plants. But like the mercury rule, it would also, as a collateral benefit, have reduced other dangerous pollutants like smog and soot. In so doing, the Obama administration calculated, it would prevent 1,500 to 3,600 premature deaths per year by 2030 and would provide other beneficial health effects. By contrast, as Lisa Friedman of The New York Times discovered (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/climate/epa-coal-pollution-deaths.html), the Trump administration's laughably weak replacement plan would cause (by the Trump E.P.A.'s own calculations) as many as 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030, as well as 15,000 new cases of upper respiratory disease and billions of dollars in new health care costs, mainly from an increase in fine particulate matter linked to heart and lung disease. At the time, Mr. Wheeler's lieutenants told everyone not to worry, that the agency had other rules to control these and other life-threatening pollutants. Among the optimists was William Wehrum (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/19/us/politics/epa-coal-emissions-standards-william-wehrum.html), the agency's chief air pollution officer, who is glad to have another chance to undermine the nation's clean air laws after failing to do so during his previous stint in the George W. Bush administration. “We have abundant legal authority to deal with those other pollutants directly,” he declared. As it happens, however, these other legal authorities are also at risk. As The N.Y. Times's Eric Lipton reported (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/24/climate/epa-coal-power-scrubbers.html), the Trump replacement plan would also have greatly weakened another E.P.A. program known as the New Source Review, a plan that has had an enormously beneficial effect on air quality in this country and whose demise would allow many of the nation's dirtiest power plants to keep running without installing new pollution controls. What we are dealing with here, in other words, is a bit of a shell game — hard to follow, costly to the public, satisfying to those who are running it. We are also dealing with people who won't let inconvenient forecasts about death and disease deter them from their appointed goal of satisfying Mr. Trump's pro-coal agenda, and who also seem eager to keep such forecasts hidden. Late last month we learned that the E.P.A. planned to dissolve its Office of the Science Advisor (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/climate/epa-science-adviser.html), the latest of several steps beginning under Mr. Pruitt to diminish the role of scientific research (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/26/opinion/pruitt-attack-science-epa.html) in policymaking. Nobody really expected a new policy direction from Mr. Wheeler, who was once consigliere to Senator James Inhofe, Congress's most outspoken climate change denier. But in Mr. Wheeler's insistence on a narrow, even cramped, reading of the nation's landmark environmental laws, he is ignoring science and threatening the public health and welfare. __________________________________________________________________________ • The editorial board represents the opinions of the board, its editor and the publisher. It is separate from the newsroom and the Op-Ed section. • A version of this editorial appears in The New York Times on Tuesday, October 09, 2018, on Page A24 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Coal Is Killing the Planet. Trump Loves It.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/opinion/epa-climate-environment-trump.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/opinion/epa-climate-environment-trump.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 10, 2018, 11:19:21 am from The Washington Post… Our planet is in crisis. We don't have time for Trump's foolishness. We are living in a climate horror movie. By EUGENE ROBINSON | 6:58PM EDT — Monday, October 08, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1011w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/10/01/Editorial-Opinion/Images/California_Wildfires_Causes_53518-0287f-3153.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/10/01/Editorial-Opinion/Images/California_Wildfires_Causes_53518-0287f-3153.jpg) Firefighters monitor a backfire near Ladoga, California, in August. — Photograph: Noah Berger/Associated Press. HERE IS how to interpret the alarming new United Nations-sponsored report on global warming (http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_chapter1.pdf): We are living in a horror movie. The world needs statesmen to lead the way to safety. Instead, we have President Trump, who essentially says, “Hey, let's all head to the dark, creepy basement where the chain saws and razor-sharp axes are kept. What could go wrong?” The answer is almost everything, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The impact of human-induced warming is worse than previously feared, the report released on Monday says, and only drastic, coordinated action will keep the damage short of catastrophe. To this point, climate change has been a slow-motion calamity whose impacts, month to month and year to year, have been hard to perceive. Unfortunately, according to the report, that is about to change. The burning of fossil fuels on an industrial scale has raised global temperatures by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-report-half-degree.html). That may not sound like much, but look at the consequences we're already seeing (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-report-half-degree.html): Stronger, slower, wetter tropical storms. Unprecedented heat waves. Devastating floods. Dying coral reefs. A never-before-seen summer shipping lane across the Arctic Ocean (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russias-suez-canal-ships-start-plying-an-ice-free-arctic-thanks-to-climate-change/2018/09/08/59d50986-ac5a-11e8-9a7d-cd30504ff902_story.html). Meanwhile, humankind continues to pump heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a tragically self-destructive rate. The IPCC calculates that a further temperature rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius — almost inevitable, given our dependence on coal, oil and gas — would be challenging but manageable. An increase of about 2 degrees, however, would be disastrous. What's the difference? With a 1.5-degree rise, about 14 percent of the world's population would be vulnerable to severe and deadly heat waves every five years; with a 2-degree rise, that figure jumps to 37 percent. With a 1.5-degree rise, an additional 350 million city dwellers worldwide will face water shortages; with a 2-degree rise, 411 million people will suffer such drought. With a 1.5-degree rise, coral reefs will experience “very frequent mass mortalities”; with a 2-degree rise, coral reefs will “mostly disappear.” Small differences can have huge impacts. Under the 1.5-degree scenario, up to 69 million people will be newly exposed to flooding. Under the 2-degree scenario — which the report estimates would boost sea-level rise by as much as 36 inches — the number rises to 80 million. Please don't dismiss all of this as just another boring compendium of carefully hedged facts and figures. I have followed the IPCC's research since covering the first Earth Summit (http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The new report strikes a different tone that combines weary fatalism with hair-on-fire alarm. In dry, just-the-facts language, it predicts declining fisheries, failing crops, more widespread risk from tropical diseases such as malaria, economic dislocation in the most-affected countries — and, by logical extension, greater political instability. All of these impacts are bad with 1.5 more degrees of temperature rise. With 2 degrees they are much, much worse. The obvious solution is to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. The IPCC says emissions need to decline by at least 40 percent by 2030 and to reach net zero by 2050 (https://ipcc.ch/news_and_events/pr_181008_P48_spm.shtml), if we are to hold warming to 1.5 degrees. Yet last year, according to the International Energy Agency, global emissions hit an all-time high (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-carbon-iea/global-carbon-emissions-hit-record-high-in-2017-idUSKBN1GY0RB). Since 2016, representatives of 195 nations (https://www.wri.org/faqs-about-how-paris-agreement-enters-force) — including all the big emitters — signed on to the landmark Paris agreement calling for systematic emissions reductions beginning in 2020. But Trump, who has ignorantly called climate change a “hoax” (https://www.nbcnews.com/card/yes-trump-did-say-global-warming-hoax-n654866), decided to withdraw the United States from the pact. Even worse, Trump is aggressively trying to increase reliance on coal, which contributes a disproportionate amount of carbon dioxide emissions compared with other fossil fuels. U.S. carbon emissions actually fell slightly in 2017 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=36953), because of the expansion of the renewable energy sector. But Trump administration policies are designed to reverse that trend; and if they fail to do so, it will be because the rest of the world is already moving toward clean energy — a huge economic shift that threatens to leave the United States behind. When you read the IPCC report, you see that what the world really needs is visionary leadership. As the world's greatest economic power and its second-largest carbon emitter (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/31/how-us-carbon-pollution-compares-with-the-rest-of-the-world.html), the United States is uniquely capable of shepherding a global transition to renewable energy. Instead, the Trump administration rejects the science of climate change and actively favors dirty energy sources over clean ones. Humanity has no time for such foolishness. “I'm the president of the United States. I'm not the president of the globe,” Trump thundered at a recent rally (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/im-not-the-president-of-the-globe-trump-goes-it-alone-as-he-faces-world-leaders-amid-trade-war-against-china/2018/09/23/fa351e58-bda2-11e8-8792-78719177250f_story.html). On what planet does he think this nation resides? __________________________________________________________________________ • Eugene Robinson (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/eugene-robinson) writes a twice-a-week column on politics and culture for The Washington Post and hosts a weekly online chat with readers. In a three-decade career at The Post, Robinson has been city hall reporter, city editor, foreign correspondent in Buenos Aires and London, foreign editor, and assistant managing editor in charge of the paper's Style section. He started writing a column for the Op-Ed page in 2005. In 2009, he received the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for “his eloquent columns on the 2008 presidential campaign that focus on the election of the first African-American president, showcasing graceful writing and grasp of the larger historic picture.” Robinson is the author of “Disintegration: The Splintering of Black America” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0767929969) (2010), “Last Dance in Havana” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0743246225) (2004), and “Coal to Cream: A Black Man's Journey Beyond Color to an Affirmation of Race” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0684857227) (1999). He lives with his wife and two sons in Arlington. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Tom Toles: Fighting climate change is too expensive because destroying the planet is cost-free (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/10/01/fighting-climate-change-is-too-expensive-because-destroying-the-planet-is-cost-free) • Eugene Robinson: Climate change is real. Welcome to the new normal. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/climate-change-is-real-welcome-to-the-new-normal/2018/09/17/2ded61e4-bab3-11e8-a8aa-860695e7f3fc_story.html) • Brian Klaas: You can't put America first if you put climate change last (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/09/13/you-cant-put-america-first-if-you-put-climate-change-last) • Eric Holthaus: Climate change wrought this freak of nature (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-brought-florence-upon-ourselves/2018/09/12/eaf376ca-b6b2-11e8-b79f-f6e31e555258_story.html) • The Washington Post's View: We won't stop California's wildfires if we don't talk about climate change (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-wont-stop-californias-wildfires-if-we-dont-talk-about-climate-change/2018/08/08/99768218-9a80-11e8-8d5e-c6c594024954_story.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/our-planet-is-in-crisis-we-dont-have-time-for-trumps-foolishness/2018/10/08/5531ceea-cb37-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/our-planet-is-in-crisis-we-dont-have-time-for-trumps-foolishness/2018/10/08/5531ceea-cb37-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 10, 2018, 10:31:28 pm so we get a few beaches washing away thats normal best to build on rock not sand
California fires not enough rain was maybe a guy with matches but most of all bad forest management by moonbats Bad forest management to blame for forest fires California is suffering, yet again, through a horrendous summer of wildfires that are destroying forests, homes — and lives. Many in the media seem to blame the size of the fires on climate change. President Donald Trump had a different take in a recent tweet: “California wildfires are being magnified & made so much worse by the bad environmental laws ... Must also tree clear to stop fire spreading!” Trump is correct that human-caused policies may be playing a bigger role than human-caused climate change in the increasingly destructive wildfires. For decades the U.S. Forest Service allowed logging companies to enter forests and clear out dead, stressed and diseased trees and underbrush — all of which are kindling for wildfires. Between 1960 and 1990 roughly 10 billion to 12 billion board feet of timber was removed annually from national forests, according to the Forest Service. But a steady decline led to only about 2.5 billion board feet harvested in 2013, leaving forests filled with dead and diseased trees. As the Forest Service reported last December, in California “the total number of trees that have died due to drought and bark beetles” reached an historic 129 million on 8.9 million acres. The dead trees continue to pose a hazard to people and critical infrastructure ...” You can say that again! But it doesn’t have to be that way — and it wasn’t in the past. California Rep. Tom McClintock, the Republican chairman of the Subcommittee on Federal Lands, said at a committee hearing last year: “The sale of excess timber ... provided a steady stream of revenue to the treasury and thousands of jobs to support local families. We could match and maintain tree density to the ability of the land to support it.” But, he continued, “Forty-five years ago, we began imposing laws that have made the management of our forests all but impossible.” The result of those changes has been a rapid expansion, not so much in the number but the size of wildfires. The Government Accountability Office has published a chart showing the total number of national forest acreage burned between 1910 and 1997 — national forests, as opposed to state and private forests, are mostly in western states. Wildfires took between 300,000 and 400,000 acres annually between 1940 and 1985. There has been a steady increase ever since. The current California wildfires have consumed more than 1 million acres, according to the Forest Service. Why the decades of smaller fires? Better-managed forests, especially when management focused on “select cutting.” But one of the purposes of the National Forest Management Act of 1976 was to protect national forests from excessive logging. And it required forest planning based on a consensus of groups, including environmental organizations that tended to oppose the logging. In addition, the Engendered Species Act tied the hands of effective management if specific actions would have a perceived negative impact on threatened species. Such changes ultimately made forest management, in McClintock’s words, “all but impossible.” The irony is that California Gov. Jerry Brown is dedicated to reducing carbon emissions — using more renewable energy sources, imposing higher mileage standards on cars and trucks, etc. But the wildfires that have grown so extensive on his watch undermine those efforts. The earth has been on a gradual warming trend since the last ice age; there is very little humans can do about that. And many climate scientists concede that most carbon-reducing proposals would have minimal impact on rising temperatures. But there is a lot we can do about reducing the size and intensity of wildfires, which would also reduce carbon emissions. And it starts with embracing policies that were standard practice decades ago. Well-managed forests are much safer and less-costly forests. https://www.hollandsentinel.com/news/20180831/con-bad-forest-management-to-blame-for-forest-fires Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 11, 2018, 10:40:37 am Yes, we KNOW you're stupid. But do you have to keep on displaying it and digging an ever-deeper hole for yourself? People in Woodville must consider you to be their village idiot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 11, 2018, 10:40:54 am (https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/70f216dac07517315a73d2243c717cbf4cee826e/0_0_4886_3085/master/4886.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=e2d83a37783d6974e1a478474992accb) (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2018/oct/08/martin-rowson-on-the-ipcc-report-on-climate-change-cartoon) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 11, 2018, 10:48:16 am (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_999w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/10/10/Editorial-Opinion/Images/toles10-11-18.0001.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/10/10/here-are-the-four-ds-of-the-climate-apocalypse-as-we-head-down-the-fifth-the-drain) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 11, 2018, 09:40:10 pm your a stupid dumb cunt
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 12, 2018, 03:26:25 am your a stupid dumb cunt Hahaha ... an “intelligent” statement from Woodville's village idiot. How many hours did it take you to compose that reply? It must have really taxed your Trump-addled brain, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 12, 2018, 04:14:56 am you're copy & past fake news moronic commie clown troll thats too stupid to have a life Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 12, 2018, 04:23:17 am I guess you're too dumb & blind to notice the ever-increasingly-extreme weather. Not to worry, your insurance company is soon going to ramp up your premiums through the roof to cover the losses they are being forced to pay out on due to global warming and climate change. No doubt you'll whinge & squeal like a stuck pig when that happens, while remaining too thick to work out why that is happening. Oh well ... ignorance is bliss for dumbfucks, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 12, 2018, 08:29:19 am our weather is ok
its more about money a big con https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 12, 2018, 11:33:29 am Go tell that to the people in Florida who have lost everything. Mind you, they're most likely stupid Trump supporters, so it probably serves them right their houses have been destroyed. I guess they can just keep on sticking their fingers in their ears and shutting their eyes and proclaiming, “it isn't happening ... it's fake news that my house got destroyed by the weather.” Haw haw haw!!! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 12, 2018, 03:05:08 pm yes thats right its called the weather you silly bunny
funny thing its been happening for 1000s of years why dont we call it climate change hahaha ;D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYhCQv5tNsQ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 16, 2018, 11:05:36 am Yes, we KNOW you're stupid. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 16, 2018, 12:30:10 pm from The Seattle Times.... Political and corporate leaders ignore climate peril President Trump and other political and corporate leaders ignore climate peril. By DAVID HORSEY | 3:27PM EDT— Monday, October 15, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Climate-hell-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x679.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Climate-hell-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) THE United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change just issued a new report (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/un-report-on-global-warming-carries-life-or-death-warning) that says, without swift action by the world's governments, the dire effects of climate change will be coming much sooner than expected — perhaps within two decades. As he has in the past with other warnings about how the United States and the world will suffer severe consequences if no action is taken in response to rising global temperatures, President Donald Trump shrugged it off (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/shrugging-off-climate-catastrophe), accusing scientists of having a “political agenda” (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/trump-says-climate-change-not-a-hoax-not-sure-of-its-source). __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/political-and-corporate-leaders-ignore-climate-peril (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/political-and-corporate-leaders-ignore-climate-peril) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 17, 2018, 01:08:14 pm oh yeah thats it a cartoon instead of real facts
you really should find out who is making all the money from this carbon scam,follow the money... give scientist enough funding and they will say anything to make the al gore richer man made warming only in china Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 17, 2018, 02:21:57 pm You wouldn't know FACTS even if you shit them out of your arsehole. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 17, 2018, 02:47:13 pm oh thats right your the mega mind hahaha
what you doing today taken over the world yet? :D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 17, 2018, 09:42:11 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 18, 2018, 01:45:58 pm so if they nuke china and russia no more problems and new ice age
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 22, 2018, 01:14:16 pm from STUFF… Climate change hits Gardens of Eden and Allah They're magnificently-named glaciers. By WILL HARVIE | 12 NOON — Sunday, 21 October 2018 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/9/o/x/q/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x350.1s9otn.png/1539903278770.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/9/o/x/q/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x350.1s9otn.png/1539903278770.jpg) Dr. Pascal Sirguey surveying the Garden of Eden ice plateau about 50km northeast of Aoraki-Mount Cook. — Photograph: Nicolus Cullen. THE Gardens of Eden and Gardens of Allah have been measured for the first time and are retreating due to climate change. The two magnificently named South Island glaciers about 50km northeast of Aoraki-Mount Cook are so remote and hard to reach that little research on their size and behaviour has been done. But University of Otago student Angus Dowson recently finished his masters of science thesis (https://otago.ourarchive.ac.nz/handle/10523/8412) trialling new methods to measure the glaciers remotely. Using satellite imagery gathered almost every day between February 2000 and 2017, Dowson found the two related icefields followed the “broad response of glaciers in the Southern Alps to climate” — meaning they have overall retreated. Mountain glaciers provide “some of the clearest and most sensitive environmental indicators of climate change”, Dowson wrote in his thesis, because their high altitude exposes them to disturbances in regional and global temperatures. Until now, New Zealand mountain glacier research has largely been done on foot — researchers clamouring over the ice with measuring gear — and NIWA's annual snowline survey (https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/research-projects/climate-present-and-past/southern-alps-glaciers/end-of-summer-snowline-survey). Going every year since 1978, the annual end-of-summer survey uses small aircraft and and aerial photography to record the permanent snow line — the altitude at which snow remains throughout the year. This is a proxy for glacier health and whether they are gaining or losing mass. Dowson's research accomplished much the same thing, except using satellite data gathered daily. He used a technique called “albedo”, which was recently developed by Otago University academics Pascal Sirguey and Nicolas Cullen and others. Albedo measures the light reflected off glacier ice and snow and is a proxy for mass balance, Sirguey said in an interview. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/9/p/a/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x350.1s9otn.png/1539903278770.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/9/p/a/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x350.1s9otn.png/1539903278770.jpg) Photo map of the Gardens of Eden and Allah, two central South Island glaciers. The West Coast is below the bottom of the image. — Photograph: Dr. Pascal Sirguey. The method was calibrated and truthed on Brewster Glacier near Haast. Brewster is a relatively accessible glacier and researchers have clamoured and aerial photographed it for years. Sirguey, Cullen and others used satellite imagery and albedo to estimate mass and got a good match with the older data. If New Zealand's mountain glaciers substantially melted due to climate change, there would be almost no effect on sea levels. Rather, the loss of the South Island glaciers would likely impact electricity generation in the southern hydro lakes. Agriculture could also be impacted as irrigators extract water from rivers and aquifers partly charged by glacier water. The Gardens of Eden and Allah contribute to the Rangitata River on the east coast and the Wanganui and Whataroa rivers to the west. The trio of researchers clamoured these icefields earlier this year. In an interview, Dowson said he was amazed by the scale of the glaciers and their remote, wild beauty. The Garden of Eden (https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/1636) was named in 1934 by A.P. Thomson (http://nzjf.org.nz/free_issues/NZJF47_3_2002/3F0E9D5C-EFE5-45C2-9E91-8A2913B1980E.pdf), an early mountaineer who was later president of the Royal Society and head of the NZ Forest Service. The Garden of Allah (https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/1635) was officially named in 1971 in sympathy with the established theme. The new glacier measurement tool could now be applied to New Zealand's other glaciers, Dowson wrote. The data were collected by the satellite and available for analysis, while new data arrive daily. While Fox and Franz Josef glaciers are famously retreating, other New Zealand glaciers are advancing. The data are still limited, but “overall, our glaciers are experiencing retreat,” Sirguey said. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • The Gardens of Eden and Allah (https://www.matthewdickinson.com/adventures/gardens) • Thin Ice interactive on NZ glaciers (https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2018/04/thin-ice/) • Our barren Alps: Aerial survey shows snow loss ‘incredibly extreme’ (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/102181406/our-barren-alps-aerial-survey-shows-snow-loss-incredibly-extreme) • When the world's glaciers shrunk, New Zealand's grew bigger (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/89403443/when-the-worlds-glaciers-shrunk-new-zealands-grew-bigger) https://www.stuff.co.nz/science/107947499/climate-change-hits-gardens-of-eden-and-allah (https://www.stuff.co.nz/science/107947499/climate-change-hits-gardens-of-eden-and-allah) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 23, 2018, 02:30:41 pm funny they call it a garden but no trees or plants maybe some after the ice goes away and who is allah ? didnt see on the news that allah moved down south oh shit is this the forst time ever that ice has melted? thats really sad Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 23, 2018, 08:51:54 pm I've actually walked across both the Garden of Eden and the Garden of Allah ice plateaus. But I betcha you haven't ... 'cause you'd be too much of a soft-cock to venture into that sort of terrain on your own two feet. Say no more. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 23, 2018, 08:52:00 pm from The Washington Post… Listen to the eerie song of Antarctica — melting Researchers discovered a constant warble in the ice — which then faded to something like a dial tone during one of the warmest summers on record. By AVI SELK | 7:00AM EDT — Monday, October 22, 2018 (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_800w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/02/09/Editorial-Opinion/Images/AFP_K30X7.jpg) (https://img.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/02/09/Editorial-Opinion/Images/AFP_K30X7.jpg) THE ICE warbled to itself for centuries: a discordant song whose verses told the stories of cold winds and shifting snow dunes vibrating across Antarctica. It wasn't music as we think of it. Days or months might pass between each tonal shift, composed of notes so low and slow they were inaudible to human ears. But if you could lie for 1,000 years on the great Ross Ice Shelf and feel every minute shiver that passed through it — if you were snow itself — then you would know the chorus. In January 2016, the song went flat. Sped up thousands of times into the frequency range of human hearing, it sounded as though the ice's warble faded to something like a dial tone — a moaning dirge that lasted for two of the warmest weeks on record for the polar continent. A song that warned of melting snow. LISTEN (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/listen-to-an-ice-shelf-melting/2018/10/21/8c17711e-d55d-11e8-8384-bcc5492fef49_video.html). If the worst fears of climate scientists come true — if in some particularly warm month this century, the 500-mile-long Ross Ice Shelf collapses like a ruined border wall, allowing Antarctica's interior glaciers to flow past it into swelling oceans — we might see little of the calamity's beginning. When a smaller ice shelf collapsed on the other side of West Antarctica in January 2002, we were blind. “Scientists monitoring daily satellite images of the Antarctic Peninsula watched in amazement as almost the entire Larsen B Ice Shelf splintered and collapsed in just over one month,” NASA wrote in its memorial to that 10,000-year-old platform of ice (https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/WorldOfChange/LarsenB). “It collapsed between pictures of a satellite,” Julien Chaput, a geophysicist at Colorado State University, told The Washington Post. “One picture, it was there. The next, it wasn't.” But the ice shelf was sick long before its spectacular death. As Chaput explained it, the early stages of disintegration are insidious and largely invisible to satellites. Repeat heat waves cause the carpet of snow atop the ice shelf to melt and refreeze. With each refreeze, the snow gets harder. Eventually, it gets so hard that pools of water form on the snow's surface and trickle downward, carving tunnels in the snow to reach the ice beneath. The ice weakens like a rotting boat hull under the meltwater's assault. It cracks. Only near the end is the extent of the damage obvious to satellites, when the entire shelf — ice, snow and all — breaks apart and dissolves into the ocean within days. This is, to put it mildly, a lousy warning system for the end of the world as we know it. But as Chaput and his team demonstrated in a paper published by the American Geophysical Union last week (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018GL079665), a wounded ice shelf will sing about its troubles long before it shows them to us. The discovery was “a complete accident,” Chaput said. No one expected ice to sing. Several years ago, a different team of researchers installed dozens of seismic stations across the Ross Ice Shelf. Like many climate scientists, they were concerned that if the France-size plank of floating ice ever collapses — like Larsen B did in 2002 — titanic glaciers behind it would be free to escape the mainland of Antarctica, eventually raising ocean levels by several feet. “For now, the Ross Ice Shelf seems to be stable,” Chaput said. “But that could change extremely rapidly and without warning.” The seismic stations were designed to measure what the Earth's crust and mantle are doing beneath the ice — massive vibrations on the scale of earthquakes. But as Chaput reviewed the data set from late 2014 to 2017, he noticed something in the sine waves: a subtle song, vibrating through the top layers of snow. “You had these pitches, these incredibly defined tones, persistent and defined at each station,” he said. “They'd change all the time, with changes in air temperature and storm events and wind events.” Even the movement of a snow dune could alter the frequencies, Chaput said. It was as if the entire snow bed were grooved out like an old phonograph record, humming with the rustle of the atmosphere above. The notes hovered around 5 hertz, about a quarter of the lowest frequency human ears can detect. But Chaput could easily speed them up enough to hear — compressing days-long rhythms into minutes or seconds. That's how he was able to hear what happened in early 2016 — when an especially warm summer came to Antarctica and the phonograph skipped. Chaput didn't discover the great melt event of January 2016. As Chris Mooney wrote in The Washington Post, it disturbed scientists who learned of it at the time. The two-week melt left nothing so obvious as a lake on the surface of the Ross Ice Shelf. Rather, it turned a patch of snow the size of Texas wet and slushy as the air temperature rose to above freezing. Scientists detected it at first through the presence of vapor clouds above the ice shelf, Mooney wrote, then used microwave satellites to confirm the damage. But in the music of the snow, the melting was impossible to miss. At seismic stations across the ice shelf, the warbling vibrations grew quiet. Notes stretched out into a long drone at some locations, like a tornado siren going off. To Chaput, it sounded like a two-week-long groan. “It doesn't sound super happy to me," he said. The music of the ice, he explained, is made by wind passing over snow dunes and sending vibrations through trillions of compressed ice crystals in the snow bed — called a firn. “Snow is 80 percent air, with flaky bonds between crystals,” Chaput said. “As they get weaker, the velocity a wave travels gets lower, so the tones go down. It both lowers and gets quieter.” All this might simply mean that Chaput found a depressing soundtrack for the melting of an ice cap. But as described in his paper, the music also holds potential as a measurement tool — something like a sonogram for the health of snow and ice in future warming events, of which he expects many. That doesn't mean we'll like what we hear. The ancient warble of the Ross Ice Shelf returned shortly after the heat wave ended in late January, as watery snow refroze and crystals reforged their bonds. But at many of the listening stations, it no longer sounds the same. The warble now has something like a rasp. “You can see the physical impact,” said Chaput, who plans to continue to arctic studies as a faculty member at the University of Texas at El Paso. “When it gets cooled again, the firn partially heals and rebounds in some ways, but not entirely.” He doesn't know whether the Ross Ice Shelf will regain its original structure and voice, or whether it's been permanently damaged, as the Larsen B Ice Shelf must have been long before it broke apart. For now, however imperfectly, it continues to sing. __________________________________________________________________________ • Avi Selk (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/avi-selk) worked for many years in factories and service industries — experiences he values. He later graduated from the University of Texas at Austin's journalism program in 2009, then worked for the Dallas Morning News until 2016, when The Washington Post hired him. He reports for the general assignment desk. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Listen to an ice shelf melting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/listen-to-an-ice-shelf-melting/2018/10/21/8c17711e-d55d-11e8-8384-bcc5492fef49_video.html) • Scientists are slowly unlocking the secrets of the Earth's mysterious hum (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/12/08/scientists-are-slowly-unlocking-the-secrets-of-the-earths-mysterious-hum) • Scientists stunned by Antarctic rainfall and a melt area bigger than Texas (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/15/scientists-just-documented-a-massive-melt-event-on-the-surface-of-antarctica) https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/22/listen-eerie-song-antarctica-melting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/22/listen-eerie-song-antarctica-melting) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 24, 2018, 12:54:07 pm from The Washington Post… There's a perfectly rectangular iceberg floating in Antarctica. Here's how it got that way. An iceberg the size of a college campus broke off a large ice shelf fed by several glaciers in the Antarctic Peninsula. By DEANNA PAUL | 6:00AM EDT — Tuesday, October 23, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/s7JCdcJ9pFBxkIQA5zbfyXD0_8U=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WB54YSWDAYI6PGJCIFI7LSTBNA.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/s7JCdcJ9pFBxkIQA5zbfyXD0_8U=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WB54YSWDAYI6PGJCIFI7LSTBNA.jpg) A piece of Antarctic iceberg A-68, shown here in 2017, calved from the Larsen C ice shelf. On Wednesday, NASA released a photograph of it, showing it shaped in a nearly perfect rectangle. — Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images. A COLLEGE-CAMPUS-SIZE ICEBERG spotted on the Antarctic Peninsula margins is upending public expectations of classic Titanic-esque icebergs, with sharp spires jutting from the ocean surface. An aerial photo shared by NASA last Wednesday captured a rectangular slab of ice sliced so smoothly that it appears unnatural. Experts believe that the iceberg fractured from Larsen C, a large ice shelf fed by several glaciers on the east side of the peninsula, in May. They're still unsure, however, whether it will cause the rest of the shelf to destabilize. According to Christopher Shuman, a research scientist at the University of Maryland Baltimore County's Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology at NASA: “The takeaway message is that ice shelves release large icebergs from time to time. They do this naturally.” It means that the ice shelf is changing, which is not surprising given the changes they've seen nearby, he told The Washington Post. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20181023twni_TwitterNasaIce_zpshf3cguqa.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/NASA_ICE/status/1052601381712887809) Larsen A was another ice shelf farther north on the peninsula that broke up in 1995. Larsen B broke up in 2002. Larsen C itself calved an even larger iceberg in 1986, Shuman said. It was recorded at 7,300 square kilometers — larger than Maryland — until last July, when it calved an iceberg the size of Delaware, known as A-68. The rectangular iceberg, photographed as part of a topographic mapping project tracking changes in polar ice shelves called Operation Ice Bridge (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/icebridge/index.html), fractured in May, after A-68 crashed into Bawden, a rocky ice-covered island in the northwest, and created several small berg fragments. “This is not good news for the Larsen C in a general sense,” Shuman said. But the iceberg could continue to be resupplied with ice from land-based glaciers, as it was after the bigger iceberg broke up in 1986. A larger problem, Shuman said, is that the ice front is as far west as it's ever been, based on satellite imagery. “The fact that the edge is so far west is not a good sign; Larsen A and Larsen B broke up just up the peninsula,” he said. According to National Snow and Ice Data Center research scientist Twila Moon, it’s also not terribly surprising that the iceberg fractured in straight lines. That's consistent with an iceberg calved from floating ice in that region, she said. Ice is a mineral; it has a crystal-like structure and breaks the way a shard of glass would. “When a piece of glacial ice is in contact with the ocean floor, the interference at the base causes it to calve off differently, creating misshaped icebergs,” Moon explained. But when an iceberg breaks off from a shelf of floating ice, like Larsen C, there's no friction controlling how it breaks up. “That's when large tabular icebergs form,” she said, which differ in shape from bulky and pointed non-tabular icebergs. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20181023twsl_TwitterStefLhermitte_zpsmxuhzxa4.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/StefLhermitte/status/1040164447577227266) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20181023twal_TwitterAdrianLuckman_zpsmmsiyzm4.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/adrian_luckman/status/1037297348253310982) Like Moon, Shuman said the shape is not surprising, though it's unusual to see such sharp angles. “It's all about the force of the iceberg striking the ice rise. When ice is fracturing, it tends to break on the line of force,” he said. Moreover, there are other pieces nearby that are relatively rectangular. “It's a part of the life cycle for ice shelves: They push out far enough that they break off in big chunks,” he said. “We do not know yet for sure that this was climate-change-related or that we're looking at a dramatic change.” Still, Shuman added, there are other areas with very definite signs that ice fronts are retreating inland dramatically and at a full-blown pace. __________________________________________________________________________ • Deanna Paul covers national and breaking news for The Washington Post. She recently graduated with honors from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism. Before joining The Post, Paul spent six years as a New York City prosecutor. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: Listen to an ice shelf melting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/listen-to-an-ice-shelf-melting/2018/10/21/8c17711e-d55d-11e8-8384-bcc5492fef49_video.html) • Listen to the eerie song of Antarctica — melting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/22/listen-eerie-song-antarctica-melting) • Watch 10 billion tons of ice fall into the ocean (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/07/09/watch-10-billion-tons-of-ice-fall-into-the-ocean) https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/10/24/theres-perfectly-rectangular-iceberg-floating-antarctica-heres-how-it-got-that-way (https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/10/24/theres-perfectly-rectangular-iceberg-floating-antarctica-heres-how-it-got-that-way) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 01, 2018, 09:14:14 pm from The Washington Post… Startling new research finds large buildup of heat in the oceans, suggesting a faster rate of global warming The findings mean the world might have less time to curb carbon emissions. More than 90 percent of global warming ends up in the oceans. By CHRIS MOONEY and BRADY DENNIS | 2:00PM EDT — Wednesday, October 31, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_999w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/10/31/National-Economy/Images/PFXASCWRYEI6RJG3DBBRDUTRFE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2018/10/31/National-Economy/Images/PFXASCWRYEI6RJG3DBBRDUTRFE.jpg) A post-sunset swimmer at Moonlight Beach in Encinitas, California, this month. — Photograph: Mike Blake/Reuters. THE world's oceans have been soaking up far more excess heat in recent decades than scientists realized, suggesting that Earth could be set to warm even faster than predicted in the years ahead, according to new research published on Wednesday. Over the past quarter-century, Earth's oceans have retained 60 percent more heat each year than scientists previously had thought, said Laure Resplandy, a geoscientist at Princeton University who led the startling study published on Wednesday in the journal Nature (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0651-8). The difference represents an enormous amount of additional energy, originating from the sun and trapped by Earth’s atmosphere — the yearly amount representing more than eight times the world's annual energy consumption. In the scientific realm, the new findings help resolve long-running doubts about the rate of the warming of the oceans before 2007, when reliable measurements from devices called “Argo floats” (http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/How_Argo_floats.html) were put to use worldwide. Before that, differing types of temperature records — and an overall lack of them — contributed to murkiness about how quickly the oceans were heating up. The higher-than-expected amount of heat in the oceans means more heat is being retained within Earth's climate system each year, rather than escaping into space. In essence, more heat in the oceans signals that global warming is more advanced than scientists thought. “We thought that we got away with not a lot of warming in both the ocean and the atmosphere for the amount of CO² that we emitted,” said Resplandy, who published the work with experts from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and several other institutions in the United States, China, France and Germany. “But we were wrong. The planet warmed more than we thought. It was hidden from us just because we didn’t sample it right. But it was there. It was in the ocean already.” Wednesday's study also could have important policy implications. If ocean temperatures are rising more rapidly than previously calculated, that could leave nations even less time to dramatically cut the world's emissions of carbon dioxide, in the hope of limiting global warming to the ambitious goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. The world already has warmed one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) since the late 19th century. Scientists backed by the United Nations reported this month (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say) that with warming projected to steadily increase, the world faces a daunting challenge in trying to limit that warming to only another half-degree Celsius. The group found that it would take “unprecedented” action by leaders across the globe over the coming decade to even have a shot at that goal. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has continued to roll back regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions from vehicles, coal plants and other sources and has said it intends to withdraw from the Paris climate accord. In one instance, the administration relied on an assumption (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trump-administration-sees-a-7-degree-rise-in-global-temperatures-by-2100/2018/09/27/b9c6fada-bb45-11e8-bdc0-90f81cc58c5d_story.html) that the planet will warm a disastrous seven degrees Fahrenheit, or about four degrees Celsius, by the end of the century in arguing that a proposal to ease vehicle fuel-efficiency standards would have only minor climate impacts. The new research underscores the potential consequences of global inaction. Rapidly warming oceans mean that seas will rise faster and that more heat will be delivered to critical locations that already are facing the effects of a warming climate, such as coral reefs in the tropics and the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. “In case the larger estimate of ocean heat uptake turns out to be true, adaptation to — and mitigation of — our changing climate would become more urgent,” said Pieter Tans, who is the leader of the Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases Group at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and was not involved in the study. The oceans absorb more than 90 percent of the excess energy trapped within the world's atmosphere. The new research does not measure the ocean's temperature directly. Rather, it measures the volume of gases, specifically oxygen and carbon dioxide, that have escaped the ocean in recent decades and headed into the atmosphere as it heats up. The method offered scientists a reliable indicator of ocean temperature change because it reflects a fundamental behavior of a liquid when heated. “When the ocean warms, it loses some gas to the atmosphere,” Resplandy said. “That's an analogy that I make all the time: If you leave your Coke in the sun, it will lose the gas.” This approach allowed researchers to recheck the contested history of ocean temperatures in a different and novel way. In doing so, they came up with a higher number for how much warming the oceans have experienced over time. “I feel like this is a triumph of Earth-system science. That we could get confirmation from atmospheric gases of ocean heat content is extraordinary,” said Joellen Russell, a professor and oceanographer at the University of Arizona. “You've got the A team here on this paper.” But Russell said the findings are hardly as uplifting. The report “does have implications for climate sensitivity, meaning, how warm does a certain amount of CO² make us?” Russell said, adding that the world could have a smaller “carbon budget” than once thought. That budget refers to the amount of carbon dioxide humans can emit while still being able to keep warming below dangerous levels. The scientists calculated that because of the increased heat already stored in the ocean, the maximum emissions that the world can produce while still avoiding a warming of two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) would have to be reduced by 25 percent. That represents a very significant shrinkage of an already very narrow carbon “budget”. The U.N. panel of climate scientists said recently that global carbon emissions must be cut in half by 2030 if the world hopes to remain beneath 1.5 Celsius of warming. But Resplandy said that the evidence of faster-warming oceans “shifts the probability, making it harder to stay below the 1.5-degree temperature target.” Understanding what is happening with Earth's oceans is critical, because they, far more than the atmosphere, are the mirror of ongoing climate change. According to a major climate report released last year (https://science2017.globalchange.gov) by the U.S. government, the world's oceans have absorbed about 93 percent of the excess heat caused by greenhouse gases since the mid-20th century. Scientists have found that ocean heat has increased at all depths since the 1960s, while surface waters also have warmed. The federal climate report projected a global increase in average sea surface temperatures of as much as nearly five degrees Fahrenheit by 2100 if emissions continue unabated, with even higher levels of warming in some U.S. coastal regions. The world's oceans also absorb more than a quarter of the carbon dioxide emitted annually from human activities — an effect making them more acidic and threatening fragile ecosystems, federal researchers say. “The rate of acidification is unparalleled in at least the past 66 million years,” the government climate report stated. Paul Durack, a research scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, said on Wednesday's study offers “a really interesting new insight” and is “quite alarming.” The warming found in the study is “more than twice the rates of long-term warming estimates from the 1960s and '70s to the present,” Durack said, adding that if these rates are validated by further studies, “it means the rate of warming and the sensitivity of the Earth's system to greenhouse gases is at the upper end.” He said that if scientists have underestimated the amount of heat taken up by the oceans, “it will mean we need to go back to the drawing board” on the aggressiveness of mitigation actions the world needs to take promptly to limit future warming. Beyond the long-term implications of warmer oceans, Russell added that in the short term, even small changes in ocean temperatures can affect weather in specific places. For instance, scientists have said warmer oceans off the coast of New England have contributed to more-intense winter storms. “We're only just now discovering how important ocean warming is to our daily lives, to our daily weather,” she said. __________________________________________________________________________ • Chris Mooney (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/chris-mooney) writes about energy and the environment at The Washington Post. He previously worked at Mother Jones, where he wrote about science and the environment and hosted a weekly podcast. Mooney spent a decade before that as a freelance writer, podcaster and speaker, with his work appearing in Wired, Harper's, Slate, the Los Angeles Times and The Boston Globe, to name a few. He also has published four books about science, politics and climate change. • Brady Dennis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/brady-dennis) is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. He previously spent years covering the nation's economy. Dennis was a finalist for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for a series of explanatory stories about the global financial crisis. Before that, he was a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times (Florida). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: U.N. report | Temperatures to rise 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2013-2052 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/un-report-temperatures-to-rise-15-degrees-celsius-by-2030-2052/2018/10/08/9d84b920-caf9-11e8-ad0a-0e01efba3cc1_video.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/31/startling-new-research-finds-large-buildup-heat-oceans-suggesting-faster-rate-global-warming (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/31/startling-new-research-finds-large-buildup-heat-oceans-suggesting-faster-rate-global-warming) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 02, 2018, 11:52:52 am I've actually walked across both the Garden of Eden and the Garden of Allah ice plateaus. But I betcha you haven't ... 'cause you'd be too much of a soft-cock to venture into that sort of terrain on your own two feet. Say no more. the Garden of Allah hahaha "how trendy" https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=582&v=56b_rmUHUg4 you're so full of yourtself really i dont give a fuck if you walk on the moon u silly moronic commie moonbat fruitecake please hurry up and leave this planet im triggered by your insanity and i am afraid people like you could breed with bush rats and create white ferral commie spawn from the dark side ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 02, 2018, 12:25:08 pm Startling new research finds large buildup of heat in the oceans
the whole universe is warming up i do hope the world gets warmer and will be happy to grow bananas have an orange grove and my own beach right outside my backdoor what a bad luck if most of the world drowns it wont be the first time meanwhile outside of your box ;D scientist find new problems as they do as scientist need to justify their existence (https://www.sciencealert.com/images/2018-07/processed/pine-island-1_1024.jpg) Scientists Discover a Volcanic Heat Source Beneath Antarctic's Most Vulnerable Glacier DAVID NIELD 6 JUL 2018 The Pine Island Glacier is known to be the fastest-melting glacier in Antarctica, responsible for around a quarter of the continent's ice loss. According to new research though, a warming planet isn't the only reason the glacier is losing ice. Based on an analysis of the water surrounding the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which the Pine Island Glacier is part of, there's a volcanic heat source somewhere underneath – and that knowledge is going to be crucial in predicting the future of this huge expanse of ice. Before we get carried away, despite some headlines out there, this doesn't mean climate change has been replaced as the main cause of the ice melt, according to the international team of researchers. At this stage the role of the new heat source is unclear, but ice loss already triggered by rising temperatures could be exposing the glacier to more of the volcanic activity. "Climate change is causing the bulk of glacial melt that we observe, and this newly discovered source of heat is having an as-yet undetermined effect, because we do not know how this heat is distributed beneath the ice sheet," says one of the team, chemical oceanographer Brice Loose from the University of Rhode Island. "Predicting the rate of sea level rise is going to be a key role for science over the next 100 years, and we are doing that. We are monitoring and modelling these glaciers." To put it another way, context is key – the surprising discovery doesn't negate all the previous research linking climate change to glacier loss up until this point, but the volcanic heat source could help scientists better understand why the ice sheet is breaking up. Last year a chunk of ice four times the size of Manhattan broke off the Pine Island Glacier. The researchers weren't looking for volcanic heat under the ice, but did notice high concentrations of helium-3 gas in the waters of the area – a tell-tale sign of volcanic activity. Further analysis showed a particular isotope of helium associated with an active heat source. (https://www.sciencealert.com/images/2018-07/pine-island-2.jpg) "You can't directly measure normal indicators of volcanism – heat and smoke – because the volcanic rift is below many kilometres of ice," says Loose. While the West Antarctic Ice Sheet was already known to be on top of a volcanic rift system, up until now there was no evidence of any magmatic (molten rock) activity for the past two thousand years. The helium isotopes give us that. Finding an active heat source so close to the Pine Island Glacier means scientists might have to seriously rethink their calculations about how fast the sheet might melt and break up... and the kind of sea level rises we might see as a result. If the whole of Pine Island Glacier were to melt, according to researchers we could potentially be looking at around 50 centimetres (1.7 feet) of global sea level rise. Changes in the warmth of the winds and the ocean currents around Antarctica are thought to be driving the rapid ice melt, but now there's a new factor to consider – and the next challenge is to work out what additional effect this active volcanic heat source is having. As climate change weakens and melts the glacier, the pressure on the mantle will be lessened, say the researchers. That could lead to more heat escaping from the rocks below, perhaps accelerating ice loss even further. "The discovery of volcanoes beneath the Antarctic ice sheet means that there is an additional source of heat to melt the ice, lubricate its passage toward the sea, and add to the melting from warm ocean waters," says one of the researchers, Karen Heywood from the University of East Anglia in the UK. "It will be important to include this in our efforts to estimate whether the Antarctic ice sheet might become unstable and further increase sea level rise." https://www.sciencealert.com/pine-island-glacier-antarctica-has-hidden-volcano-heat-underneath Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 02, 2018, 12:48:01 pm Meanwhile, NIWA are forecasting 30+ degrees Celcius temperatures for the east coast of the North Island and much of the South Island next week and throughout the rest of November and into December. That is totally abnormal weather. Only a stupid moron would ignore those warning signs about a rapidly-warming planet and the increasingly destructive weather patterns that will bring to the entire planet. Already, sea temperatures down-under are reaching record temperatures for spring. And warm sea temperatures bring increasingly-violent tropical cyclones. No doubt, the stupid flat-earthers/climate-change deniers will continue to bury their heads in the sand, stick their fingers in their ears and screw their eyes tightly shut lest they learn something that intelligent folks worked out years ago. Unfortunately, there are too many stupid morons/deniers in this world. When it becomes so obvious that they cannot deny it any more, those fuckwits will be the ones screaming the loudest as mother earth gets ready to wipe out their grandchildren, great grandchildren and great-great grandchildren. Or perhaps those fuckwits are so selfish and self-centred that they don't give a fuck about their spawn and their spawn's later generations? That senario wouldn't surprise me at all. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 02, 2018, 07:54:09 pm abnormal according to what
because we dont have real records going back far enough we dont know what is normal logic shows us all people are bias this includes scientist if they all vote and say something is truth it only means they cant change their minds with no room left to learn what is normal or abnormal i really hope it gets much warmer its too fucken cold mother earth has been kind to me so far in the end everyone dies its ok. try not to pannic too much when your number comes up you have nothing to worry about as you dont believe in god,life after death,hell. dont you believe the science monkeys who wear white coats. good luck with that. i cant bury my head in the sand no sand here lol Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 20, 2018, 07:21:43 pm from The New York Times… ‘Like a Terror Movie’: How Climate Change Will Cause More Simultaneous Disasters By the end of this century, some parts of the world could face as many as six climate-related crises at the same time, researchers have concluded. By JOHN SCHWARTZ | Monday, November 19, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/11/20/climate/20CLI-DISASTERS-print/merlin_145393776_50443844-7d4d-4a4d-8df0-44ca6f9b6e35-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/11/20/climate/20CLI-DISASTERS-print/merlin_145393776_50443844-7d4d-4a4d-8df0-44ca6f9b6e35-superJumbo.jpg) A seaside neighborhood in Mexico Beach, Florida, devastated by Hurricane Michael this year. — Photograph: Scott Olson/Getty Images. GLOBAL WARMING is posing such wide-ranging risks to humanity, involving so many types of phenomena, that by the end of this century some parts of the world could face as many as six climate-related crises at the same time, researchers say. This chilling prospect is described in a paper published on Monday in Nature Climate Change (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0315-6), a respected academic journal, that shows the effects of climate change across a broad spectrum of problems, including heat waves, wildfires, sea level rise, hurricanes, flooding, drought and shortages of clean water. Such problems are already coming in combination, said the lead author, Camilo Mora of the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He noted that Florida had recently experienced extreme drought, record high temperatures and wildfires — and also Hurricane Michael, the powerful Category 4 storm that slammed into the Panhandle (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/10/us/hurricane-michael-intensification-strength.html) last month. Similarly, California is suffering through the worst wildfires the state has ever seen (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/09/climate/why-california-fires.html), as well as drought, extreme heat waves and degraded air quality that threatens the health of residents (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/air-quality-california.html). Things will get worse, the authors wrote. The paper projects future trends and suggests that, by 2100, unless humanity takes forceful action to curb the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change, some tropical coastal areas of the planet, like the Atlantic coast of South and Central America, could be hit by as many as six crises at a time. That prospect is “like a terror movie that is real,” Dr. Mora said. The authors include a list of caveats about the research: Since it is a review of papers, it will reflect some of the potential biases of science in this area, which include the possibility that scientists might focus on negative effects more than positive ones; there is also a margin of uncertainty involved in discerning the imprint of climate change from natural variability. New York can expect to be hit by four climate crises at a time by 2100 if carbon emissions continue at their current pace, the study says, but if emissions are cut significantly that number could be reduced to one. The troubled regions of the coastal tropics could see their number of concurrent hazards reduced from six to three. The paper explores the ways that climate change intensifies hazards and describes the interconnected nature of such crises. Greenhouse gas emissions, by warming the atmosphere, can enhance drought in places that are normally dry, “ripening conditions for wildfires and heat waves,” the researchers say. In wetter areas, a warmer atmosphere retains more moisture and strengthens downpours, while higher sea levels increase storm surge and warmer ocean waters can contribute to the overall destructiveness of storms. In a scientific world marked by specialization and siloed research, this multi-disciplinary effort by 23 authors reviewed more than 3,000 papers on various effects of climate change. The authors determined 467 ways in which those changes in climate affect human physical and mental health, food security, water availability, infrastructure and other facets of life on Earth. The paper concludes that traditional research into one element of climate change and its effects can miss the bigger picture of interrelation and risk. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/11/20/climate/20CLI-DISASTERS2/merlin_146908263_c3ea64c2-2918-4708-8931-5068a30073d4-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/11/20/climate/20CLI-DISASTERS2/merlin_146908263_c3ea64c2-2918-4708-8931-5068a30073d4-superJumbo.jpg) A search-and-rescue team looking for human remains in the aftermath of the recent Camp Fire in Paradise, California. The state is also suffering from drought, extreme heat waves and degraded air quality. — Photograph: Eric Thayer/for The New York Times. Climate change also has different ramifications for the world's haves and have-nots, the authors found: “The largest losses of human life during extreme climatic events occurred in developing nations, whereas developed nations commonly face a high economic burden of damages and requirements for adaptation.” People are not generally attuned to dealing with problems like climate change, Dr. Mora said. “We as humans don't feel the pain of people who are far away or far into the future,” he said. “We normally care about people who are close to us or that are impacting us, or things that will happen tomorrow.” And so, he said, people tend to look at events far in the future and tell themselves, “We can deal with these things later, we have more pressing problems now.” But, he added, this research “documented how bad this already is.” The paper includes an interactive map (https://maps.esri.com/MoraLab/CumulativeChange/index.html) of the various hazards under different emissions scenarios for any location in the world, produced by Esri, which develops geographic information systems. “We see that climate change is literally redrawing the lines on the map, and revealing the threats that our world faces at every level,” said Dawn Wright, the company’s chief scientist. Michael E. Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University who was not involved in the paper, said it underscored the urgency for action to curb the effects of climate change and showed that “the costs of inaction greatly outweigh the costs of taking action.” Dr. Mann published a recent paper (http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/10/eaat3272) suggesting that climate change effects on the jet stream are contributing to a range of extreme summer weather events, such as heat waves in North America, Europe and Asia, wildfires in California and flooding in Japan. The new study, he said, dovetails with that research, and “is, if anything, overly conservative” — that is, it may underestimate the threats and costs associated with human-caused climate change. A co-author of the new paper, Kerry Emanuel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, hailed its interdisciplinary approach. “There's more than one kind of risk out there,” he said, but scientists tend to focus on their area of research. “Nations, societies in general, have to deal with multiple hazards, and it's important to put the whole picture together.” Like military leaders developing the capability to fight wars on more than one front, governments have to be ready to face more than one climate crisis at a time, Dr. Emanuel said. Dr. Mora said he had considered writing a book or a movie that would reflect the frightening results of the research. His working title, which describes how dire the situation is for humanity, is unprintable here. His alternate title, he said, is “We Told You So”. __________________________________________________________________________ • John Schwartz (https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-schwartz) is a science writer for The New York Times, focusing on climate change. Writing for The N.Y. Times since 2000, John has covered law, technology, the space program, infrastructure and more. He also shows up occasionally in The New York Times Book Review, Science Times and the Arts section, and writes a humor column for the business section's mutual funds quarterly. • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Tuesday, November 20, 2018, on Page A11 of the New York print edition with the headline: “‘Like a Terror Movie’: How Changing Climate Will Multiply Disasters”. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • How Much Hotter Is Your Hometown Than When You Were Born? (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/30/climate/how-much-hotter-is-your-hometown.html) • Climate Change Is Complex. We've Got Answers to Your Questions. (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/climate/what-is-climate-change.html) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/19/climate/climate-disasters.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/19/climate/climate-disasters.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 23, 2018, 02:36:02 pm more bullshit fake news
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 23, 2018, 02:38:14 pm more bullshit fake news ...and America has a fake, bullshit President residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 29, 2018, 08:17:40 pm from The Seattle Times… Denier-in-chief digs in a little deeper President Donald Trump says he does not believe the stark predictions of a new federal climate assessment. By DAVID HORSEY | 11:13AM PDT — Tuesday, November 27, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate-report-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x690.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate-report-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) THE latest National Climate Assessment (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/national-climate-assessment-paints-grim-picture-for-northwest), a mandated report produced by scientists tasked for the job by the federal government, paints a dire picture of the myriad ways the economy and environment of the Northwest, as well as the rest of the United States, will soon be undermined by climate change. If nothing is done to mitigate the effects of global warming, Washington's fisheries and agriculture will be decimated, snowpacks — and ski areas — will grow scarce, wildfires will be even more common and Puget Sound will be more acidic. Nevertheless, the man at the top of the government is in denial. President Donald Trump, making the dubious claim that he actually looked at the report, told the White House press corps that he does not believe it (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/trump-i-dont-believe-government-climate-report-finding). This is convenient, since it relieves him of the duty of doing anything about this looming threat to the nation and our region. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/denier-in-chief-digs-in-a-little-deeper (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/denier-in-chief-digs-in-a-little-deeper) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 30, 2018, 08:55:06 am (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Snoqualmie-snowless-PRINT-COLOR-1020x703.jpg) (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/climate-change-report-a-real-bummer-for-northwest-skiers) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2018, 08:40:08 am MACRON SUBMITS TO YELLOW VEST REBELLION, CANCELS FUEL TAX HIKE INDEFINITELY
(https://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/frenchrevolution3.jpg) MACRON CARBON TAX A TOTAL FAILURE VIVA LA REVOLUTION ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2018, 10:15:12 am Do Woodville folks point at you and piss themselves laughing whenever they see you? 'cause if I lived there, that's what I'd be doing ... laughing at the village idiot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 06, 2018, 06:05:14 pm do they laugh at you when you fuck your mother
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 06, 2018, 06:37:02 pm My mother died many years ago ... IDIOT!! (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/30_Idiot.gif) (I guess that kinda PROVES you are Woodville's village idiot) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 07, 2018, 07:54:56 am people die be your turn soon
and there will be one less powerless retarded little man in the world ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2018, 02:23:32 pm from The Seattle Times… Global warming today mirrors conditions during Earth's largest extinction event: UW study If humans continue to pump greenhouse gases at our current rate, “we have no reason to think it wouldn't cause a similar type of extinction," said Curtis Deutsch, a University of Washington professor and author of the research. By EVAN BUSH | 11:00AM PDT — Thursday, December 06, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/100931-1560x1040.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/100931.jpg) A melting iceberg floats along a fjord leading away from the edge of the Greenland ice sheet near Nuuk, Greenland, in 2011. By this century's end, if emissions continue at their current pace, humans will have warmed the ocean about 20 percent, as much as during the Permian extinction event, newly published research says. — Photograph: Brennan Linsley/The Associated Press. MORE THAN two-thirds of life on earth died off some 252 million years ago, in the largest mass extinction event in Earth's history. Researchers have long suspected that volcanic eruptions triggered “the Great Dying,” as the end of the Permian geologic period is sometimes called, but exactly how so many creatures died has been something of a mystery. Now scientists at the University of Washington and Stanford believe their models reveal how so many animals were killed, and they see frightening parallels in the path our planet is on today. Models of the effects of volcanic greenhouse-gas releases showed the earth warming dramatically and oxygen disappearing from its oceans, leaving many marine animals unable to breathe, according to a study published on Thursday in the peer-reviewed journal Science (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6419/eaat1327). By the time temperatures peaked, about 80 percent of the oceans' oxygen, on average, had been depleted. Most marine animals went extinct. The researchers tested the model's results against fossil-record patterns from the time of the extinction and found they correlated closely. Although other factors, like ocean acidification, might have contributed some to the Permian extinction, warming and oxygen loss account for the pattern of the dying, according to the research. By this century's end, if emissions continue at their current pace, humans will have warmed the ocean about 20 percent as much as during the extinction event, the researchers say. By 2300, that figure could be as high as 50 percent. “The ultimate, driving change that led to the mass extinction is the same driving change that humans are doing today, which is injecting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” said Justin Penn, a UW doctoral student in oceanography and the study’s lead author. Curtis Deutsch, a UW associate professor of oceanography and an author of the research, said if society continues to pump greenhouse gases at our current rate, “we have no reason to think it wouldn't cause a similar type of extinction.” Massive eruptions The earth 252 million years ago was a much different place. The continents as we know them today were still mostly one landmass, named Pangea, which looks like a chunky letter “C” on a map. The climate, however, resembled Earth's now, and researchers believe animals would have adapted many traits, like metabolism, that were similar to creatures today. Nearly every part of the Permian Ocean, before the extinction, was filled with sea life. “Less than one percent of the Permian Ocean was a dead zone — quite similar to today's ocean,” Deutsch said. The series of volcanic events in Siberia that many scientists believe set off the mass extinction “makes super volcanoes look like the head of a pin,” said Seth Burgess, a geologist and volcanologist with the United States Geological Survey. “We're talking about enough lava erupted onto the surface and intruded into the crust to cover the area of the United States that if you looked at the U.S. from above was maybe a kilometer deep in lava,” he said. Burgess, who has researched the Siberian Traps volcanic events but did not work on the new Science paper, said scientists believe magma rising from the earth released some extinction-causing greenhouse gases. In addition, sills of magma still inside the earth heated massive deposits of coal, peat and carbonate minerals, among others, which vented even more carbon and methane into the atmosphere. “That's how you drive the Permian mass extinction, by intruding massive volumes of magma into a basin rich in carbon-bearing sediments,” he said. The UW and Stanford research “takes the next step in figuring out why things died at the end of the Permian,” Burgess said. “It couples what we think was happening in the climate with the fossil record, and it does it elegantly.” Animals couldn’t breathe It took a supercomputer more than six months to simulate all the changes the volcanic eruptions are suspected of causing during the Permian period. The computer models go into remarkable detail — simulating things like clouds, ocean currents and marine plant life — in describing what temperatures and conditions were like on Earth. The researchers knew that surface temperatures rose about 10 degrees Celsius in the tropics because of previous scientific analysis of the fossilized teeth of eel-like creatures called conodonts. To run their model, researchers pumped volcanic greenhouse gases into their simulation to match temperature conditions at the end of the Permian period. As temperatures climbed toward the 10-degree mark, the model's oceans became depleted of oxygen, a trend scientists are evaluating in today's oceans (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/01/climate-change-suffocating-low-oxygen-zones-ocean), too. To measure how rising temperatures and less oxygen would affect animal species of the Permian period, the researchers used 61 modern creatures — crustaceans, fish, shellfish, corals and sharks. The researchers believe these animals would have similar temperature and oxygen sensitivities to Permian species because the animals adapted to live in similar climates. Warming's effects were twofold on the creatures, the researchers found. In warmer waters, animals need more oxygen to perform bodily functions. But warm waters can't contain as much dissolved oxygen, which means less was available to them. In other words, as animals' bodies demanded more oxygen, the ocean's supply dropped. In their model, the researchers were able to quantify the loss of habitat as species faced increasingly challenging ocean conditions. Surface-temperature rise and oxygen loss were more substantial in areas farther from the equator. Extinction rates also increased at higher latitudes. Animals in the tropics were already accustomed to warmer temperatures and lower oxygen levels before the volcanic eruptions shifted the climate, according to the research. As the world warmed, they could move along with their habitat. Marine creatures that favored cold waters and high oxygen levels fared worse: They had nowhere to go. “The high latitudes where it's cold and oxygen is high — if you're an organism that needs those kind of conditions to survive, those conditions completely disappear from Earth,” Deutsch said. In modern oceans, warming and oxygen loss have also been more pronounced near the poles, researchers said, drawing another analogue between the shift in climate some 252 million years ago and what's happening today. “The study tells us what's at the end of the road if we let climate [change] keep going. The further we go, the more species we're likely to lose,” Deutsch said. “That's frightening. The loss of species is irreversible.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Evan Bush (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/evan-bush) is a staff reporter at The Seattle Times. Related to this topic: • More from Science: Climate change and marine mass extinction (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6419/1113) https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/global-warming-today-mirrors-conditions-during-earths-largest-extinction-event-uw-study (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/global-warming-today-mirrors-conditions-during-earths-largest-extinction-event-uw-study) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 07, 2018, 03:03:24 pm from The Washington Post… EDITORIAL: It’s time to face the inescapable truth: We're running out of time on climate change! The transition away from fossil fuels will be difficult. But it is essential for our planet's survival. By THE WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL BOARD | 7:20PM EDT — Thursday, December 06, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/9HQKHq8NpG9N15YfgRFekT2CA1E=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J2N2R6XZU4I6RDE2QYGOFKAUR4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/9HQKHq8NpG9N15YfgRFekT2CA1E=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J2N2R6XZU4I6RDE2QYGOFKAUR4.jpg) A coal-fired power plant in Germany. Global carbon emissions are estimated to rise by 2.7 percent in 2018. — Photograph: Sascha Steinbach/European Pressphoto Agency/Agencia-EFE/Shutterstock. THE WORLD is heading in the wrong direction, and it does not have much time left to change course. After several years in which global greenhouse-gas emissions leveled off, they spiked to record levels (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high) this year, according to projections a group of scientists released on Wednesday. Along with some major developing nations, emissions in the United States are projected to grow substantially. So much for all those assurances that the market would take care of the problem. The news comes just after the United Nations released a report (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say) finding that climate change will disrupt human society, kill many people and permanently reshape the Earth unless stemmed aggressively, and soon. The inescapable truth: The transition from fossil fuels is essential, it is going to be hard, and the United States must step up. Overall, global emissions are projected to rise by 2.7 percent this year, up more than a point from last year's growth rate. China's emissions are up 5 percent, and India's 6 percent. China remains the world's largest emitter. Even so, its emissions intensity — that is, how much carbon dioxide it spews into the air relative to the size of its economy — has declined substantially in recent years, and the country is still on track (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/27/countries-vowed-cut-carbon-emissions-they-arent-even-close-their-goals-un-report-finds) to meet the landmark target it set in the Paris climate agreement. India, meanwhile, has lots of poor people struggling to emerge from miserable poverty, who will naturally use more energy as they improve their standard of living. Yet that country is poised to exceed its Paris commitment (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/27/countries-vowed-cut-carbon-emissions-they-arent-even-close-their-goals-un-report-finds). The United States is not, and the country does not have the excuse that its economy is still developing. U.S. emissions are up by 2.5 percent from last year, and it is one of seven major nations lagging on their Paris goals. Canada is also behind, but Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just announced an ambitious carbon-tax plan. The European Union, too, needs to do more to meet its Paris commitment, but its emissions were down this year, and the bloc has worked hard to cut its carbon footprint. The Trump administration, on the other hand, is trying to push the United States backward. The day after the latest emissions numbers emerged, the Environmental Protection Agency announced another rollback (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/06/trump-epa-coal-rules-1047296) of a regulation on coal-fired power plants, the greatest villains in the climate change story. The reason for the United States' surge in emissions appears to have been higher energy use to heat and cool homes this year. As the world warms, people will want to use more air conditioning — producing more emissions unless the country gets its energy from low- or zero-carbon sources. This is just one of the many, many factors that make it more sensible to combat climate change before it worsens rather than waiting until it becomes an emergency. World leaders have missed their chance to avoid the warming already here and built into the system. The Trump administration would have humanity miss its window entirely. __________________________________________________________________________ • Editorials represent the views of The Washington Post as an institution, as determined through debate among members of the Editorial Board (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-posts-view). The board includes: Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/fred-hiatt); Deputy Editorial Page Editor Jackson Diehl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jackson-diehl); Deputy Editorial Page Editor Ruth Marcus (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/ruth-marcus); Associate Editorial Page Editor Jo-Ann Armao (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jo-ann-armao), who specializes in education and District affairs; Jonathan Capehart (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jonathan-capehart), who focuses on national politics; Lee Hockstader (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/lee-hockstader), who writes about immigration, and political and other issues affecting Virginia and Maryland; Charles Lane (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/charles-lane), who concentrates on economic policy, trade and globalization; Stephen Stromberg (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/stephen-stromberg), who specializes in energy, the environment, public health and other federal policy; David Hoffman (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-e-hoffman), who writes about foreign affairs and press freedom; Molly Roberts (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/molly-roberts), who focuses on technology and society; and editorial cartoonist Tom Toles (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/tom-toles). Op-ed editors Michael Larabee, Robert Gebelhoff (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/robert-gebelhoff) and Mark Lasswell; letters editor Jamie Riley; international opinions editors Elias Lopez, Karen Attiah (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/karen-attiah) and Christian Caryl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/christian-caryl); international opinions writer Jason Rezaian (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jason-rezaian); digital opinions editor James Downie (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/james-downie); operations editor Becca Clemons (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/becca-clemons); editor and writer Christine Emba (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/christine-emba); and digital producer and writer Mili Mitra also take part in board discussions. The board highlights issues it thinks are important and responds to news events, mindful of stands it has taken in previous editorials and principles that have animated Washington Post editorial boards over time. Articles in the news pages sometimes prompt ideas for editorials, but every editorial is based on original reporting. News reporters and editors never contribute to editorial board discussions, and editorial board members don't have any role in news coverage. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • ‘We are in trouble’. Global carbon emissions reached a record high in 2018. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high) • Max Boot: I was wrong on climate change. Why can't other conservatives admit it, too? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/i-was-wrong-on-climate-change-why-cant-other-conservatives-admit-it-too/2018/11/26/11d2b778-f1a1-11e8-bc79-68604ed88993_story.html) • Robert J. Samuelson: We're on mission impossible to solve global warming (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-on-mission-impossible-to-solve-global-warming/2018/10/14/518acff8-ce34-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html) • Eugene Robinson: Climate change is real. Welcome to the new normal. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/climate-change-is-real-welcome-to-the-new-normal/2018/09/17/2ded61e4-bab3-11e8-a8aa-860695e7f3fc_story.html?utm_term=.7a671bf1ae1e) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-face-the-inescapable-truth-were-running-out-of-time-on-climate-change/2018/12/06/d8452156-f99f-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-face-the-inescapable-truth-were-running-out-of-time-on-climate-change/2018/12/06/d8452156-f99f-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 09, 2018, 03:31:11 am hope the world heats up sea level rises and everyone dies hahaha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpLVRPJnL4M Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 09, 2018, 10:51:07 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 09, 2018, 10:51:38 am from The Seattle Times… Denier-in-chief digs in a little deeper President Donald Trump says he does not believe the stark predictions of a new federal climate assessment. By DAVID HORSEY | 11:13AM PDT — Tuesday, November 27, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate-report-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x690.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate-report-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) THE latest National Climate Assessment (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/national-climate-assessment-paints-grim-picture-for-northwest), a mandated report produced by scientists tasked for the job by the federal government, paints a dire picture of the myriad ways the economy and environment of the Northwest, as well as the rest of the United States, will soon be undermined by climate change. If nothing is done to mitigate the effects of global warming, Washington's fisheries and agriculture will be decimated, snowpacks — and ski areas — will grow scarce, wildfires will be even more common and Puget Sound will be more acidic. Nevertheless, the man at the top of the government is in denial. President Donald Trump, making the dubious claim that he actually looked at the report, told the White House press corps that he does not believe it (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/trump-i-dont-believe-government-climate-report-finding). This is convenient, since it relieves him of the duty of doing anything about this looming threat to the nation and our region. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/denier-in-chief-digs-in-a-little-deeper (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/denier-in-chief-digs-in-a-little-deeper) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 09, 2018, 10:51:50 am from The Seattle Times… Global warming today mirrors conditions during Earth's largest extinction event: UW study If humans continue to pump greenhouse gases at our current rate, “we have no reason to think it wouldn't cause a similar type of extinction," said Curtis Deutsch, a University of Washington professor and author of the research. By EVAN BUSH | 11:00AM PDT — Thursday, December 06, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/100931-1560x1040.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/100931.jpg) A melting iceberg floats along a fjord leading away from the edge of the Greenland ice sheet near Nuuk, Greenland, in 2011. By this century's end, if emissions continue at their current pace, humans will have warmed the ocean about 20 percent, as much as during the Permian extinction event, newly published research says. — Photograph: Brennan Linsley/The Associated Press. MORE THAN two-thirds of life on earth died off some 252 million years ago, in the largest mass extinction event in Earth's history. Researchers have long suspected that volcanic eruptions triggered “the Great Dying,” as the end of the Permian geologic period is sometimes called, but exactly how so many creatures died has been something of a mystery. Now scientists at the University of Washington and Stanford believe their models reveal how so many animals were killed, and they see frightening parallels in the path our planet is on today. Models of the effects of volcanic greenhouse-gas releases showed the earth warming dramatically and oxygen disappearing from its oceans, leaving many marine animals unable to breathe, according to a study published on Thursday in the peer-reviewed journal Science (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6419/eaat1327). By the time temperatures peaked, about 80 percent of the oceans' oxygen, on average, had been depleted. Most marine animals went extinct. The researchers tested the model's results against fossil-record patterns from the time of the extinction and found they correlated closely. Although other factors, like ocean acidification, might have contributed some to the Permian extinction, warming and oxygen loss account for the pattern of the dying, according to the research. By this century's end, if emissions continue at their current pace, humans will have warmed the ocean about 20 percent as much as during the extinction event, the researchers say. By 2300, that figure could be as high as 50 percent. “The ultimate, driving change that led to the mass extinction is the same driving change that humans are doing today, which is injecting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” said Justin Penn, a UW doctoral student in oceanography and the study’s lead author. Curtis Deutsch, a UW associate professor of oceanography and an author of the research, said if society continues to pump greenhouse gases at our current rate, “we have no reason to think it wouldn't cause a similar type of extinction.” Massive eruptions The earth 252 million years ago was a much different place. The continents as we know them today were still mostly one landmass, named Pangea, which looks like a chunky letter “C” on a map. The climate, however, resembled Earth's now, and researchers believe animals would have adapted many traits, like metabolism, that were similar to creatures today. Nearly every part of the Permian Ocean, before the extinction, was filled with sea life. “Less than one percent of the Permian Ocean was a dead zone — quite similar to today's ocean,” Deutsch said. The series of volcanic events in Siberia that many scientists believe set off the mass extinction “makes super volcanoes look like the head of a pin,” said Seth Burgess, a geologist and volcanologist with the United States Geological Survey. “We're talking about enough lava erupted onto the surface and intruded into the crust to cover the area of the United States that if you looked at the U.S. from above was maybe a kilometer deep in lava,” he said. Burgess, who has researched the Siberian Traps volcanic events but did not work on the new Science paper, said scientists believe magma rising from the earth released some extinction-causing greenhouse gases. In addition, sills of magma still inside the earth heated massive deposits of coal, peat and carbonate minerals, among others, which vented even more carbon and methane into the atmosphere. “That's how you drive the Permian mass extinction, by intruding massive volumes of magma into a basin rich in carbon-bearing sediments,” he said. The UW and Stanford research “takes the next step in figuring out why things died at the end of the Permian,” Burgess said. “It couples what we think was happening in the climate with the fossil record, and it does it elegantly.” Animals couldn’t breathe It took a supercomputer more than six months to simulate all the changes the volcanic eruptions are suspected of causing during the Permian period. The computer models go into remarkable detail — simulating things like clouds, ocean currents and marine plant life — in describing what temperatures and conditions were like on Earth. The researchers knew that surface temperatures rose about 10 degrees Celsius in the tropics because of previous scientific analysis of the fossilized teeth of eel-like creatures called conodonts. To run their model, researchers pumped volcanic greenhouse gases into their simulation to match temperature conditions at the end of the Permian period. As temperatures climbed toward the 10-degree mark, the model's oceans became depleted of oxygen, a trend scientists are evaluating in today's oceans (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/01/climate-change-suffocating-low-oxygen-zones-ocean), too. To measure how rising temperatures and less oxygen would affect animal species of the Permian period, the researchers used 61 modern creatures — crustaceans, fish, shellfish, corals and sharks. The researchers believe these animals would have similar temperature and oxygen sensitivities to Permian species because the animals adapted to live in similar climates. Warming's effects were twofold on the creatures, the researchers found. In warmer waters, animals need more oxygen to perform bodily functions. But warm waters can't contain as much dissolved oxygen, which means less was available to them. In other words, as animals' bodies demanded more oxygen, the ocean's supply dropped. In their model, the researchers were able to quantify the loss of habitat as species faced increasingly challenging ocean conditions. Surface-temperature rise and oxygen loss were more substantial in areas farther from the equator. Extinction rates also increased at higher latitudes. Animals in the tropics were already accustomed to warmer temperatures and lower oxygen levels before the volcanic eruptions shifted the climate, according to the research. As the world warmed, they could move along with their habitat. Marine creatures that favored cold waters and high oxygen levels fared worse: They had nowhere to go. “The high latitudes where it's cold and oxygen is high — if you're an organism that needs those kind of conditions to survive, those conditions completely disappear from Earth,” Deutsch said. In modern oceans, warming and oxygen loss have also been more pronounced near the poles, researchers said, drawing another analogue between the shift in climate some 252 million years ago and what's happening today. “The study tells us what's at the end of the road if we let climate [change] keep going. The further we go, the more species we're likely to lose,” Deutsch said. “That's frightening. The loss of species is irreversible.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Evan Bush (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/evan-bush) is a staff reporter at The Seattle Times. Related to this topic: • More from Science: Climate change and marine mass extinction (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6419/1113) https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/global-warming-today-mirrors-conditions-during-earths-largest-extinction-event-uw-study (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/global-warming-today-mirrors-conditions-during-earths-largest-extinction-event-uw-study) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 09, 2018, 10:52:08 am from The Washington Post… EDITORIAL: It’s time to face the inescapable truth: We're running out of time on climate change! The transition away from fossil fuels will be difficult. But it is essential for our planet's survival. By THE WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL BOARD | 7:20PM EDT — Thursday, December 06, 2018 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/9HQKHq8NpG9N15YfgRFekT2CA1E=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J2N2R6XZU4I6RDE2QYGOFKAUR4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/9HQKHq8NpG9N15YfgRFekT2CA1E=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J2N2R6XZU4I6RDE2QYGOFKAUR4.jpg) A coal-fired power plant in Germany. Global carbon emissions are estimated to rise by 2.7 percent in 2018. — Photograph: Sascha Steinbach/European Pressphoto Agency/Agencia-EFE/Shutterstock. THE WORLD is heading in the wrong direction, and it does not have much time left to change course. After several years in which global greenhouse-gas emissions leveled off, they spiked to record levels (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high) this year, according to projections a group of scientists released on Wednesday. Along with some major developing nations, emissions in the United States are projected to grow substantially. So much for all those assurances that the market would take care of the problem. The news comes just after the United Nations released a report (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say) finding that climate change will disrupt human society, kill many people and permanently reshape the Earth unless stemmed aggressively, and soon. The inescapable truth: The transition from fossil fuels is essential, it is going to be hard, and the United States must step up. Overall, global emissions are projected to rise by 2.7 percent this year, up more than a point from last year's growth rate. China's emissions are up 5 percent, and India's 6 percent. China remains the world's largest emitter. Even so, its emissions intensity — that is, how much carbon dioxide it spews into the air relative to the size of its economy — has declined substantially in recent years, and the country is still on track (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/27/countries-vowed-cut-carbon-emissions-they-arent-even-close-their-goals-un-report-finds) to meet the landmark target it set in the Paris climate agreement. India, meanwhile, has lots of poor people struggling to emerge from miserable poverty, who will naturally use more energy as they improve their standard of living. Yet that country is poised to exceed its Paris commitment (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/27/countries-vowed-cut-carbon-emissions-they-arent-even-close-their-goals-un-report-finds). The United States is not, and the country does not have the excuse that its economy is still developing. U.S. emissions are up by 2.5 percent from last year, and it is one of seven major nations lagging on their Paris goals. Canada is also behind, but Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just announced an ambitious carbon-tax plan. The European Union, too, needs to do more to meet its Paris commitment, but its emissions were down this year, and the bloc has worked hard to cut its carbon footprint. The Trump administration, on the other hand, is trying to push the United States backward. The day after the latest emissions numbers emerged, the Environmental Protection Agency announced another rollback (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/06/trump-epa-coal-rules-1047296) of a regulation on coal-fired power plants, the greatest villains in the climate change story. The reason for the United States' surge in emissions appears to have been higher energy use to heat and cool homes this year. As the world warms, people will want to use more air conditioning — producing more emissions unless the country gets its energy from low- or zero-carbon sources. This is just one of the many, many factors that make it more sensible to combat climate change before it worsens rather than waiting until it becomes an emergency. World leaders have missed their chance to avoid the warming already here and built into the system. The Trump administration would have humanity miss its window entirely. __________________________________________________________________________ • Editorials represent the views of The Washington Post as an institution, as determined through debate among members of the Editorial Board (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-posts-view). The board includes: Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/fred-hiatt); Deputy Editorial Page Editor Jackson Diehl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jackson-diehl); Deputy Editorial Page Editor Ruth Marcus (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/ruth-marcus); Associate Editorial Page Editor Jo-Ann Armao (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jo-ann-armao), who specializes in education and District affairs; Jonathan Capehart (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jonathan-capehart), who focuses on national politics; Lee Hockstader (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/lee-hockstader), who writes about immigration, and political and other issues affecting Virginia and Maryland; Charles Lane (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/charles-lane), who concentrates on economic policy, trade and globalization; Stephen Stromberg (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/stephen-stromberg), who specializes in energy, the environment, public health and other federal policy; David Hoffman (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-e-hoffman), who writes about foreign affairs and press freedom; Molly Roberts (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/molly-roberts), who focuses on technology and society; and editorial cartoonist Tom Toles (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/tom-toles). Op-ed editors Michael Larabee, Robert Gebelhoff (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/robert-gebelhoff) and Mark Lasswell; letters editor Jamie Riley; international opinions editors Elias Lopez, Karen Attiah (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/karen-attiah) and Christian Caryl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/christian-caryl); international opinions writer Jason Rezaian (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jason-rezaian); digital opinions editor James Downie (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/james-downie); operations editor Becca Clemons (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/becca-clemons); editor and writer Christine Emba (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/christine-emba); and digital producer and writer Mili Mitra also take part in board discussions. The board highlights issues it thinks are important and responds to news events, mindful of stands it has taken in previous editorials and principles that have animated Washington Post editorial boards over time. Articles in the news pages sometimes prompt ideas for editorials, but every editorial is based on original reporting. News reporters and editors never contribute to editorial board discussions, and editorial board members don't have any role in news coverage. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • ‘We are in trouble’. Global carbon emissions reached a record high in 2018. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high) • Max Boot: I was wrong on climate change. Why can't other conservatives admit it, too? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/i-was-wrong-on-climate-change-why-cant-other-conservatives-admit-it-too/2018/11/26/11d2b778-f1a1-11e8-bc79-68604ed88993_story.html) • Robert J. Samuelson: We're on mission impossible to solve global warming (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-on-mission-impossible-to-solve-global-warming/2018/10/14/518acff8-ce34-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html) • Eugene Robinson: Climate change is real. Welcome to the new normal. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/climate-change-is-real-welcome-to-the-new-normal/2018/09/17/2ded61e4-bab3-11e8-a8aa-860695e7f3fc_story.html?utm_term=.7a671bf1ae1e) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-face-the-inescapable-truth-were-running-out-of-time-on-climate-change/2018/12/06/d8452156-f99f-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-face-the-inescapable-truth-were-running-out-of-time-on-climate-change/2018/12/06/d8452156-f99f-11e8-863c-9e2f864d47e7_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 10, 2018, 02:48:52 am more fake spammer scaremongering porn
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 10, 2018, 06:24:27 am Fuck, your ears must be permanently full-of-sand from continually burying your head into the sand while wondering while your arse is getting hot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 11, 2018, 12:01:53 pm really i am sure your head is stuck right up your arse
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 13, 2018, 11:44:26 am from The Seattle Times… Unlike prehistoric creatures, we've been warned about climate catastrophe After modeling what seems to have happened to the environment prior to a mass extinction 252 million years ago, scientists at the University of Washington are warning that we all could be heading toward another huge annihilation if humans continue to pump CO² into the atmosphere. By DAVID HORSEY | 12:23PM PST — Wednesday, December 12, 2018 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Extinction-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x674.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Extinction-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) IT'S worth remembering that fossil fuels are exactly that: black gunk made up from the remains of dead dinosaurs. All those old raptors and giant plant eaters met their end in a global calamity of one kind or another, but, long before the dinosaurs had their long day in the sun, there were earlier species roaming the land and swimming in the sea during the Permian geologic period. That era came to a dramatic end as massive volcanic activity filled Earth's atmosphere with carbon dioxide. The resulting mass extinction eliminated two-thirds of the planet's life forms. Now, after modeling what seems to have happened to the environment prior to that extinction 252 million years ago, scientists at the University of Washington are warning that we all could be heading toward another huge annihilation if humans continue to pump CO² into the atmosphere. In an interview with The Seattle Times, Curtis Deutsch, a UW associate professor of oceanography and an author of the research, said (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/global-warming-today-mirrors-conditions-during-earths-largest-extinction-event-uw-study), “The study tells us what's at the end of the road if we let climate [change] keep going. The further we go, the more species we're likely to lose. That's frightening. The loss of species is irreversible.” One of those species could well be homo sapiens. That's not a happy thought, but, on the plus side, our remains might turn out to be a useful fuel for some future advanced animals who need to get somewhere in a hurry. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/unlike-prehistoric-creatures-weve-been-warned-about-climate-catastrophe (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/unlike-prehistoric-creatures-weve-been-warned-about-climate-catastrophe) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 13, 2018, 03:53:48 pm Bullshit
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 20, 2018, 06:49:15 am (https://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/science-squared-dt-600.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 23, 2018, 02:52:44 pm You've been listening to that lunatic Alex Jones for too long. He has “FUCKED” your brain. No wonder you think that god delusion inside your mind is a real god. If I lived in Woodville, I would stand outside your house every day pointing in your direction and rolling around the ground pissing myself laughing. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 27, 2018, 08:00:16 pm from The New York Times… EDITORIAL: Trump Imperils the Planet Endangered species, climate change — the administration is taking the country, and the world, backward. By THE NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD | Wednesday, December 26, 2018 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/12/24/opinion/editorials/26enviro/26enviro-master768.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/12/24/opinion/editorials/26enviro/26enviro-superJumbo.jpg) Illustration: Enzo Pérès-Labourdette. IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE but it was only three years ago this month — just after 7 p.m., Paris time, December 12, to be precise — that delegates from more than 190 nations, clapping and cheering, whooping and weeping, rose to celebrate the Paris Agreement (https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement) — the first genuinely collective response to the mounting threat of global warming. It was a largely aspirational document, without strong legal teeth and achieved only after contentious and exhausting negotiations. But for the first time in climate talks stretching back to 1992, it set forth specific, numerical pledges from each country to reduce emissions so that together they could keep atmospheric temperatures from barreling past a point of no return. Two weeks ago, delegates met at a follow-up conference (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/climate/cop24-katowice-climate-summit.html) in Katowice, Poland, to address procedural questions left unsettled in Paris, including common accounting mechanisms and greater transparency in how countries report their emissions. In this the delegates largely succeeded, giving rise to the hope, as Brad Plumer put it in The New York Times, that “new rules would help build a virtuous cycle of trust and cooperation among countries, at a time when global politics seems increasingly fractured.” But otherwise it was a hugely dispiriting event and a fitting coda to one of the most discouraging years (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/12/climate/year-in-climate-change.html) in recent memory for anyone who cares about the health of the planet — a year marked by President Trump's destructive, retrograde policies (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/26/us/politics/donald-trump-environmental-regulation.html), by backsliding among big nations, by fresh data showing that carbon dioxide emissions are still going up, by ever more ominous signs (devastating wildfires and floods, frightening scientific reports (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-climate-report-2040.html)) of what a future of unchecked greenhouse gas emissions is likely to bring. The conference itself showcased the very fossil fuels (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/reader-center/katowice-climate-talks.html) that scientists and most sentient people agree the world must rapidly wean itself from. Poland's president, Andrzej Duda (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/world/europe/poland-coal-un.html), set the tone by declaring he had no intention of abandoning coal, which provides nearly four-fifths of Poland's electricity. The United States and three other major oil producers — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Russia — refused to endorse an alarming report (https://www.ipcc.ch/2018/10/08/summary-for-policymakers-of-ipcc-special-report-on-global-warming-of-1-5c-approved-by-governments) issued in October by the United Nations scientific panel on climate change calling for swift reductions in fossil fuel use by 2030 to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, which it said were approaching much faster than anyone had thought. Wells Griffith, Mr. Trump's international energy and climate adviser, managed in one quote to summarize the dismissiveness of the American delegation and its fealty to the president's apparently unshakable conviction that anything that helps the environment must inevitably hurt the economy. “The United States has an abundance of natural resources and is not going to keep them in the ground,” he said (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/climate/katowice-climate-talks-cop24.html). “We strongly believe that no country should have to sacrifice their economic prosperity or energy security in pursuit of environmental sustainability.” The administration is full of zero-sum philosophers like Mr. Griffith. The idea that sustainability may be a necessary condition of future economic growth appears never to have crossed their minds. Further depressing the proceedings were recent defections and political troubles in countries that, along with the United States, had been expected to lead the way to a low-carbon energy future. Germany, which long ago walked away from carbon-free nuclear power, is having a hard time cutting back on coal (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/10/world/europe/germany-coal-climate.html) because of political opposition. In Australia, a prime minister was kicked out of office (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/24/climate/australia-climate-change.html) because he wanted to reduce the use of coal, which Australia produces in abundance. China, despite admirably aggressive investments in wind and solar power, has yet to get a firm grip on its emissions from coal-fired plants (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/24/climate/coal-global-warming.html). The new president-elect of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, not only named an outspoken climate-change denier (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/28/world/americas/brazil-climate-meeting.html) as his foreign minister but also, reversing his predecessors' policy, pledged to open up the Amazon (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/climate/brazil-election-amazon-environment.html) to mining and farming. This will threaten biodiversity in one of the world's great rain forests while crippling its ability to act as a sink for carbon emissions. No country's backsliding, of course, compares with Mr. Trump's. Determined to demolish President Barack Obama's entire climate strategy, Mr. Trump has in the past year (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/12/climate/year-in-climate-change.html) replaced Mr. Obama's clean-power plan, which was aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, with an essentially useless substitute that would emit 12 times the pollution envisaged by the Obama plan. He has proposed weakening a major Obama regulation (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/business/trump-auto-industry-emissions-rules.html) requiring automakers to nearly double the fuel economy of passenger vehicles by 2025. (This rollback, The New York Times reported this month (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/climate/cafe-emissions-rollback-oil-industry.html), came after a lot of whining by oil interests, not, as one might suspect, from the auto companies, which had accepted the challenge.) And the Environmental Protection Agency and the Interior Department have taken multiple steps to roll back Obama-era efforts to control emissions of methane (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/climate/trump-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html), a greenhouse gas many times more powerful than carbon dioxide. These three programs formed the basis of Mr. Obama's pledge at the 2015 Paris meeting (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/us/politics/obama-takes-second-term-resolve-on-climate-to-paris.html) to reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The health and environmental effects of the Trump rollbacks (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump-environment-rules-reversed.html), as documented by a New York Times investigation (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/26/us/politics/donald-trump-environmental-regulation.html) published this week, are far-reaching and potentially devastating. This holiday season has brought more gifts to fossil fuel interests; every day is Christmas Day for the likes of Murray Energy (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/09/climate/document-Murray-Energy-Action-Plan.html) and Exxon (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/climate/exxon-lawsuit-climate-change.html) Mobil. This month, the E.P.A. proposed killing an Obama rule that would effectively block the construction of new coal-fired power plants (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/climate/epa-coal-carbon-capture.html). The Interior Department relaxed restrictions on oil and gas drilling in areas inhabited by the sage grouse (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/climate/trump-sage-grouse-oil.html), a threatened bird. Also in December, the department released an environmental-impact statement that would open all or part of the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/climate/alaska-anwr-oil-drilling-proposal.html) to leasing and exploration. The area had been off limits to drilling for decades until Congress, late last year, approved an amendment (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/climate/arctic-drilling.html) sponsored by Senator Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, to open it up. All this is fundamentally Mr. Trump's doing. A series of early executive orders established the pro-fossil fuel policy framework; Scott Pruitt, the E.P.A. administrator, and Ryan Zinke, the interior secretary, filled in the details. Mr. Pruitt has left Washington and Mr. Zinke is in his final days, both finishing under ethical clouds. They will deserve, along with Mr. Trump, history's censure for doing virtually nothing to move to a more responsible energy future — and for not doing so at just the moment when the world needed the kind of leadership that Mr. Obama and his secretary of state, John Kerry (and Bill Clinton and Al Gore before them), tried to provide. The numbers are not great. The goal in Paris (https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreement) was to keep warming from exceeding 2 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels, and if possible to hold the line at 1.5 degrees, thresholds that scientists deemed unacceptably risky. Delegates knew that even if every country managed to fulfill its individual pledges, the world would be on pace for 3 degrees of warming in this century. So they agreed to tighten the targets as time went on, but instead they've slid backward. Many large emitters are not on track to meet their self-imposed goals. That includes America, despite the retirement of many coal-fired plants in favor of cleaner natural gas, the increasing cost competitiveness of renewable fuels like wind and solar power, and the valiant efforts of states like California (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/27/climate/california-climate-change.html) to sharply reduce their own emissions and lead where Mr. Trump will not. The bottom line, according to the Global Carbon Project, is that after three years in which emissions remained largely flat, global levels of carbon dioxide (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/climate/greenhouse-gas-emissions-2018.html) increased by 1.6 percent in 2017 and are on pace to jump by 2.7 percent this year. Some scientists have likened the increase in emissions to a “speeding freight train” (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07586-5). That has a lot to do with economic growth. It also has a lot to do with not moving much faster to less carbon-intensive ways of powering that growth. Or in Mr. Trump's case, moving in the opposite direction. __________________________________________________________________________ • The editorial board represents the opinions of the board, its editor and the publisher. It is separate from the newsroom and the Op-Ed section.. • A version of this editorial appears in The New York Times on Thursday, December 27, 2018, on Page A18 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Trump Imperils the Planet With His Stupidity”. __________________________________________________________________________ Recent New York Times editorials on climate change: • Best Way to Fight Climate Change? Put an Honest Price on Carbon. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/opinion/climate-change-carbon-price.html) • Wake Up, World Leaders. The Alarm Is Deafening. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/opinion/climate-change-ipcc-report.html) • Where There’s Fire, Trump Blows Smoke (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/08/opinion/environment/california-wildfires-trump-zinke-climate-change.html) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/opinion/editorials/climate-change-environment-trump.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/opinion/editorials/climate-change-environment-trump.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 30, 2018, 04:00:54 pm more funny shit fake news
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 30, 2018, 04:03:54 pm You've been listening to that lunatic Alex Jones for too long. He has “FUCKED” your brain. No wonder you think that god delusion inside your mind is a real god. If I lived in Woodville, I would stand outside your house every day pointing in your direction and rolling around the ground pissing myself laughing. Come and stand outside my house even knock on my door and see what happens next ;D Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 12, 2019, 02:45:36 pm from The Washington Post… The oceans are warming faster than we thought, and scientists suggest we brace for impact 2018 was the warmest year on record in the oceans, the third in a row. By ANGELA FRITZ | 5:25PM EST — Friday, January 11, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_999w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/01/11/Local/Images/2UN76WAV5UI6TK3ZGDGU66JG6I.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/01/11/Local/Images/2UN76WAV5UI6TK3ZGDGU66JG6I.jpg) The planet's oceans are actually warming 40 to 50 percent faster than the most recent report from IPCC has predicted. — Photograph: iStock. THE OCEANS are warming faster than climate reports have suggested, according to a new synthesis of temperature observations published this week. The most recent report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made what turned out to be a very conservative estimate of rise in ocean temperature, and scientists are advising us to adjust our expectations. “The numbers are coming in 40 to 50 percent [warmer] than the last IPCC report,” said Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and an author on the report, published in Science Magazine on Thursday (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6423/128). Furthermore, Trenberth said, “2018 will be the warmest year on record in the oceans” as 2017 was and 2016 before that. Oceans cover 70 percent of the globe and absorb 93 percent of the planet's extra heat from climate change. They are responsible for spawning disasters like hurricanes Florence and Maria and generating torrential rainfall via meteorological processes with names like “atmospheric river” and “Pineapple Express”. Sea level is rising with observable consequences along the East Coast and around the world, both physically and financially (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/09/20/antarctica-warming-could-fuel-disastrous-sea-level-rise-study-finds). Trenberth and his colleagues say if society continues to emit greenhouse gas at its current rate, oceans will rise one foot by the end of the century on top of the rise expected from melting land ice on Greenland and Antarctica (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/09/20/antarctica-warming-could-fuel-disastrous-sea-level-rise-study-finds). Scientists have started to pin down how climate change is loading the dice on extreme weather. After Hurricane Harvey, researchers found the storm's deadly and costly effects were probably made worse by warmer oceans. And, as The Washington Post reported in December (https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/12/10/climate-change-was-behind-weather-disasters), “a drought in East Africa that left 6 million people in Somalia facing food shortages was caused by dramatic ocean warming that could not have occurred without humans' impact on the environment.” After several studies published over the past couple of years, some of which included errors that needed to be corrected and published for the record, “we felt the need to do a more general assessment,” said Trenberth. The scientists combined four data sets to paint a picture of what has been happening in the oceans since 1991. Trenberth and his co-authors say ocean heat content, which is a measure of the warmth of the water down to about 2,000 meters, is a “great metric for measuring global warming” because the data isn’t as erratic as the temperature on land, and it captures much more of the planet. In the process, they discovered something interesting: Their data agrees with what the climate models were predicting. “Oh, maybe the models have more credibility than we thought,” Trenberth said, tongue firmly in cheek. As the planet warms, models have proven an invaluable tool. It's not enough to say the climate is changing — scientists want to know how it is going to change in the future. Yet these models are one of the preferred targets of climate change skeptics (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/09/21/scientists-go-after-the-media-for-highlighting-a-study-showing-ipcc-climate-models-were-wrong). They appeared to miss the so-called global warming hiatus between 1998 and 2013. At the time, scientists posited (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/there-no-global-warming-hiatus-after-all-180955501) there wasn't really a hiatus, but that the heat was simply building up in the oceans, or that there was a data collection issue. They were right, but that didn't save the models from criticism. This synthesis suggests the models are doing just fine. In fact, in the oceans, they are performing even better than expected, and have marched in lockstep with the extreme ocean heating observed by thousands of temperature-collecting floats all over the world. If climate models have actually performed well in the past, it gives scientists more confidence in their predictions for the future. Trenberth said their comparatively concise article published on Thursday “highlights some of the developments that have occurred since the last IPCC report,” which came out in 2014. The previous one came out in 2007. Articles like the one in Science are helpful to remind people of the advances that happen in science between the big, sweeping reports, said Tom Di Liberto, a climatologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The IPCC reports have research deadlines at least a year before they are published; science in the most recent report may have been done six to eight years ago and “there's a whole lot of stuff that has happened since then,” Di Liberto said. “It speaks to the broader issue of science communication,” he continued. “Science works slower than the way we communicate now.” Looking forward, there are two scenarios scientists are working with. The low-emissions scenario that the Paris climate change agreement was built around is no longer realistic, Trenberth said. The high-emissions, business-as-usual scenario will probably continue until about 2040, in his opinion, but eventually society will figure out how to manage the crisis. “Yes, we need to try and stop emitting greenhouse gas. But the inertia is large,” Trenberth said. “Therefore the climate is going to continue to change.” He believes adaptation is the way forward, rather than geo-engineering, which is “not thought out well at all and problematic.” Di Liberto agrees that we're already feeling the effects, but he sees things changing in society, too. “We've spent too much time and effort on people who may not be convinced” that climate change is real and important, he said. “But now there seems to be this grass-roots movement of young people who care. I don't remember a time like this.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Angela Fritz (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/angela-fritz) is an atmospheric scientist who knew from a young age that weather was her true calling. After receiving a Batchelor of Science in meteorology from Valparaiso University and a Master of Science in earth and atmospheric science from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Fritz worked as a meteorologist at CNN in Atlanta and Weather Underground in San Francisco. She is The Washington Post's deputy weather editor. https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/01/11/oceans-are-warming-faster-than-we-thought-scientists-suggest-we-brace-impact (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/01/11/oceans-are-warming-faster-than-we-thought-scientists-suggest-we-brace-impact) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on January 22, 2019, 04:13:02 pm Still mindlessly spamming like a butthead I see! 😁
This strongly suggests you have no understanding of the subject at all beyond mindlessly believing what the loony left media feeds to you. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 22, 2019, 10:08:23 pm You strongly suggest to the world that your head is buried in the sand so you can remain pig-ignorant. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 31, 2019, 07:14:18 pm the US is suffering from global freezing lol
people warned against taking a deep breath or their lungs could get damaged by cold air that is sixty below 0 yes global warming is a crock of shit Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 31, 2019, 08:10:47 pm Do you know what global warming causes? Extremes of weather ... both extreme hot and extreme cold. The current extreme polar vortex hitting the USA was predicted by REAL scientists who know their stuff about human-induced global warming and the weather extremes it brings. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 04, 2019, 04:24:44 pm both extremely hot and extremely cold have been happening for millions of years you and the numb-skulls who call themselves scientist are out of your minds It's all about the sun u silly bunny ;D (https://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/a-cold-aoc-600-li.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 07, 2019, 01:50:29 pm The perpetually-stupid, shit-for-brains moron says… (https://assets.amuniversal.com/486a4fb006f101377d78005056a9545d) (https://www.gocomics.com/stuartcarlson/2019/01/30) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 07, 2019, 08:01:21 pm Yes, you are shit 4 brains you think 60 Below Zero is Global Warming
these people have lived there and know socialism sucks https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=234&v=CJhRMEW-5ws Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on February 11, 2019, 05:40:30 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dy2GcgEUYAEgScT.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1093678368766144513) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on February 12, 2019, 12:38:15 am needs to be hotter i was cold today
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 05, 2019, 03:30:45 pm Fuck ... you're as dumb as dogshit. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 05, 2019, 03:32:14 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 05, 2019, 03:32:31 pm from The Seattle Times… Climate denier Trump can't handle the truth about why Central Americans flock to U.S. By WILL BUNCH | 3:30AM PDT — Friday, May 03, 2019 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/201904261043MCT_____PHOTO____US-NEWS-TRUMP-11-ABA-780x506.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/201904261043MCT_____PHOTO____US-NEWS-TRUMP-11-ABA.jpg) President Donald J. Trump walks on the South Lawn while departing the White House on April 26. LET'S STIPULATE RIGHT HERE that President Donald Trump doesn't understand a lot of things, even as he enters his 28th month in charge of the massive bureaucratic battleship that is the U.S. government. But no issue has flummoxed our rage-prone 45th president more than the rise in unauthorized crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border — even after promising his xenophobic base that his harsh immigration crackdown would make America great again. When numbers came into the White House showing this decade's biggest surge in refugees at the border — with Border Patrol agents detaining as many as 4,000 migrants, many of them women and children, in a single day — Trump reportedly went ballistic. The commander-in-chief sought even harsher family separation policies, even after the first wave of ripping toddlers and even infants from their mommies and daddies, in 2018, had shocked consciences around the globe. He threatened to completely shut down the border with Mexico, which would have crippled commerce and maybe triggered a recession. A senior aide told CNN's Jake Tapper that the president was “increasingly unhinged” about border crossings, even as he furiously tweeted out more fear. To Trump, immigrants are cheaters, frauds or out-and-out criminals, trying to take advantage of us. But Donald Trump can't handle the truth. Because to do that, the Trump administration would have to do something alien to every xenophobic bone in its body: embrace science. The president would have to start accepting that climate change is real, that it's occurring right now, and that responses like mass migration are an unavoidably human reaction to drought, floods and misery. Experts (admittedly, non-persons in Trumpland) believe that a sizable portion of the recent steep increase in migrants from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are doing so because record drought in the region — the result of a warming planet — has destroyed crops and left destitute farmers desperate to save their families. Simply put, images of armed U.S. officers seizing kids at the border still won't deter parents who see the only alternative as famine and crushing poverty. “People have been displaced by climate for millennia, but we are now at a particular historical moment, facing a new type of environmentally driven migration that will be more fast and furious,” Maria Cristina Garcia, a Cornell University professor publishing a book on climate-driven migration, said recently. (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/op-ed-trump-immigration-002tsr-780x530.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/op-ed-trump-immigration-002tsr.jpg) Conor Walsh, who works for Catholic Family Services in Honduras, wrote recently in the Arizona Daily Star that severe drought in neighboring Guatemala in 2018 resulted in significant crop loss for as many as 300,000 subsistence farmers there. Indeed, the cycle of arid days without rain and severe floods has become so pronounced in the key growing regions of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras during the 2010s that the area is now called “the dry corridor.” Experts note that the last big drought in 2014 matched up with the last big surge in U.S. border crossings. And the World Bank says climate change may cause as many as 1.4 million people to leave Central America and Mexico over the next 30 years. Imagine a world where, instead of yelling at Cabinet members to lock up more kids in cages, the president sat at the Resolute Desk and listened to the story of Fredi Onan Vicen Pena, a 41-year-old Honduran coffee farmer who told The New York Times he has seen a drought-fueled disease called coffee rust destroy 70 percent of his crop, while most of his family members have already left for the U.S. or elsewhere. That world, sadly, does not exist. Can the United States do anything to help the struggling farmers of Honduras and Guatemala? The answer is “yes.” Sebastian Charchalac, a Guatemalan agronomist who was running a program with about $200,000 in U.S. aid, told the New Yorker he was seeing real success in helping farmers diversify crops, conserve water and, as a result, save their land. Then in 2017 the Trump administration killed the program. Indeed, one element of Trump's rage-frenzied rampage over border crossings has been an announcement that the U.S. will end all foreign aid to the three key Central American nations — about $350 million to $400 million a year as a spiteful punishment for the supposed failure to curb migration. That money goes not just for farm aid but also for programs that attack problems like urban gang violence — i.e., all of the horrible things that would cause people to abandon their native countries, undertake an arduous and dangerous long journey, and seek freedom in the United States. Meanwhile, climate-change-driven migration — and the famines, wars and other crises created by this — are only going to get worse. In January, the Pentagon warned yet again that climate change is a major national security issue for this country. But Trump, who won the presidency insisting he knows more than the generals, didn't listen. He definitely won't listen to the scientists, either. The president only listens to the narcissistic rantings of his damaged psyche — and that is creating a human-rights crisis on this continent. __________________________________________________________________________ • Story updated at 3:37PM PDT — Friday, May 03, 2019. • Will Bunch (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/will-bunch) is an opinion columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer and a syndicated columnist for many newspapers including The Seattle Times. https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/climate-denier-trump-cant-handle-the-truth-about-why-central-americans-flock-to-u-s/ (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/climate-denier-trump-cant-handle-the-truth-about-why-central-americans-flock-to-u-s) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 06, 2019, 06:14:36 am funnest fake news ever(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/17_Clapping.gif)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYUyCU7qKgY Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 07, 2019, 08:47:02 pm from The New York Times… Humans Are Speeding Extinction and Altering the Natural World at an ‘Unprecedented’ Pace A dire United Nations report, based on thousands of scientific studies, paints an urgent picture of biodiversity loss and finds that climate change is amplifying the danger to humanity. By BRAD PLUMER | Monday, May 06, 2019 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY1/merlin_149013252_f06a206f-03bd-4ee9-bea7-639ab7a710d8-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY1/merlin_149013252_f06a206f-03bd-4ee9-bea7-639ab7a710d8-superJumbo.jpg) Fishing nets and ropes are a frequent hazard for olive ridley sea turtles, seen on a beach in India's Kerala state in January. A new 1,500-page report by the United Nations is the most exhaustive look yet at the decline in biodiversity across the globe. — Photograph: Soren Andersson/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. WASHINGTON D.C. — Humans are transforming Earth's natural landscapes so dramatically that as many as one million plant and animal species are now at risk of extinction, posing a dire threat to ecosystems that people all over the world depend on for their survival, a sweeping new United Nations assessment has concluded. The 1,500-page report, compiled by hundreds of international experts and based on thousands of scientific studies, is the most exhaustive look yet at the decline in biodiversity across the globe and the dangers that creates for human civilization. A summary of its findings (https://www.ipbes.net/news/ipbes-global-assessment-summary-policymakers-pdf), which was approved by representatives from the United States and 131 other countries, was released on Monday in Paris. The full report is set to be published this year. Its conclusions are stark. In most major land habitats, from the savannas of Africa to the rain forests of South America, the average abundance of native plant and animal life has fallen by 20 percent or more, mainly over the past century. With the human population passing 7 billion, activities like farming, logging, poaching, fishing and mining are altering the natural world at a rate “unprecedented in human history.” At the same time, a new threat has emerged: Global warming has become a major driver of wildlife decline, the assessment found, by shifting or shrinking the local climates that many mammals, birds, insects, fish and plants evolved to survive in. When combined with the other ways humans are damaging the environment, climate change is now pushing a growing number of species, such as the Bengal tiger (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/science/tigers-climate-change-sundarbans.html), closer to extinction. As a result, biodiversity loss is projected to accelerate through 2050, particularly in the tropics, unless countries drastically step up their conservation efforts. The report is not the first to paint a grim portrait of Earth's ecosystems. But it goes further by detailing how closely human well-being is intertwined with the fate of other species. “For a long time, people just thought of biodiversity as saving nature for its own sake,” said Robert Watson, chair of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (https://www.ipbes.net/), which conducted the assessment at the request of national governments. “But this report makes clear the links between biodiversity and nature and things like food security and clean water in both rich and poor countries.” A previous report by the group (https://www.ipbes.net/system/tdf/2018_americas_full_report_book_v5_pages_0.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=29404) had estimated that, in the Americas, nature provides some $24 trillion of non-monetized benefits to humans each year. The Amazon rain forest absorbs immense quantities of carbon dioxide and helps slow the pace of global warming. Wetlands purify drinking water. Coral reefs sustain tourism and fisheries in the Caribbean. Exotic tropical plants form the basis of a variety of medicines. But as these natural landscapes wither and become less biologically rich, the services they can provide to humans have been dwindling. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY2/merlin_87896002_43d24469-4121-46f3-9948-c73adfbe19e9-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY2/merlin_87896002_43d24469-4121-46f3-9948-c73adfbe19e9-superJumbo.jpg) Cattle grazing on a tract of illegally cleared Amazon forest in Pará State, Brazil. In most major land habitats, the average abundance of native plant and animal life has fallen by 20 percent or more, mainly over the past century. — Photograph: Lalo de Almeida/for The New York Times. Humans are producing more food than ever, but land degradation is already harming agricultural productivity on 23 percent of the planet's land area, the new report said. The decline of wild bees and other insects that help pollinate fruits and vegetables is putting up to $577 billion in annual crop production at risk. The loss of mangrove forests and coral reefs along coasts could expose up to 300 million people to increased risk of flooding. The authors note that the devastation of nature has become so severe that piecemeal efforts to protect individual species or to set up wildlife refuges will no longer be sufficient. Instead, they call for “transformative changes” that include curbing wasteful consumption, slimming down agriculture's environmental footprint and cracking down on illegal logging and fishing. “It's no longer enough to focus just on environmental policy,” said Sandra M. Díaz, a lead author of the study and an ecologist at the National University of Córdoba in Argentina. “We need to build biodiversity considerations into trade and infrastructure decisions, the way that health or human rights are built into every aspect of social and economic decision-making.” Scientists have cataloged only a fraction of living creatures, some 1.3 million; the report estimates there may be as many as 8 million plant and animal species on the planet, most of them insects. Since 1500, at least 680 species have blinked out of existence, including the Pinta giant tortoise of the Galápagos Islands and the Guam flying fox. Though outside experts cautioned it could be difficult to make precise forecasts, the report warns of a looming extinction crisis, with extinction rates currently tens to hundreds of times higher than they have been in the past 10 million years. “Human actions threaten more species with global extinction now than ever before,” the report concludes, estimating that “around 1 million species already face extinction, many within decades, unless action is taken.” Unless nations step up their efforts to protect what natural habitats are left, they could witness the disappearance of 40 percent of amphibian species, one-third of marine mammals and one-third of reef-forming corals. More than 500,000 land species, the report said, do not have enough natural habitat left to ensure their long-term survival. Over the past 50 years, global biodiversity loss has primarily been driven by activities like the clearing of forests for farmland, the expansion of roads and cities, logging, hunting, overfishing, water pollution and the transport of invasive species around the globe. In Indonesia, the replacement of rain forest with palm oil plantations has ravaged the habitat of critically endangered orangutans and Sumatran tigers. In Mozambique, ivory poachers helped kill off nearly 7,000 elephants (https://www.ipbes.net/system/tdf/africa_assessment_report_20181219_0.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=29243) between 2009 and 2011 alone. In Argentina and Chile, the introduction of the North American beaver in the 1940s has devastated native trees (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2018/08/09/why-two-countries-want-to-kill-100000-beavers) (though it has also helped other species thrive, including the Magellanic woodpecker). (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY4/merlin_152458245_e76c4280-d7e8-4e12-af9b-5c2e7d95b7a9-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/06/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY4/merlin_152458245_e76c4280-d7e8-4e12-af9b-5c2e7d95b7a9-superJumbo.jpg) Volunteers collected trash in March in a mangrove forest in Brazil. The loss of mangrove forests and coral reefs along coasts could expose up to 300 million people to increased risk of flooding. — Photograph: Amanda Perobelli/Reuters. All told, three-quarters of the world's land area has been significantly altered by people, the report found, and 85 percent of the world's wetlands have vanished since the 18th century. And with humans continuing to burn fossil fuels for energy, global warming is expected to compound the damage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-report-half-degree.html). Roughly 5 percent of species worldwide are threatened with climate-related extinction if global average temperatures rise 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the report concluded. (The world has already warmed 1 degree.) “If climate change were the only problem we were facing, a lot of species could probably move and adapt,” Richard Pearson, an ecologist at the University College of London, said. “But when populations are already small and losing genetic diversity, when natural landscapes are already fragmented, when plants and animals can't move to find newly suitable habitats, then we have a real threat on our hands.” The dwindling number of species will not just make the world a less colorful or wondrous place, the report noted. It also poses risks to people. Today, humans are relying on significantly fewer varieties of plants and animals to produce food. Of the 6,190 domesticated mammal breeds used in agriculture, more than 559 have gone extinct and 1,000 more are threatened. That means the food system is becoming less resilient against pests and diseases. And it could become harder in the future to breed new, hardier crops and livestock to cope with the extreme heat and drought that climate change will bring. “Most of nature's contributions are not fully replaceable,” the report said. Biodiversity loss “can permanently reduce future options, such as wild species that might be domesticated as new crops and be used for genetic improvement.” The report does contain glimmers of hope. When governments have acted forcefully to protect threatened species, such as the Arabian oryx or the Seychelles magpie robin, they have managed to fend off extinction in many cases. And nations have protected more than 15 percent of the world's land and 7 percent of its oceans by setting up nature reserves and wilderness areas. Still, only a fraction of the most important areas for biodiversity have been protected, and many nature reserves poorly enforce prohibitions against poaching, logging or illegal fishing. Climate change could also undermine existing wildlife refuges by shifting the geographic ranges of species that currently live within them. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/03/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY6/merlin_146083860_80ce1e0a-9505-4d73-b913-47bc5be44eea-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/03/climate/06CLI-BIODIVERSITY6/merlin_146083860_80ce1e0a-9505-4d73-b913-47bc5be44eea-superJumbo.jpg) An elephant in the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy at the foot of Mount Kenya, outside Nairobi. More than 500,000 land species do not have enough natural habitat left to ensure their long-term survival. — Photograph: Tony Karumba/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. So, in addition to advocating the expansion of protected areas, the authors outline a vast array of changes aimed at limiting the drivers of biodiversity loss. Farmers and ranchers would have to adopt new techniques to grow more food on less land (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/climate/agriculture-food-global-warming.html). Consumers in wealthy countries would have to waste less food and become more efficient in their use of natural resources. Governments around the world would have to strengthen and enforce environmental laws, cracking down on illegal logging and fishing and reducing the flow of heavy metals and untreated wastewater into the environment. The authors also note that efforts to limit global warming will be critical, although they caution that the development of biofuels to reduce emissions could end up harming biodiversity by further destroying forests. None of this will be easy, especially since many developing countries face pressure to exploit their natural resources as they try to lift themselves out of poverty. But, by detailing the benefits that nature can provide to people, and by trying to quantify what is lost when biodiversity plummets, the scientists behind the assessment are hoping to help governments strike a more careful balance between economic development and conservation. “You can't just tell leaders in Africa that there can't be any development and that we should turn the whole continent into a national park,” said Emma Archer, who led the group's earlier assessment of biodiversity in Africa (https://www.ipbes.net/system/tdf/africa_assessment_report_20181219_0.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=29243). “But we can show that there are trade-offs, that if you don't take into account the value that nature provides, then ultimately human well-being will be compromised.” In the next two years, diplomats from around the world will gather for several meetings under the Convention on Biological Diversity, a global treaty, to discuss how they can step up their efforts at conservation (http://un2020.org/timeline/timeline-cbd/). Yet even in the new report's most optimistic scenario, through 2050 the world’s nations would only slow the decline of biodiversity — not stop it. “At this point,” said Jake Rice, a fisheries scientist who led an earlier report on biodiversity in the Americas, “our options are all about damage control.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Brad Plumer (https://www.nytimes.com/by/brad-plumer) is a reporter covering climate change, energy policy and other environmental issues for The New York Times's climate team. • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Tuesday, May 7, 2019, on Page A1 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Wildlife Facing Extinction Risk All Over Globe”. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/climate/biodiversity-extinction-united-nations.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/climate/biodiversity-extinction-united-nations.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 08, 2019, 10:15:55 pm we need wars to get rid of humans Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 09, 2019, 12:52:36 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6BxkwXWsAAhwVi.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1125838349585936384) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 10, 2019, 01:16:57 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6GMABBU0AEeA0A.jpg) (https://twitter.com/GuyKeverneBody/status/1126335322059489280) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 17, 2019, 05:12:33 pm from The Washington Post… It was 84 degrees near the Arctic Ocean this weekend as carbon dioxide hit its highest level in human history The carbon dioxide milestone and unusual warmth in northwest Russia blend into the portrait of human-induced climate change. By JASON SAMENOW | 2:55PM EDT — Tuesday, May 14, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_888w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/05/14/Local/Images/PVDCDGZ3SBBABANK5AGCGWFF5M.png) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/05/14/Local/Images/PVDCDGZ3SBBABANK5AGCGWFF5M.png) Carbon dioxide levels from approximately 1750 to the present day. — Graph: Scripps Institute of Oceanography. OVER THE WEEKEND, the climate system sounded simultaneous alarms. Near the entrance to the Arctic Ocean in northwest Russia, the temperature surged to 84 degrees Fahrenheit (29 degrees Celsius). Meanwhile, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eclipsed 415 parts per million for the first time in human history. By themselves, these are just data points. But taken together with so many indicators of an altered atmosphere and rising temperatures, they blend into the unmistakable portrait of human-induced climate change. Saturday's steamy 84-degree reading was posted in Arkhangelsk, Russia, where the average high temperature is around 54 this time of year. The city of 350,000 people sits next to the White Sea, which feeds into the Arctic Ocean's Barents Sea. (https://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20190514twmr_TwitterMikaRantanen_zpscldtbpd0.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/mikarantane/status/1127188356608212992) In Koynas, a rural area to the east of Arkhangelsk, it was even hotter on Sunday, soaring to 87 degrees (31 degrees Celsius) (https://twitter.com/EKMeteo/status/1127952018285502465). Many locations in Russia, from the Kazakhstan border to the White Sea, set record-high temperatures over the weekend, some 30 to 40 degrees (around 20 degrees Celsius) above average. The warmth also bled west into Finland, which hit 77 degrees (25 degrees Celsius) (https://twitter.com/mikarantane/status/1127215699359870981) on Saturday, the country's warmest temperature of the season so far. The abnormally warm conditions in this region stemmed from a bulging zone of high pressure centered over western Russia. This particular heat wave, while a manifestation of the arrangement of weather systems and fluctuations in the jet stream, fits into what has been an unusually warm year across the Arctic and most of the mid-latitudes. In Greenland, for example, the ice sheet's melt season began about a month early (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/04/18/its-been-exceptionally-warm-greenland-lately-ice-is-melting-month-early). In Alaska, several rivers saw winter ice break up on their earliest dates on record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/03/28/alaska-is-baking-an-exceptionally-toasty-march-steep-long-term-warming-presses). Across the Arctic overall, the extent of sea ice has hovered near a record low for weeks. (https://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20190514twzl_TwitterZackLabe_zpszmpevqfm.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/ZLabe/status/1127769938834288640) Data from the Japan Meteorological Agency show April was the second warmest on record (https://twitter.com/EKMeteo/status/1128257240249577473) for the entire planet. These changes all have occurred against the backdrop of unremitting increases in carbon dioxide, which has now crossed another symbolic threshold. Saturday's carbon dioxide measurement of 415 parts per million at Hawaii's Mauna Loa Observatory is the highest in at least 800,000 years and probably over 3 million years (https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/4/eaav7337). Carbon dioxide levels have risen by nearly 50 percent since the Industrial Revolution. The clip at which carbon dioxide has built up in the atmosphere has risen in recent years (https://twitter.com/kevpluck/status/1124648737207398401). Ralph Keeling, director of the program that monitors the gas at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, tweeted that its accumulation in the last year (https://twitter.com/Keeling_curve/status/1127683198110953472) is “on the high end”. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that, along with the rise of several other such heat-trapping gases, is the primary cause of climate warming in recent decades, scientists have concluded. Eighteen of the 19 warmest years on record for the planet have occurred since 2000 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/02/06/undeniable-warming-planets-hottest-five-years-record-five-images), and we keep observing these highly unusual and often record-breaking high temperatures. They won't stop soon, but cuts to greenhouse emissions would eventually slow them down (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say). __________________________________________________________________________ • Jason Samenow (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jason-samenow) has loved weather since he was a boy. At the University of Virginia, he earned a degree in environmental science, focusing in atmospheric science. He went on to earn a master's degree in atmospheric science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2000. Samenow is The Washington Post's weather editor. From 2000 to September 2010, he worked as a climate change analyst for the federal government, monitoring, analyzing and communicating the science of climate change. He founded CapitalWeather.com (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang) in early 2004, the first professional weather blog on the Internet, which became part of The Washington Post in 2008. Samenow is a past chairman of the D.C. Chapter of the American Meteorological Society and a Weather and Society Integrated Studies Fellow. He earned the Digital Seal of Approval from the National Weather Association. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Vietnam just observed its highest temperature ever recorded: 110 degrees, in April (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/04/22/vietnam-just-observed-its-highest-temperature-ever-recorded-degrees-april) • Red-hot planet: Last summer's punishing and historic heat in 7 maps and charts (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/08/17/red-hot-planet-this-summers-punishing-and-historic-heat-in-7-maps-and-charts) https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/05/14/it-was-degrees-near-arctic-ocean-this-weekend-carbon-dioxide-hit-its-highest-level-human-history (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/05/14/it-was-degrees-near-arctic-ocean-this-weekend-carbon-dioxide-hit-its-highest-level-human-history) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 17, 2019, 07:38:24 pm from The Seattle Times… Leading the charge in climate battle Washington state takes big steps toward curbing climate changing carbon. By DAVID HORSEY | 9:17AM PDT — Tuesday, May 14, 2019 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/No-carbon-George-ONLINE-COLOR-780x520.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/No-carbon-George-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) WITH A big push from Governor Jay Inslee and the votes of the Democrats who control both houses of the Legislature, new laws have been enacted (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/two-more-key-climate-change-bills-pass-in-olympia-head-to-inslees-desk) to cut carbon emissions in Washington state. The most significant measure mandates that electrical utilities in the state must cease using coal by 2025 and natural gas by 2045. While the national government has, for two years, been retreating from the fight against climate change, Washington and other key states — California, in particular — have kept the United States inching forward in the battle to mitigate the dire consequences of rising global temperatures. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/leading-the-charge-in-climate-battle (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/leading-the-charge-in-climate-battle) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 17, 2019, 08:51:31 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6vlmgoVUAAEfm8.jpg) (https://twitter.com/Slanecartoons/status/1129250007645745152) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on May 17, 2019, 09:53:23 pm climate climax fear porn fake news a supernova destroys the whole universe we all die the end ;D hahaha Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 17, 2019, 10:02:35 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6U2zIsUIAE_ife.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1127367544287842304) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 30, 2019, 01:38:28 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6UErwKVUAAJnE-.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1127312438339072000) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 30, 2019, 01:40:11 pm from The Seattle Times… What orca extinction sounds like The human clatter on the surface of the sea is a death knell for the creatures below, particularly sound-sensitive killer whales. By DAVID HORSEY | 2:45PM PDT — Wednesday, May 22, 2019 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Orca-ONLINE-COLOR-780x519.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Orca-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) THERE ARE more than 300,000 ferry sailings in the Salish Sea in a single year. Washington waters also host 6,330 cargo, container and passenger vessels and 1,134 oil tankers and barge tows annually. Add to that a fleet of small, but noisy, pleasure craft zipping across the waves and it adds up to a cacophony of sound that is nothing like music to the sensitive hearing of the orcas. The sleek killer whales that have been emblematic of the Northwest since before white settlers arrived are imperiled because of all the racket. Already stressed by pollution and the diminished salmon population on which they feed, the orcas are finding it increasingly difficult to locate the prey that remain because their highly sensitive sonic capability is being drowned out by all the sound of human machinery (https://projects.seattletimes.com/2019/hostile-waters-orcas-noise). The conveyors of commerce on the surface of the sea are clanging a death knell for the creatures below. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/what-orca-extinction-sounds-like (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/what-orca-extinction-sounds-like) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on May 30, 2019, 01:44:40 pm from The Seattle Times… Welcome to the Ever-brown State Breathe in the fresh air while you still can, as droughts become the new normal for Washington. By DAVID HORSEY | 12:42PM PDT — Thursday, May 23, 2019 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Drought-ONLINE-COLOR-2-1020x676.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Drought-ONLINE-COLOR-2.jpg) WASHINGTON had a pretty good ski season with a nice, steady dump of snow, but that snowpack has disappeared rapidly in this spring's warmth. Water from melting snow will be in short supply this summer to power dams, help irrigate crops and keep streams and rivers at levels and temperatures that sustain fish runs. Governor Jay Inslee declared this week (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/gov-inslee-declares-drought-for-about-half-of-washington-state) that nearly half of the state is heading into a serious drought. The unusually dry summer could well bring even more wildfires than last year, which means more smoke fogging our sunny skies and choking sensitive lungs. It would be nice to think this year is an aberration, but the reality is that more frequent droughts will be a new normal for the Evergreen State as the effects of climate change become more pronounced. Breathe in the fresh air while you still can. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/welcome-to-the-ever-brown-state (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/welcome-to-the-ever-brown-state) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on June 01, 2019, 11:53:28 am from The Seattle Times… Trump lives in the great state of denial Climate change is ravaging the country, but the president does not care. By DAVID HORSEY | 8:26AM PDT — Friday, May 31, 2019 (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Climate-travel-guide-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x680.jpg) (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Climate-travel-guide-ONLINE-COLOR.jpg) THE HARSH AND DEADLY EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE are becoming more pronounced, from the fast-melting snowpacks, shrinking glaciers and calamitous wildfires (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/visiting-a-national-park-this-summer-youll-get-up-close-view-of-climate-crisis) in our national parks, to the epic floods and more frequent tornadoes that are pummeling Midwest farm communities. It may be the biggest national-security challenge facing the nation. Does the Trump administration care? Apparently, not at all. Not only do the president and his policymakers deny the reality of the global temperature rise (https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/trump-administration-hardens-its-attack-on-climate-science) driven by human-generated carbon emissions, they are actively undermining government scientists and researchers while loosening restrictions on polluting industries. Of all the outrages and assaults on the American people being perpetrated by President Donald Trump, his attack on climate science may be his most calamitous legacy to humanity. __________________________________________________________________________ • See more of David Horsey's cartoons at The Seattle Times HERE (https://www.seattletimes.com/author/david-horsey). https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/the-great-state-of-denial (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/the-great-state-of-denial) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 04, 2019, 04:20:07 pm from The Washington Post… Europe's flight-shame movement has travelers taking trains to save the planet Young Europeans are digging out their parents' yellowing Europe-by-rail guidebooks. By MICHAEL BIRNHAUM | 3:41PM EDT — Friday, August 02, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1099w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/08/02/Foreign/Images/swedentravel003.JPG) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/08/02/Foreign/Images/swedentravel003.JPG) Johan Hilm traveled from Stockholm to Austria in a 30-hour trip by train, bus and ferry. — Photograph: Darian Woehr/The Washington Post. STOCKHOLM — If he had hopped on a plane, Johan Hilm would have gotten from Sweden to Austria in two hours. Instead, the lanky Swede made an epic overland journey by rail, bus and ferry that took more than 30 hours. He joined a growing crowd of Europeans who are spurning air travel out of concern for the environment this summer. Budget airlines such as Ireland's Ryanair and British easyJet revolutionized European travel two decades ago, when they first started offering to scoot people across the continent for as little as $20 a flight. That mode of travel, once celebrated as an opening of the world, is now being recognized for its contribution to global problems. Tourists have been spooked by the realization that one passenger's share of the exhaust from a single flight can cancel out a year's worth of Earth-friendly efforts. And so they are digging out their parents' yellowing Europe-by-rail guidebooks and trading tips on the most convenient night train to Vienna. Mark Smith, founder of Seat 61 (https://www.seat61.com), a popular website dedicated to train-based travel around Europe and beyond, said he has noticed a change in the people coming to his site. When he set it up in 2001, users told him they loved trains, or were scared of flying, or couldn't fly. “Now, when people tell me why they are taking the train, they say two things in the same breath: They say they are fed up with the stress of flying, and they want to cut their carbon footprint,” Smith said. So far, the biggest shift has been in green-conscious Sweden, where airline executives blame increased train travel — up one-third this summer compared with a year ago — for a drop in air passenger traffic. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Yr1J7Ab-Azv2WhlI2FhjG-mn0XA=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4VASVTFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Yr1J7Ab-Azv2WhlI2FhjG-mn0XA=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4VASVTFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) In Sweden, flygskam, or “flight shame,” has encouraged some travelers to switch to trains. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/rI6nl40KK1OzPM8oBoWjXmyeYTw=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/55WJOUVPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/rI6nl40KK1OzPM8oBoWjXmyeYTw=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/55WJOUVPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) Hilm reduced his carbon emissions by 80 percent by taking trains, a bus and a ferry instead of a plane. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. Swedish leaders this month announced they would inject new cash into the national rail company. They plan to build up a new fleet of trains after years of cutbacks when cheap plane tickets were luring people into the skies. The newly coined concept of flygskam, or “flight shame” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2019/07/09/europes-flight-shame-movement-doesnt-stand-chance-us), has turned some Swedes bashful about their globe-trotting. A guerrilla campaign used Instagram to tally the planet-busting travels of top Swedish celebrities. Next door in Norway, meanwhile, the prime minister felt the need to assure citizens that they need not apologize for flying to see family in the high north. Hilm, 31, a health-care consultant who was on his way to hike across Austria for eight days, said he tried to live an environmentally responsible life. “I don't drive a car. I eat mostly vegetarian. I live in an apartment, not a big house.” He was stunned when he assessed the impact of his flights. “I did one of those calculators you can do online,” he said, “and 80 percent of my emissions were from travel.” “I don't want to say I'll never fly again, but I do want to be conscious about the decisions I make,” Hilm added over coffee in the Stockholm-to-Copenhagen train's bistro car. Little kids bounced on the squishy red banquette seats nearby. In the passenger compartments, some people dozed, others played card games. Out the window, cows looked up from their fields as the train hurtled through at 120 mph. Environmentally friendly travel can require a time investment. To get to Austria, Hilm took a 5½-hour train trip to Copenhagen, a 1¾-hour bus to the Danish coast, a 45-minute ferry to Germany, a 90-minute train to Hamburg, an 11-hour night train to southern Germany and a final three-hour train. He left his Stockholm apartment before 6 a.m. on a Wednesday. He arrived at his Alpine destination after noon the next day. What was it worth? Measuring carbon dioxide emissions from travel can be an inexact science. One popular online calculator suggested that Hilm's trip would have led to about 577 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions if he had flown, compared with 118 pounds by rail, a savings of 80 percent. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/BurjfD3BAdoU1sLQJwvdzmRey6k=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7UXOJZFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/BurjfD3BAdoU1sLQJwvdzmRey6k=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7UXOJZFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) The Stockholm-to-Copenhagen train speeds past fields and forests. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Q5TI4GIbXTZGcFYDSxtXEgkYX6U=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5U2BXVVPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Q5TI4GIbXTZGcFYDSxtXEgkYX6U=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5U2BXVVPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) Train attendant Iris Grundström tidies the bistro car of the Stockholm-to-Copenhagen train. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. In the first six months of 2019, air passenger traffic was down 3.8 percent in Sweden compared with the previous year. Climate concerns (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/05/17/europe-discusses-banning-short-haul-flights-climate-change-is-suddenly-top-campaign-agendas-worldwide) are among several reasons for the downturn, said Jean-Marie Skoglund, an aviation expert at the Swedish Transport Agency. He said a slowing economy, tax changes and an airline bankruptcy were other factors. Across Europe, air travel still ticked up — by 4.4 percent — in the first quarter of 2019, according to figures from Airports Council International Europe, an industry group. But for young, green Europeans, saying no to flying is becoming a thing. The shift has been inspired in part by Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish climate campaigner who sparked a worldwide school strike (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/school-climate-strikes-draw-thousands-to-the-streets-in-cities-across-the-globe/2019/03/15/ad365672-402d-11e9-85ad-779ef05fd9d8_story.html) and has been crisscrossing Europe by train as she pressures politicians to do more about the environment. Thunberg has not been on a plane since 2015. This week, she said she would soon travel to the United States — by sailboat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/sailing-to-america-teen-to-bring-her-climate-activism-to-us/2019/07/29/f7ff8a28-b1e0-11e9-acc8-1d847bacca73_story.html). Record heat this summer and last has also focused attention on climate change and influenced travel plans. Hilm set out on his trip during a heat wave that brought all-time high temperatures to Paris, Britain, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. “If you want to reduce your environmental impact, the best thing you can do is to stop flying,” said Susanna Elfors, founder of a Facebook group called Tagsemester (https://www.facebook.com/groups/tagsemester), or Train Vacation, that has been credited with helping to spur train travel. Users exchange practical tips and cheer on each other's journeys. The Swedish-language group now has 99,000 members — which could mean that 1 percent of Sweden's 10 million people are using it. The aviation sector generates about 2.5 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions — meaning it's only a small fraction of the problem. A European Union list (https://www.transportenvironment.org/press/ryanair-joins-club-europe%E2%80%99s-top-10-carbon-polluters) released in April ranked Ryanair among Europe's top 10 carbon emitters, grouping the airline with companies that operate coal-fired power plants. “Passengers travelling on Ryanair have the lowest CO² emissions per kilometer traveled than any other airline,” the company responded in a statement. European leaders are beginning to reconsider how much they should encourage plane travel. Jet fuel is currently untaxed in the E.U., unlike in the United States. France this month announced it would introduce an eco-tax (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/07/09/france-moves-combat-climate-change-by-making-flights-more-expensive) on flights originating at French airports, with the money to be reinvested in rail networks and other environmentally friendly transport. Several other European countries have imposed or increased flight taxes. The Dutch government is lobbying for an E.U.-wide tax on aviation. Even some airlines have gotten in on the “fly less” message. “Think about flying responsibly,” Dutch airline KLM said in an advertisement unveiled this month. Unusually, it suggested considering a different form of transportation: “Could you take the train instead?” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/bjxQmrmsbpYyUl3ryXwYlGVLfgo=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4WJTPEFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/bjxQmrmsbpYyUl3ryXwYlGVLfgo=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4WJTPEFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) The view from a train traveling between Malmö, Sweden, and Copenhagen. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/C0lBIN_CcYW4_BxA9AuoFBgjSPE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/6SX3V4FPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/C0lBIN_CcYW4_BxA9AuoFBgjSPE=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/6SX3V4FPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) Linnea Rothin, 23, and Marcus Nygren, 27, at Copenhagen Central Station. They have been traveling by train because of environmental concerns. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. Airlines say they are taking steps to be greener. SAS, the largest airline in Scandinavia, is ending in-flight duty-free sales and asking passengers to pre-book meals so planes can be lighter and more fuel-efficient. Pilots have been urged to taxi on the ground with only one engine switched on. Anxiety about climate change is “playing a part, for sure,” in Sweden's dropping air passenger traffic, said SAS chief executive Rickard Gustafson. He said the airline was pushing to expand its use of renewable fuels as quickly as possible. He said, however, the world needs air travel. “The society that we all enjoy, the wealth and the social security that we all have — without aviation, it would all collapse,” he said. To be sure, there are limits to train travel. It can be time-consuming, and the transit is not always painless. Travelers on the Swedish Facebook group complain of trains without air conditioning that turn into saunas and delays that cause missed connections. Marcus Nygren and Linnea Rothin, a Swedish couple who just returned from a three-week rail trip around central Europe, said on one stretch, they were crammed into a night train compartment with a woman who spoke neither the local language nor anything they could speak, and who was traveling with a vast assortment of baggage, including what appeared to be a sewing machine. They also saw train travel as liberating. “I've dreamed about going to an airport, looking at the board and saying, ‘Okay, I want to go there’. And that's pretty much what we've done,” only by rail, said Nygren, 27. They bought Pan-European Inter-rail passes and set out with only a first destination in mind. Then they improvised their way from the Czech Republic to Hungary to Austria to Croatia to Slovenia to Germany. It was the first time either had traveled that way. “Before, it would be, like, ‘Okay, I'm traveling to Italy’,” Rothin, 23, said. By rail and on the ground, she said, “you can kind of understand the way the countries influence each other,” as one culture shades into another. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Yh0JdPcrVcJC0LHaH9HcqL4K5LU=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/477AZZFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/Yh0JdPcrVcJC0LHaH9HcqL4K5LU=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/477AZZFPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) Nygren and Rothin play the game “Hive” on their return train to Sweden. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/fNw5PlHkGVPxfYr-nPU92fPzDFk=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7F3OZ7FPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/fNw5PlHkGVPxfYr-nPU92fPzDFk=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7F3OZ7FPZEI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) The view from a Copenhagen-to-Stockholm train. Some travelers say taking trains has given them a new understanding of Europe. — Photograph: Rebecka Uhlin/for The Washington Post. Climate change experts caution that meaningful shifts will need to happen on a structural level that goes beyond any individual's private actions. “In terms of personal climate activism broadly, whether you're talking about aviation, reducing the amount of meat you eat, consumption choices, the answer is always: It is important, but it is insufficient,” said Greg Carlock, a manager at the World Resources Institute, a Washington think tank. Rail travelers say they simply want to lead climate-friendlier lives — and that they are delighted they already seem to have spurred a move to invest more in the Swedish rail system. “You can do a lot of things on your own, but you also have to understand it's part of the ecosystem,” Rothin said. __________________________________________________________________________ • Karla Adam in London contributed to this report. • Michael Birnbaum (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/michael-birnbaum) is the Brussels bureau chief for The Washington Post. He previously served as the bureau chief in Moscow and in Berlin, and was an education reporter. He has covered the conflict in Ukraine, the Egyptian revolution, the fall of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi and the Arab Spring elsewhere in the Middle East. He has also worked at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Birnbaum has a degree in German history from Yale University. He grew up in Chicago. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO:‘Flight shame’: How avoiding planes might save the planet (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/world/flight-shame-how-avoiding-planes-might-save-the-planet/2019/08/02/af2fb533-1481-45dd-bd05-b8ca7465b450_video.html) • Europe's ‘flight shame’ movement doesn’t stand a chance in the U.S. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2019/07/09/europes-flight-shame-movement-doesnt-stand-chance-us) • Should short-haul flights be banned? Climate change is a major issue in elections in Europe and Australia. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/05/17/europe-discusses-banning-short-haul-flights-climate-change-is-suddenly-top-campaign-agendas-worldwide) • France moves to combat climate change by making flights more expensive (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/07/09/france-moves-combat-climate-change-by-making-flights-more-expensive) • An Airline That Doesn't Want You to Fly. That’s New (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/an-airline-that-doesnt-want-you-to-fly-thats-new/2019/07/04/64a31458-9e43-11e9-83e3-45fded8e8d2e_story.html) • Listen on Post Reports: By The Way reporter Hannah Sampson on the airline asking its passengers not to fly (https://www.washingtonpost.com/podcasts/post-reports/a-constant-state-of-drowning-nearly-half-of-americans-say-they-struggle-to-pay-bills) • Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg addressed French lawmakers. Right-wingers boycotted and mocked her. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/07/23/teenage-climate-activist-greta-thunberg-addressed-french-lawmakers-right-wingers-boycotted-mocked-her) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/europes-flight-shame-movement-has-travelers-taking-trains-to-save-the-planet/2019/08/02/1bd38486-ac96-11e9-9411-a608f9d0c2d3_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/europes-flight-shame-movement-has-travelers-taking-trains-to-save-the-planet/2019/08/02/1bd38486-ac96-11e9-9411-a608f9d0c2d3_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 10, 2019, 08:18:10 pm from The Washington Post… Climate change isn't an intangible future risk. It's here now, and it's killing us. Hundreds have died and thousands have been hospitalized since the beginning of July as extreme heat waves smothered countries around the world, a phenomenon scientists warn will intensify. By KAYLA EPSTEIN | 5:58PM EDT — Friday, August 09, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_777w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/08/09/Health-Environment-Science/Images/VEJ544FQTYI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/08/09/Health-Environment-Science/Images/VEJ544FQTYI6TFARUYEPTUGC2M.jpg) FOUR HUNDRED DEATHS in the Netherlands. More than 18,000 hospitalizations in Japan. An estimated 169 million people on alert (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/heat-wave-blazes-it-s-even-too-hot-ice-cream-n1031946) in the United States. This isn't the plot of a disaster movie. The numbers reflect the impact of extreme heat waves that smothered countries around the world in July and early August, a phenomenon that scientists warn will intensify as the Earth warms. July was the hottest month on record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/08/05/heres-how-hottest-month-recorded-history-unfolded-around-globe), said Petteri Taalas, secretary general of the World Meteorological Organization, as he discussed the record. “This is not science fiction. It is the reality of climate change,” he said. “It is happening now, and it will worsen in the future without urgent climate action.” In the Netherlands, 400 more people died (https://in.reuters.com/article/weather-netherlands/heatwave-caused-nearly-400-more-deaths-in-netherlands-stats-agency-idINKCN1UZ0GX) in the next-to-last week of July than normally would have during a typical summer week, the country's statistics agency said on Friday. In the week that began on July 22, 2,964 people died, which is 15 percent more deaths than the country typically sees in a summer week. Scorching heat had toppled records across Europe in late July, and on July 25, Paris experienced its hottest day on record — a previously unthinkable 109 degrees (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/07/25/record-temperatures-europe). On the other side of the planet, a heat wave in Japan stretched from July 29 to August 4 and killed at least 57 people, while more than 18,000 others were taken to hospitals, with 100 in serious condition, The Washington Post reported on Friday (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/olympics-construction-worker-among-dead-as-heat-wave-batters-japan/2019/08/09/80d7c1d2-ba5e-11e9-8e83-4e6687e99814_story.html). A 50-year-old construction worker toiling on an Olympics project in Tokyo died of suspected heat stroke Thursday, when temperatures reached 95 degrees. Organizers of the Olympics told Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-olympics-2020-temperature/olympics-construction-worker-dies-as-tokyo-swelters-heatstroke-suspected-idUSKCN1UZ040) that the “precise cause of his death remains unknown,” but still, the city had numerous heat-related fatalities. On Friday, NHK reported (https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20190809_01) that 45 people in Tokyo had died in a week because of the heat. In the United States, most of the country endured a sweltering heat (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/07/16/widespread-dangerous-heat-wave-expand-across-much-us) wave in July; several heat-related deaths were reported (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/heat-wave-blazes-it-s-even-too-hot-ice-cream-n1031946) across the country. The month saw scorching and unusual temperatures across Alaska. Heat waves are already deadly. A 2008 study (https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(08)00686-7/fulltext) by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that extreme heat events “are the most prominent cause of weather-related human mortality in the U.S., responsible for more deaths annually than hurricanes, lightning, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes combined.” And climate change will only make the situation worse. Last year's National Climate Assessment (https://nca2018.globalchange.gov), compiled by the Trump administration, warned that heat-related deaths would continue to increase. Climate change would cause illnesses such as asthma and hay fever to become more severe, while wildfires and pollution also posed a risk to respiratory health. Rising temperatures would alter the geographic distribution of disease-carrying insects and pests, endangering new populations. “Climate change is a public health crisis,” Vijay Limaye told The Washington Post. “The science is really strong in telling us that with climate change accelerating, we expect heat waves to be more frequent, more intense and longer.” Limaye is currently a fellow at the Natural Resources Defense Council, but used to study the impact of climate change at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. A 2018 study (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10393-018-1363-0) written by Limaye and his former colleagues found that climate change would lead to thousands more heat-related deaths in the eastern United States by the middle of the century. They said 11,562 additional annual deaths could occur among people 65 and older because of cardiovascular stress caused by heat, and increasingly high minimum temperatures would result in 8,767 additional fatalities. “As a nation and as a globe, we are not prepared to confront an ever-mounting heat risk in terms of our health,” he said. For example, while air conditioning was known to save lives, Limaye warned that increased reliance on the technology could have a harmful long-term effect if the energy used for cooling continued to come from fossil fuels. “We really need to focus on solutions that can stem the underlying climate problem,” Limaye said, “Or we're not going be able to adapt our way out of this.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Kayla Epstein (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/kayla-epstein) is a multi-media journalist at The Washington Post who uses traditional reporting as well as social media and open journalism to tell stories and engage readers. She previously worked for The Guardian US, where she worked in support of the Pulitzer Prize-winning team that broke the National Security Agency stories and later spearheaded the audience efforts for the Counted project. Kayla joined The Post in 2016 as a social media editor embedded with the National desk. She covered the 2016 presidential election using social media and emerging platforms, and was a member of the team that won an Edward R. Murrow Award for Excellence in Social Media for its campaign coverage. She focuses on applying her digital journalism skills to an array of topics, including politics, national and breaking news, technology, and more. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • VIDEO: The natural world is under attack. Here's why David Attenborough is still hopeful. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/the-natural-world-is-under-attack-heres-why-david-attenborough-is-still-hopeful/2019/04/11/028e9204-13a7-410e-b206-0d9fa24ab3ae_video.html) • Here's how the hottest month in recorded history unfolded around the world (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/08/05/heres-how-hottest-month-recorded-history-unfolded-around-globe) • Perspective: Europe's killer heat waves are a new norm. The death rates shouldn't be. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/07/26/europes-killer-heat-waves-are-new-norm-death-rates-shouldnt-be) • Heat wave smashes temperature records across Europe (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/a-second-heat-wave-hits-europe-with-paris-expecting-109f-on-thursday/2019/07/25/d74b6b1c-ac95-11e9-9411-a608f9d0c2d3_story.html) • Greenland wildfire part of unusual spike in Arctic blazes this summer (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/07/18/greenland-wildfire-part-unusual-spike-arctic-blazes-this-summer) • Europe never understood America's love of air conditioning — until now (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/06/28/europes-record-heatwave-is-changing-stubborn-minds-about-value-air-conditioning) • Opinion: Your air conditioner is making the heat wave worse (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/22/your-air-conditioner-is-making-the-heat-wave-worse) https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/08/09/climate-change-isnt-an-intangible-future-risk-its-here-now-its-killing-us (https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/08/09/climate-change-isnt-an-intangible-future-risk-its-here-now-its-killing-us) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 16, 2019, 01:25:51 pm Yes we have discovered weather Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 17, 2019, 12:04:40 pm Meanwhile, on the island nation of Tuvalu, the southwest Pacific region's pariah island-continent nation is graphically displaying their true, “fuck you” bullying colours to the small nations of the region… (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECCFO-VVAAAXc7o.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1162075205772046336) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 17, 2019, 08:00:43 pm looks like you drew that picture
ill give it a 1 out of ten why are those islands still not underwater yet wtf Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 17, 2019, 08:09:23 pm The island nations of the South Pacific need to tell Australia to fuck-off from the Forum and boot them out. Those island nations don't need Australia's aid. They can quite easily get it from China in return for allowing China to establish military bases in their countries. That'd really piss-off the Aussies and show them the island nations of the South Pacific aren't going to put up with Oz's “fuck-you” bullshit. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 18, 2019, 11:52:37 am yes why not let china fuck all those island people in the arse
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 18, 2019, 01:02:28 pm As opposed to allowing Australia to fuck them in the arse? Fuck, you're a stupid moron sometimes. I'm going to laugh when global-warming induced climate change causes a huge flood through Woodville and wipes out your house. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 18, 2019, 01:59:59 pm So … tell me … what does it feel like being Woodville's village idiot? (http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww32/XtraNewsCommunity2/Animated%20emoticons/03_Huh.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 18, 2019, 02:02:51 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 18, 2019, 02:03:15 pm Meanwhile, on the island nation of Tuvalu, the southwest Pacific region's pariah island-continent nation is graphically displaying their true, fuck you bullying colours to the small nations of the region (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECCFO-VVAAAXc7o.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1162075205772046336) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on August 18, 2019, 02:03:26 pm from the Sunday Star-Times… The rabble over The Ditch No-one should be shocked by the ravings of Alan Jones. By FINDLAY MACDONALD | 5:00AM — Sunday, 18 August 2019 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/i/6/q/v/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/i/6/q/v/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) Alan Jones has stepped up his criticism of PM Jacinda Ardern, labelling her “gormless” over her climate change policy. — Photographs: Getty Images. ONE OF THE ADVANTAGES of living in New Zealand rather than Australia is that you rarely have to think about Alan Jones. Last week was an exception, largely because our media find irresistible any mention of New Zealand by a foreign celebrity, even one as ludicrous and discredited as the former Wallabies coach-turned-talkback rabble-rouser. For the record, Jones treated his breakfast radio audience on Sydney's 2GB to a typically foam-flecked rant about Jacinda Ardern's suggestion that Australia would have to “answer to the Pacific over climate change”. Jones wondered whether Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had been briefed to “shove a sock down her throat”, called her a “lightweight” and a “clown”, said she should “shut up”, and generally confirmed what everyone knows already — that he's a reactionary blowhard without an off switch. In nearly every report of his semi-coherent diatribe Jones was described as a “shock jock” (or by one wag, a “sock jock”). It's an easy shorthand, but it's really not that accurate — no one is shocked any more by the illiberal mental dandruff that sprinkles from his head. It might play well with the professionally offended warriors of wokeness on Twitter to pretend outrage, but that's just oxygen to a life-form such as Jones, which thrives on being perceived as the enemy of political correctness. So, Jones's intemperate gibbering received entirely too much coverage here, a reminder perhaps that cultural cringe is slow to die this side of the ditch. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/y/n/4/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1whxzz.png/1566018281895.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/y/n/4/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whxzz.png/1566018281895.jpg) Alan Jones has been slapped on the wrist by ACMA more than any other broadcaster this decade. — Photograph: Jenny Evans. In Australia it wasn't such big news, inured as its long-suffering citizenry is to the kind of ad hominem raving that passes for conservative opinion in some quarters. In the end Jones issued an apology — by calling in live to his own radio station, of course. Whether he was truly contrite or simply heading off calls for an advertising boycott is impossible to say. But it reinforces the impression that words don't particularly matter to motormouths like Jones, they are simply deployed in the moment for maximum impact or to mitigate the consequences of their original utterance. In 1999 it was revealed that Jones and fellow broadcaster John Laws had indeed been selling their opinions for corporate bucks in the so-called “cash for comment” scandal. Neither's career was unduly affected; their words worth millions, their values as free as the air into which they are breathed. Laws retired in 2007, leaving Jones in a league of his own. Go back only a couple of electoral cycles and he was laughing that then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard's recently deceased father had “died of shame” (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/gillards-father-died-of-shame-alan-jones-20120929-26soa.html) and that she should be “put into a chaff bag and thrown into the sea”. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/r/g/d/j/a/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/r/g/d/j/a/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) Alan Jones once said that former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard's father had died of shame. — Photograph: Scott Barbour/Getty Images. Before that he was found by the Australian media watchdog to have made comments before the infamous Cronulla riots in Sydney that were “likely to encourage violence or brutality and to vilify people of Lebanese and Middle Eastern backgrounds on the basis of ethnicity”. And at the heart of Jones' attack on Ardern was his apparent belief that climate change science is a hoax (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/114146956/what-motivates-the-biggest-climate-change-deniers). In this he most resembles our own talkback veteran Leighton Smith, who also stands bravely apart from global scientific consensus. In truth, though, we have no equivalent in New Zealand to the right wing opinion mill that grinds out inflammatory soundbites and column inches in Australia. Yes, Mike Hosking, Duncan Garner, Paul Henry and the late Paul Holmes have all flirted occasionally with fuelling the ratings fire with combustible garbage. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/y/m/s/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/y/m/s/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whz43.png/1566047511302.jpg) Paul Henry had a history of making controversial comments, but it pales in comparison to Alan Jones. — Photograph: Lawrence Smith. But next to Jones and his peers — Laws, Andrew Bolt, Miranda Devine, Piers Akerman, Kyle Sandilands or ex-pat Kiwi Derryn “the human headline” Hinch — our lot look like a bunch of choirboys. That's partly a measure of more general cultural differences. New Zealanders just aren't as brash, as confrontational or (let's be honest) as good at insults as their neighbours. And without getting into a debate about our supposedly more progressive social and racial record, there's little doubt you can get away with saying stuff in Australia that you wouldn't here, at least with the mic switched on. Theirs' is a country, remember, where Pauline Hanson's idiotic motion that “it's okay to be white” was only narrowly defeated in the Senate. With political dog whistles like that coming from the top is it any wonder sections of the mass media wag their tails? There is a theory that this weaponising of opinion by populist broadcasters such as Jones is really a calculated strategy: play to a redneck base with bigotry and vulgarity, garner mainstream attention by being outrageous, and thus stay relevant and rating. In which case, you have to wonder why we insist on taking the bait. Perhaps the unpalatable truth is that by my writing this and you reading it, Alan Jones has already proved his point. __________________________________________________________________________ • Finlay Macdonald (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlay_Macdonald_(editor)) is a New Zealand journalist, editor, publisher and broadcaster. He is best known for editing the New Zealand Listener. Macdonald lives in Auckland with his partner, media executive Carol Hirschfeld. They have two children, Will and Rosa. His father was the late journalist Iain Macdonald. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Malcolm Turnbull blasts ‘misogynist’ Alan Jones over his Jacinda Ardern comments (https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/115078544/malcolm-turnbull-blasts-misogynist-alan-jones-over-his-jacinda-ardern-comments) • Alan Jones attacks 'hypocrite' Jacinda Ardern again as climate change row escalates (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/115061399/alan-jones-attacks-hypocrite-jacinda-ardern-again-as-climate-change-row-escalates) • Who is this outrageous Australian shockjock Alan Jones? (https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/115051103/who-is-this-outrageous-australian-shockjock-alan-jones) • Australian PM slams Alan Jones' call to ‘shove a sock down throat’ of Jacinda Ardern (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/115045951/australian-pm-slams-alan-jones-call-to-shove-a-sock-down-throat-of-jacinda-ardern) https://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/115052547/noone-should-be-shocked-by-the-ravings-of-alan-jones (https://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/115052547/noone-should-be-shocked-by-the-ravings-of-alan-jones) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 20, 2019, 04:10:21 am haha
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on August 22, 2019, 11:23:12 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 23, 2019, 05:34:45 pm The smoking gun… from The Dominion Post… Dave Lowe found measurable proof of climate change 50 years ago — he's watched in horror ever since Dave Lowe established the Baring Head air monitoring station, helped prove human-driven climate change and won a Nobel Peace Prize. Along the way were countless arguments with climate change deniers, a lost marriage, and one significant regret. Joel MacManus met him. By JOEL MacMANUS | 5:00AM — Saturday, 21 September 2019 (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/9/0/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/9/0/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Dave Lowe has been involved in collecting atmospheric data in Wellington since before the term ‘climate change’ even existed. — Photograph: Ross Giblin. THERE'S a certificate on the wall of Dave Lowe's small cottage in Petone, Wellington. It's tucked away in the back office, an A3 piece of paper in an ordinary wooden frame. It could easily be missed by a passing guest. But if they cared to take a second glance, three words would immediately jump out: Nobel Peace Prize. It's the 2007 Prize, awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Lowe was a lead author on their largest-ever report. It was by far the greatest honour of his career. He resigned almost immediately afterward, walking away on top of the scientific world. The Prize is a testament to all that he has achieved in his career, but at the same time, to him, it's a haunting reminder of all the things he didn't, or couldn't, change. Sitting at his kitchen table, reflecting on the prize, he goes a little glassy-eyed. He stares intently at nothing in particular. His voice drops an octave. “I've lived this horror for 50 years,” he says. “There's so little time left and we've just been so bloody stupid.” Dave Lowe was one of the first people on earth to find measurable proof that human activities were changing the atmosphere and warming the planet. For the past 50 years, he has watched on, helpless and frustrated, as the situation around him has got worse, and worse, and worse. A VOLCANO ABOVE THE CLOUDS The world's largest volcano dominates the skyline of Hawaii's Big Island. The huge, sloping sides and gigantic crater of Mauna Loa cast an imposing shadow and send a constant warning across the Pacific paradise. The Ancient Hawaiians believed Mauna Loa was created by the volcano goddess Pele, who formed it at such an immense height so she could escape the wrath of her sister Nāmaka, the sea goddess. According to one legend, Pele is accompanied by a phantom white dog. When an eruption was soon to occur, she would send her dog down the mountain to warn the people of the impending disaster. In 1958, an American scientist named Charles David Keeling climbed Mauna Loa, and changed the world's understanding of our climate forever. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/c/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/c/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) The long, sloping sides of Mauna Loa, seen from the summit of its sister mountain, Mauna Kea. Keeling had spent the better part of the 1950s perfecting a system of measuring exactly how much of which gases make up the Earth's atmosphere. By adapting gas analysers used in coal mines, he was able to take the first ever reliable reading of the amount of carbon dioxide in the air. The barren mountainside on the edge of the Mauna Loa crater, high above the cloud layer and away from any interference, proved the perfect location to capture the swirling air currents. It was here, in two simple grey buildings set against a desolate, otherworldly landscape, that Keeling established the world's first permanent station to measure CO² levels. The gas analyser splits a sample of air into one million parts, and counts how many of those are CO². (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/6/p/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/6/p/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) A lava channel flows down the sides of Mauna Loa after the 1984 eruption. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/v/a/n/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/v/a/n/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Geologists escape Manua Loa aboard a rescue helicopter during the 1984 eruption. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/u/0/l/8/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/h/u/0/l/8/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) The Mauna Loa Baseline Atmospheric Observatory, where Keeling set up his first continuous measurement. The first measurement Keeling took read 313 parts per million. Then, as he continued to take regular readings, he saw something no-one had ever seen before. The planet was breathing. In autumn, as the leaves died off the trees, the amount of CO² in the air would rise. Then in spring, as the plants grew again,the number would fall again. In and out, like lungs exhaling. Then, when a full year had gone by and the cycle was complete, he checked the number again. It never returned to 313. Now, it sat at 314 ppm. He had just uncovered the first piece of evidence that the total amount of CO² in the air was increasing. That matters because CO² has an insulating effect in the atmosphere. It traps heat, which is why it's called a greenhouse gas. More CO² means more heat. Every year without fail, for the last 61 years, the number has continued to climb at an ever-increasing rate. The chart which tracks the rising CO², that drumbeat on the march to climate breakdown, is called the Keeling Curve. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/i/y/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/i/y/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Charles David Keeling received the National Medal of Science from then-US President George W Bush in 2002. Some would say that the legends of Mauna Loa are true. Pele's white dog has become Keeling's gas analyzer, high in the mountains among the ancient volcanic rock, sending out a warning signal to tell the people of the coming disaster. A WORLDWIDE SEARCH While Keeling was tracking the first evidence of climate change on a Hawaiian volcano, Dave Lowe was a teenage high school dropout in Taranaki, with only one thing on this mind: surfing. The sport was in its infancy in New Zealand, primitive wooden longboards were the only equipment available. But Lowe was hooked. “There was just a small bunch of us, really weird characters, and I was just fascinated with it,” he says. “You go out there and man, do you get a feeling for the environment. I saw the atmosphere directly, going down into the ocean, mixing the sounds, the smells.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/l/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Dave Lowe, left, as a teenage surfboarder in Taranaki in the mid-1960s. Sitting on his board, staring out at the mist and the ocean spray dancing against the pink hues of the setting sun, he decided he needed to understand more about the world around him. He went back to school and earned a Physics honours degree from Victoria University of Wellington. Lowe and Keeling's paths would cross for the first time in 1970. By this time, Keeling was a giant in his field. But he wasn't satisfied with his research station at Mauna Loa. One measurement at one specific location wasn't enough evidence. He wanted a global record, in both hemispheres, so he could confirm what he was seeing, and track it for future decades. Lowe was a 23-year-old graduate at the former Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, recruited to join Keeling's team as they set up the world's second continuous record of atmospheric CO². They found a spot about 30 minutes out of Wellington city, near Makara Beach, at the World War II-era gun emplacements of Fort Opau. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/7/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/0/7/7/s/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) The first failed attempts to record atmospheric CO² in New Zealand were made at Fort Opau, a gun emplacement built in 1941 to protect the Wellington harbour. After six months training in California, Lowe returned to join the small American team of one scientist and two technicians. But pretty soon he found himself with far more responsibility than he expected. “The scientist would constantly just bugger off back to San Diego for six months at a time. And the technicians, well … They were being paid to have the holiday of their lives, they were always off hunting and fishing, not to speak of the marijuana.” “I was thrown in the deep end trying to run hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear on a really important project which is being funded millions by the National Science Foundation.” But that work was for nothing. The readings at Makara were erratic, showing wild swings and no discernable pattern. They were useless. There was about a kilometre of paddocks between the sea and the analyzer, which was sucking up too much CO² and throwing off the readings. Keeling told him he needed to develop a new portable gas analyzer and find a new location, undisturbed by vegetation or outside sources. After some searching, Lowe found the spot he was looking for at Baring Head, a peninsula an hour out of Wellington in the opposite direction, at the base of the Remutaka Forest Park. It was perfect. At the right time, Baring Head gets air currents directly from Antarctica, an incredible undisturbed run through hundreds of kilometres of the Southern Ocean. “What we got was incredible. Right from the outset you could see that we had struck gold.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/k/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/k/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) The Baring Head lighthouse and research station in 1972. Air samples were taken at the top of the flagpole and atmospheric CO² concentration was measured by an infra red analyser in the building. — Photograph: Dave Lowe. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/j/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/j/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Dave Lowe taking an air flask sample at the edge of the Baring Head cliff in 1972. The first they learned was that Baring Head always measured a few ppm behind Mauna Loa. The majority of emissions are produced in the northern hemisphere, this showed that it took time for those gases to spread to the south. They also found that Baring Head didn't show the same huge seasonal swings as the Mauna Loa readings. The huge continents of vegetation in the northern hemisphere were impacting the Hawaiian readings, but the measurements in the South Pacific, surrounded by ocean, were far more stable. But the most important thing was that the measurements at Baring Head proved that Mauna Loa wasn't an anomaly. In both the south and the north, the carbon in the atmosphere was slowly rising. James Renwick is a professor of geology at Victoria University, who was also a contributor to the 2007 Nobel Prize and received last year's Prime Minister's Science Prize. He says Lowe is “a bit of a legend in NZ atmospheric science”, and his contributions to the global record of climate change were invaluable. “At the time I suspect it wasn't appreciated just how important the Baring Head Station was, but now the climate science community really values the long time series from Baring Head.” “That's very significant," he says. "They are a part of a global network of observing sites that have taught us many things. Dave Lowe has been a real pioneer in atmospheric science in NZ, especially around measurement of greenhouse gases and in understanding the chemistry of the atmosphere and how that's changing.” __________________________________________________________________________ The first ever CO² reading at Baring Head was 326 Parts Per Million. The most recent reading was 409 Parts Per Million. __________________________________________________________________________ THE GRIND Finding himself in charge of a groundbreaking research with barely any experience, Lowe put everything on his own shoulders. Together with his friend and colleague Peter Gunther, they were basically running the entire southern arm of the operation alone, and they were fully aware of how important their work was. That meant constant flights between Wellington and California, reading every background paper that had ever been written on the subject, developing all the computer programs to drive the calculations. The DSIR lab, where he was working, had one computer, an IBM 650 with paper tape inputs and magnetic tape. “We worked our butts off,” he says. “I knew that I just had to do this. I threw everything I had into it.” (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/i/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Dave Lowe in 1973 at the DSIR Institute of Nuclear Sciences laboratories in Gracefield, Lower Hutt. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/f/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/6/f/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) American scientist Peter Gunther, who worked with Lowe at Baring Head throughout the 70s. But that intensity had its consequences. Eventually, something had to give. The single-minded drive Lowe had dedicated to his pursuit of science cost him his marriage. “I just kept on going as my marriage crashed. I was a real mess. A hell of a mess. I was working too hard, and completely blown apart emotionally.” “The guy I was working for took a look at me and said ‘Dave, you're no good to me at all in your condition’.” PROOF OR PERSUASION In 1975, Lowe took a sabbatical to recover from his professional and personal blowout. He attended the first ever scientific conference of greenhouse gas experts. He reckons he's probably the only person at the meeting who is still alive. The small group knew what was coming before anyone else in the world. They had proven that mankind was changing the chemical makeup of the air, and they knew the inevitable outcome of that. The terms ‘Global Warming’ and ‘Climate Change’ hadn't been invented yet, but that's exactly what they were seeing. In the following years, Lowe moved to Germany to study further, and met his now-wife Irena. They've been married for 40 years. He specialised in isotopic techniques, which he describes as like DNA tracing for gas particles. Not all the CO² in the atmosphere is from the burning of fossil fuels. For most of human history, the CO² level has naturally fluctuated between 200 and 300 parts per million, which we know thanks to air samples trapped in glacier ice cores. Those natural fluctuations are often cited by climate deniers to suggest that climate change is not man-made. Naturally occurring carbon is made up of different isotopes. The most common types are called Carbon-12 and Carbon-13. Carbon-12 is by far the most common type found in nature. Carbon-13 makes up about 1 per cent of the total. But the exact amount can differ. There is slightly less Carbon-13 in fossil fuels like coal and oil compared to in atmospheric carbon. Lowe and other international researchers found that while total CO² in the air was increasing, the percentage of Carbon-13 isotopes compared to Carbon-12 was decreasing. That proved that the additional CO² in the atmosphere was coming from the burning of fossil fuels by humans, not anything else. “That's the smoking gun. You can get every sceptic blue in the face but that's just open and shut evidence that this extra CO² came from humans,” he says. “Unequivocal, no doubt.” That was proof, settled science. But the battle to convince the public of his findings was only just beginning. Part of the problem was that the predicted temperature rise didn't show up for several years. While CO² was rising, the mercury was jumping up and down, with no consistency. But eventually, the signal separated from the noise and the heat started to climb. Once it did, it basically never stopped. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/x/1/e/p/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/x/1/e/p/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) The sun setting behind the Baring Head. Atmospheric carbon measurements are still taken there to this day. — Photograph: Nicholas Boyack. In hindsight, the conservative approach of the scientific community probably held progress pack for a number of years, he says. “As a scientists, we thought, ‘No, you don't jump up and down and scream, we're not activists’. Losing our credibility was the big issue.” “It was a totally different time. If only I knew then what I know now … Now it's different, many of us are out there doing stuff. We have to, this is an emergency.” Full-blown arguments with climate change deniers have been a common occurrence in Lowe's life. His voice bristles with frustration when the topic comes up. “It's better now, but it was hard yards. I'd be yelled at by people. It used to be constant shouting matches with sceptics.” “[Scientists] deal in data and facts and graphs and numbers, it's really hard to get through with that. In my lifetime I've given hundreds of climate change talks and you're always up against it with this distrust.” Nothing grinds his gears more than scientists in the 1980s and 1990s who deliberately spread mistruths about climate change while on the payrolls of oil companies, like Fred Singer and others profiled in the 2010 book Merchants of Doubt. “I just think … the bastard, how dare he not look at the facts. That makes me angry, people who deliberately go out and falsify what's going on.” After resigning, Lowe started his own small family business, consulting and doing climate change education. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/8/x/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/h/q/8/x/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1whq5f.png/1569009764018.jpg) Dave Lowe has retired and now lives in Petone. He's still active in the climate science community and lives a low-emissions lifestyle. — Photograph: Ross Giblin. After his children left home, he and Irena moved into their small cottage, which they meticulously designed to have the smallest possible carbon footprint. He's still actively involved in climate science, making submissions on bills and helping with various research work. He's working on a book about his life work. Every day as he sits down to write, that Nobel Peace Prize certificate hangs behind him. “I just wish … all of us wish, that we could have changed minds,” he says. “But how do you fight an oil company?” __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • New Zealand in 2050: The scenario if temperatures keep rising (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/115758188/the-scenario-for-new-zealand-if-temperatures-keep-rising) • Higher sea-level calculations push more of Wellington under water (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/114669039/higher-sealevel-calculations-push-more-of-wellington-under-water) • It was 28.9 degrees Celsius near the Arctic Ocean this weekend as carbon dioxide hit its highest level in human history (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/112724015/it-was-289-degrees-celcius-near-the-arctic-ocean-this-weekend-as-carbon-dioxide-hit-its-highest-level-in-human-history) • Earth's carbon dioxide levels continue to soar, at highest point in 800,000 years (https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/103664849/earths-carbon-dioxide-levels-continue-to-soar-at-highest-point-in-800000-years) https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/115040931/kiwi-dave-lowe-found-measurable-proof-of-climate-change-50-years-ago--hes-watched-in-horror-ever-since (https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/115040931/kiwi-dave-lowe-found-measurable-proof-of-climate-change-50-years-ago--hes-watched-in-horror-ever-since) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 26, 2019, 12:21:07 pm (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Its-Obvious-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x746.jpg) (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/the-name-of-the-game-climate-denial) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on September 29, 2019, 10:31:24 am (https://www.askideas.com/media/19/Never-Trust-A-Fart-Funny-Nasty-Girl-Picture.jpg)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 29, 2019, 11:51:30 am Ah, a member of the “terminally-stupid” brigade from Woodville has farted. It'll be hilarious when your grandchildren and great-grandchildren become extinct from life-threatening temperatures and extreme weather due to your “I don't give a fuck” greed. As things turn totally to crap for them, the last thing they'll think of will be their selfish grandfather/great-grandfather who didn't give a fuck about them while he helped to trash the planet. How does it feel to know you are going to be regarded as such a selfish arsehole by your descendants, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 01, 2019, 10:16:56 pm he thinks the climate models are fake bullshit
ktj has a brainfart and thinks I wonder if he works for an oil company https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 02, 2019, 01:11:58 am Fuck, you're dumb. Mind you, you're a Trump-supporter, so no wonder you're dumb. It goes with being a Trump-supporter … you've got to be really stupid to be one of those. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 02, 2019, 01:08:39 pm your an expert on the stupid look in a mirror
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 05, 2019, 02:33:25 pm KTJ IS THE DRONGO DRONE Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 05, 2019, 03:04:13 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjlC02NsIt0
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Fd3%2F71%2F9b%2Fd3719b56a9c61f4678c673c0fcbfa670.png&f=1&nofb=1) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on October 10, 2019, 11:24:16 am Current temperature increases are NOT unusual at all.
KTJ are you brave enough to pull your head out and look at the evidence, or are you just another mindless cult lemming? ;D https://youtu.be/5u2EWJP87YU (https://youtu.be/5u2EWJP87YU) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 14, 2019, 08:08:22 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ED94vnhUUAUoaEz.jpg) (https://twitter.com/JeffBellNZ/status/1170787195776430080) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 14, 2019, 11:11:31 pm meanwhile in cartoon land
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8L6T6Yj5u4k Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 15, 2019, 07:54:18 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-qBOyrD0-0
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 15, 2019, 09:26:33 am Yet more stupid stuff from Woodville's village idiot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 16, 2019, 12:05:04 am Shut T F U you white trash retarded arse clown
so far all the claims about global warming have been wrong and for some strange reason the idiot scientists still have a job fuck all temp rise, fuck all sea-level rise It's just a silly scaremongering fraud and KTJ is a useful idiot that believes it hahaha maybe you should knock out all your teeth and ask the tooth fairy for some help or maybe a nut doctor Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 16, 2019, 10:52:06 am Human beings have shown they are selfish, “fuck-you” pigs who are unfit to share this planet with other species. In addition to polluting the atmosphere and causing global warming and subsequent climate change extremes, humans are also polluting the oceans with their plastic garbage. • Penguins ‘living on a plastic beach’, Wellington clean-up crews say (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/116592880/penguins-living-on-a-plastic-beach-wellington-cleanup-crews-say) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/f/1/r/3/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1xezn4.png/1571117092392.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/f/1/r/3/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1xezn4.png/1571117092392.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/1/1/v/h/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1xezn4.png/1571117092392.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/s/1/1/v/h/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1xezn4.png/1571117092392.jpg) When “mother earth” wipes out human beings, including your grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren, it will be because of YOUR “fuck-you” greed and selfishness. Other species on the planet (those that survive) will have reason to rejoice when there are no more human beings left alive. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 17, 2019, 02:54:24 pm • Climate change, pollution threaten NZ's marine environment (https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/116623998/new-zealand-seafood-at-risk-from-climate-change--report) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/8/m/k/r/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.710x400.1xfnni.png/1571270257896.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/w/8/m/k/r/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1xfnni.png/1571270257896.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 20, 2019, 11:22:03 pm since the 1800s, the sea level has risen .8 of a CM everybody should panic and get a life jacket
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPavvQme60s your picture below is not worth laughing at Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 23, 2019, 03:36:24 am Victim of the chicken little type of child abuse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYxt0BeTrT8 let's get real https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGUteY0O47E Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 23, 2019, 08:19:37 am Oh, dear … you continue to graphically display why you are Woodville's village idiot. I guess that's the consequence of being an intellectual lightweight, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 23, 2019, 08:20:27 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 26, 2019, 02:36:32 pm cartoon land
global warming is a fraud by the mega-rich to tax us for breathing the air Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 31, 2019, 07:57:07 am Open your eyes, dumbarse. California is burning … all due to global warming and the resultant climate change. Even an imbecile can see what is happening … I guess this means you are dumber than an imbecile. Do the good folks of Woodville stop outside your place and point at your house while pissing themselves laughing? It wouldn't surprise me in the least if that is the reality. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on October 31, 2019, 08:55:17 am Quote California is burning … all due to global warming and the resultant climate change silly me I thought it was burning because of fire being fanned by the devil wind Quote Jan Null, a meteorologist who spent years as a National Weather Service forecaster, gave the nefarious autumn winds that can plague the coastal mountain ranges of the San Francisco Bay area the name Diablo, or “devil,” winds. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on November 06, 2019, 06:44:31 pm Pretty colours sway dimwitted alarmists:
(https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Temp-stripe-chart-global-150.png) https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/02/u-of-readings-stripe-chart-is-propaganda-but-2000-year-chart-make-todays-warming-look-tame/ (https://notrickszone.com/2019/11/02/u-of-readings-stripe-chart-is-propaganda-but-2000-year-chart-make-todays-warming-look-tame/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 07, 2019, 06:15:51 pm Dealing with you two is like shooting fish in a barrel. You're both too dumb to comprehend REAL science. (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/TooFunny_zps2gz4suf2.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingPinkPanther_zpsy6iu8yso.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ROFLMAO_Dog_zpsc4esrpyc.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/LaughingHard_zpswco6umsu.gif~original) (http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/ItchyBugga_zpsebzrttez.gif~original) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 07, 2019, 06:23:47 pm • July 2019 was hottest month on record for the planet (https://www.noaa.gov/news/july-2019-was-hottest-month-on-record-for-planet) • Earth sizzles through October as another month ranks as the warmest on record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/11/05/earth-sizzles-through-october-another-month-ranks-warmest-record) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/LlIKLxi-xsl2QjwzwyEBWXDD3ds=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7NWZRAHUFZEVFPGIUP3IMSCQHM.png) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/LlIKLxi-xsl2QjwzwyEBWXDD3ds=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7NWZRAHUFZEVFPGIUP3IMSCQHM.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 08, 2019, 10:39:28 am Simon Bridges, the leader of the Nats Party in NZ (and leader of the opposition) defecates out of his mouth… (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIynhCYUYAAjBd-.jpg:large) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1192512203011678208) (Righties are such stupid, selfish, “fuck-you” ugly people) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 08, 2019, 05:20:15 pm Did you colour this in all by yourself much too much red it needs more blue
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/LlIKLxi-xsl2QjwzwyEBWXDD3ds=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/7NWZRAHUFZEVFPGIUP3IMSCQHM.png) the world looks cool to me unlike your child-like drawing of the world on fire which is a fake money-making scare-mongering lie if you look at the temperatures all around the world nothing bad is happening just the weather ;D https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/ Where Does the Weather Data Come From? CustomWeather provides the weather data on timeanddate.com. They use weather stations at airports, stations run by the World Meteorological Association (WMO), and MADIS weather stations which are typically a community effort. now because airports are areas that are hotter than out in the country my theory is climate-alarmist are pulling the data out of their arses Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 08, 2019, 10:14:40 pm You're fucked-in-the-head. Just like all heads-in-the-sand flat-earthers. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 10, 2019, 09:29:08 am tell me again when London is underwater fucktard
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 10, 2019, 10:10:03 am I wonder how many of those Australians who have lost their homes and/or been burned to death thought global warming was a load of shit, eh? Ditto the numerous Americans who have likewise lots their homes to wildfires. The world is full of terminally-stupid, heads-in-the-sand clowns. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 10, 2019, 12:09:11 pm Yep, there's some stupid dumbarses around, alright. And one particularly stupid dumbarse residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington D.C. (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Trump-climate-science-ONLINE-COLOR-CORRECTED-1020x684.jpg) (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/one-very-stable-genius-vs-more-than-11000-climate-scientists) (click on David Horsey's excellent cartoon to learn more) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 26, 2019, 05:56:49 am I wonder how many of those Australians who have lost their homes and/or been burned to death thought global warming was a load of shit, eh? Ditto the numerous Americans who have likewise lots their homes to wildfires. The world is full of terminally-stupid, heads-in-the-sand clowns. HOW DEAR YOU ;D yes you are a dumbarse with no knowledge of history Australia has a long history of fires burning the place down for thousands of years same thing with California the main problem is people build their houses with no understanding of the land's history of bush fires https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8JZo6PzpCU Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 26, 2019, 07:44:06 am Australia has a long history of burning. But not from mid-Spring. Nor does the California wildfire season last as late into their autumn as it has in recent years as human-induced atmospheric warming has increased. In some ways it serves the Aussies right. They continue to elect coal-loving pollution-loving governments into power, so their are reaping what they have sowed. Anyway, a lot of the “country” Australians are starting to get it and they are screeching at their rightie politicians. So when those rightie politicians start losing their seats in parliament, then the balance of power in Australia will change. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 26, 2019, 08:06:35 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEWoPzaDmOA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMfYjKauHbs Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 26, 2019, 11:59:57 am Yet more stupid video clips from somebody who has his head buried in the sand. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 26, 2019, 04:48:53 pm from The Guardian… • Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/25/climate-heating-greenhouse-gases-hit-new-high-un-reports) (https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e55c7086fad1fcd27e297c796c92f62c50a13ff8/0_276_4417_2651/master/4417.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=a8a7d44554f225196afb4ad30545d04f) (https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e55c7086fad1fcd27e297c796c92f62c50a13ff8/0_276_4417_2651/master/4417.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=a8a7d44554f225196afb4ad30545d04f) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on November 27, 2019, 12:46:24 am Climate Fear Porn
stupid lefty UN has a communist agenda and they want more power and control over all the worlds humans mans contribution to warming is very small 3% which is nothing if these vile climate alarmist creatures get their way with their stupid green plan people all over the world will live out their lives in total poverty, they will get pissed off and rise up and revolt. it takes a massive amount of energy to produce the windmills, the solar panels and the batteries, the electricity needed to run them and produce the metals used in their construction.they do not produce enough energy to pay for them, government subsidies from taxes are needed to produce them,they are throwing ours and future generations money into a deep dark black hole, it will amount and come to nothing their plan will fail to get the results they want and they will make our life hellish. if we go back to the stone age as proposed by the climate change alarmists and the elite who will profit from this scam most of the people on this planet will have no way to earn a living and will die from starvation and strife, there will be more wars caused by the need for resources, the greens and their ilk are a religious suicide cult of idiots they will be the ones that cause the mass extinction of the human race the world needs energy so that the people can live, windmills and solar panels are useless and will not sustain the lives of billions of humans. forget all the bullshit you have learned from fools, use that tiny bit of common sense I hope you have and think if the world gets 5 degrees warmer people will adapt to it or die as sea levels and land levels rise and fall. there is nothing we humans can do to stop this. there is no solution to this problem as its a cycle that has happened over and over for thousands and millions of years. in the past there was ice at the equator if that happens again we all will die when the climate is warm humans thrive. when is cold or freezing we can't produce enough food to feed the world we are made of carbon the trees and plants need carbon to grow, there is less carbon on the planet now than at any time in past history at that time the planet was lush and full of plants and creatures that were thriving in a much hotter climate without us. so enough of the fear-mongering already he sky is not falling on your head this guy talks more sense than any crazy climate alarmist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqRkM5S6MiM Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 16, 2019, 07:34:59 pm A stupid moron reacts to SCIENTIFIC FACTS about the reality of global warming & climate change… (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-detail/118215825/the-detail-what-to-say-when-uncle-bruce-tells-you-climate-change-is-a-hoax) …he's probably the village idiot from Woodville, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 16, 2019, 10:37:29 pm I think that's a picture of you waiting to get screwed by Al Gore
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 09:42:16 am Must have hit a raw nerve, eh, Woodville's village idiot. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 17, 2019, 11:26:26 am sticks an stones
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fusercontent1.hubstatic.com%2F13270980_f520.jpg&f=1&nofb=1) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 11:27:28 am A stupid moron reacts to SCIENTIFIC FACTS about the reality of global warming & climate change… (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-detail/118215825/the-detail-what-to-say-when-uncle-bruce-tells-you-climate-change-is-a-hoax) …he's probably the village idiot from Woodville, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 11:27:53 am Yep, there's a real dumbarse living in Woodville. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 11:28:23 am (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png)
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 11:28:42 am A stupid moron reacts to SCIENTIFIC FACTS about the reality of global warming & climate change… (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-detail/118215825/the-detail-what-to-say-when-uncle-bruce-tells-you-climate-change-is-a-hoax) …he's probably the village idiot from Woodville, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 17, 2019, 11:39:43 am but not caused by humans silly
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 17, 2019, 04:39:49 pm About 100 times as many scientists say humans are contributing towards global warming as scientists who say they aren't. And most of the scientists who say humans aren't contributing towards global warming haven't had their stuff peer-reviewed. Which tends to tell us that those denialist scientists are “fake scientists” just like Donald J. Trump is America's “fake president”. The world is full of stupid, gullible people who swallow everything spouted by “fake scientists” and America's “fake president”. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 18, 2019, 12:44:35 pm (http://www.floppingaces.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/7121876b8af26f7f2200550a16681e50-political-issues-political-views.jpg)
Peer Reviewed Studies and/or Major Scientific Journal Articles Disputing Man-made Causes for Global Warming Links Below We don't dispute that there may have been some global warming since the turn of the century. Even though it is quite likely some of the measurements were distorted and there is still some dispute over whether we've really warmed at all (see ”If The Globe Is Warming Why Are The Oceans Not?” and ”The Earth may have actually COOLED in the past 60 years!”. But we'll assume for a minute that the earth really has warmed 0.7°C in the past 100 years. That is certainly within the realm of natural variability. Below are links to peer reviewed and/or major scientific journal articles backing the case for a natural cause for global warming. Man has always blamed other men (and women) for bad weather. Medieval peasants burned people at the stake believing that they were witches causing the bad weather. Lets not be so ignorant this time around. The earth goes through warming and cooling cycles, this is just one of them (one of the milder one's I might add). So why haven't you heard of these studies? Perhaps the following could answer that question: “I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers.” - Ellen Goodman, national syndicated columnist “David Suzuki has called for political leaders to be thrown in jail for ignoring the science behind climate change. At a Montreal conference last Thursday, the prominent scientist, broadcaster and Order of Canada recipient exhorted a packed house of 600 to hold politicians legally accountable for what he called an intergenerational crime.” - Jail politicians who ignore climate science: Suzuki The IPCC's chairman, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, recently compared eco-skeptic Bjorn Lomborg to Hitler. "What is the difference between Lomborg's view of humanity and Hitler's?" Pachauri told a Danish newspaper. "If you were to accept Lomborg's way of thinking, then maybe what Hitler did was the right thing. - National Review Solar Cycles causing global warming: A 150,000-year climatic record from Antarctic ice Abstract: “During much of the Quaternary, the Earth's climate has undergone drastic changes most notably successive glacial and interglacial episodes. The past 150 kyr includes such a climatic cycle: the last interglacial, the last glacial and the present holocene interglacial. A new climatic-time series for this period has been obtained using delta18 O data from an Antarctic ice core.” A Variable Sun Paces Millennial Climate Abstract: “Paleoceanographers report that the climate of the northern North Atlantic has warmed and cooled nine times in the past 12,000 years in step with the waxing and waning of the sun. Some researchers say the data make solar variability the leading hypothesis to explain the roughly 1500-year oscillation of climate seen since the last ice age, and that the sun could also add to the greenhouse warming of the next few centuries” Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model Abstract: “We conclude that the glacial 1,470-year climate cycles could have been triggered by solar forcing despite the absence of a 1,470-year solar cycle.” Widespread evidence of 1500 yr climate variability in North America during the past 14 000 yr Abstract: “Times of major transitions identified in pollen records occurred at 600, 1650, 2850, 4030, 6700, 8100, 10 190, 12 900, and 13 800 cal yr B.P., consistent with ice and marine records. We suggest that North Atlantic millennial-scale climate variability is associated with rearrangements of the atmospheric circulation with far-reaching influences on the climate.” Influence of Solar Activity on State of Wheat Market in Medieval England Abstract: “The database of Prof. Rogers (1887), which includes wheat prices in England in the Middle Ages, was used to search for a possible influence of solar activity on the wheat market. We present a conceptual model of possible modes for sensitivity of wheat prices to weather conditions, caused by solar cycle variations, and compare expected price fluctuations with price variations recorded in medieval England. We compared statistical properties of the intervals between wheat price bursts during years 1249-1703 with statistical properties of the intervals between minimums of solar cycles during years 1700-2000. We show that statistical properties of these two samples are similar, both for characteristics of the distributions and for histograms of the distributions. We analyze a direct link between wheat prices and solar activity in the 17th Century, for which wheat prices and solar activity data (derived from 10Be isotope) are available. We show that for all 10 time moments of the solar activity minimums the observed prices were higher than prices for the correspondent time moments of maximal solar activity (100% sign correlation, on a significance level < 0.2%). We consider these results as a direct evidence of the causal connection between wheat prices bursts and solar activity.” Climate Models Progress in Physical Geography 27,3 (2003) pp. 448–455 Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Abstract: Climate models are now being used extensively to diagnose the causative, especially anthropogenic, factors of observed climatic changes of the past few decades (Palmer, 2001; Stott ., 2001; Thorne ., 2002). These models are also used to make long-term climate projections and climate risk assessments based on future anthropogenic forcing scenarios (Saunders, 1999; Palmer, 2001; Houghton ., 2001; Pittock, 2002; Schneider, et al S.H., 2002). Many such exercises help to shape public policy recommendations concerning future energy use and various ‘climate protection’ measures in order to prevent ‘dangerous climate impacts’ (e.g., Schneider, S.H., 2002; O’Neill and Oppenheimer, 2002). But meaningful and credible scientific confidence, resting either on the traditional deterministic method of quantification or the probabilistic mode of measuring change (as favoured by, for example, Washington, 2000; Räisänen and Palmer, 2001; Schneider, S.H., 2002) cannot yet be made to such computer experiments because climate models do not yield sufficiently reliable, quantitative results in reproducing well-documented climatic changes around the world. (This work was supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research grant AF 49620-02-1-0194 and by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration grant NAG5-7635.) Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations Albert Arking - Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Abstract: Codes commonly used in climate and weather prediction models for calculating the transfer of solar radiation in the atmosphere show systematic differences amongst each other, and even the best of codes show systematic differences with respect to observations. A 1-dimensional radiative-convective equilibrium model is used to show the effects of such bias on the global energy balance and on the global response to a doubling of CO2. We find the main impact is in the energy exchange terms between the surface and atmosphere and in the convective transport in the lower troposphere, where it exceeds 10 W m-2. The impact on model response to doubling of CO2, on the other hand, is quite small and in most cases negligible. Anthropogenic: Implications of the Secondary Role of Carbon Dioxide and Methane Forcing in Climate Change: Past, Present, and Future Abstract: “A review of the recent refereed literature fails to confirm quantitatively that carbon dioxide (CO2) radiative forcing was the prime mover in the changes in temperature, ice-sheet volume, and related climatic variables in the glacial and interglacial episodes of the past 650,000 years, even under the “fast-response” framework where the convenient if artificial distinction between forcing and feedback is assumed. Atmospheric CO2 variations generally follow changes in temperature and other climatic variables rather than preceding them.” On global forces of nature driving the Earth’s climate. Are humans involved? Abstract: “The authors identify and describe the following global forces of nature driving the Earth’s climate: (1) solar radiation as a dominant external energy supplier to the Earth, (2) outgassing as a major supplier of gases to the World Ocean and the atmosphere, and, possibly, (3) microbial activities generating and consuming atmospheric gases at the interface of lithosphere and atmosphere. The writers provide quantitative estimates of the scope and extent of their corresponding effects on the Earth’s climate. Quantitative comparison of the scope and extent of the forces of nature and anthropogenic influences on the Earth’s climate is especially important at the time of broad-scale public debates on current global warming. The writers show that the human-induced climatic changes are negligible.” The Continuing Search for an Anthropogenic Climate Change Signal: Limitations of Correlation-Based Approaches Abstract: “Several recent studies claim to have found evidence of large-scale climate changes that were attributed to human influences. These assertions are based on increases in correlation over time between general circulation model prognostications and observations as derived from a centred pattern correlation statistic. We argue that the results of such studies are inappropriate because of limitations and biases in these statistics which leads us to conclude that the results of many studies employing these statistics may be erroneous and, in fact, show little evidence of a human fingerprint in the observed records.” Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics Abstract: The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861, and Arrhenius 1896, and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified. Quote: Global climatologists claim that the Earth's natural greenhouse effect keeps the Earth 33C warmer than it would be without the trace gases in the atmosphere. 80 percent of this warming is attributed to water vapor and 20 percent to the 0.03 volume percent CO2. If such an extreme effect existed, it would show up even in a laboratory experiment involving concentrated CO2 as a thermal conductivity anomaly. It would be manifest itself as a new kind of `superinsulation' violating the conventional heat conduction equation. However, for CO2 such anomalous heat transport properties never have been observed. http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/page.php?8 Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 28, 2019, 02:36:13 pm from The Washington Post… 2°C: Beyond the limit On land, Australia's rising heat is ‘apocalyptic’. In the ocean, it's worse. Tasmanian Aboriginals faced genocide, and now extreme climate change is threatening what's left of their culture. By DARRYL FEARS | Friday, December 27, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_999w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/12/26/Foreign/Images/C2TASMANIA50_6copy.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/12/26/Foreign/Images/C2TASMANIA50_6copy.jpg) Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. BRUNY ISLAND, TASMANIA — Even before the ocean caught fever and reached temperatures no one had ever seen, Australia's ancient giant kelp was cooked. Rodney Dillon noticed the day he squeezed into a wet suit several years ago and dove into Trumpeter Bay to catch his favorite food, a big sea snail called abalone. As he swam amid the towering kelp forest, he saw that “it had gone slimy.” He scrambled out of the water and called a scientist at the University of Tasmania in nearby Hobart. “I said, ‘Mate, all our kelp's dying, and you need to come down here and have a look’.” “But no one could do anything about it.” Climate change had arrived at this island near the bottom of the world, and the giant kelp that flourished in its cold waters was among the first things to go. Over recent decades, the rate of ocean warming off Tasmania, Australia's southern-most state and a gateway to the South Pole, has climbed to nearly four times the global average, oceanographers say. More than 95 percent of the giant kelp — a living high-rise of 30-foot stalks that served as a habitat for some of the rarest marine creatures in the world — died. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/ECE6XKHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/ECE6XKHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Strands of bull kelp at Shelly Point in Tasmania. The Tasman Sea is warming, and once plentiful giant kelp forests have rapidly declined. Indigenous artists rely on a kelp habitat for traditional jewelry and basket making. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Giant kelp (https://tinyurl.com/rm4bb6t) had stretched the length of Tasmania's rocky east coast throughout recorded history. Now it clings to a tiny patch near Southport, the island's southern tip, where the water is colder. “This is a hot spot,” said Neil Holbrook, a professor who researches ocean warming at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania. “And it's one of the big ones.” Climate scientists say it's essential to hold global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times to avoid irreversible damage from warming. The Tasman Sea is already well above that threshold. The Washington Post's examination of accelerated warming in the waters off Tasmania marks this year's final installment of its global series “2C: Beyond the Limit”, which identified hot spots around the world. The investigation has shown that disastrous impacts from climate change aren't a problem lurking in the distant future: They are here now. Nearly a tenth of the planet has already warmed 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) since the late 19th century, and the abrupt rise in temperature related to human activity has transformed parts of the Earth in radical ways. In the United States, New Jersey is among the fastest-warming states, and its average winter has grown so warm that lakes no longer freeze as they once did. Canadian islands are crumbling into the sea because a blanket of sea ice no longer protects them from crashing waves. Fisheries from Japan to Angola to Uruguay are collapsing as their waters warm. Arctic tundra is melting away in Siberia and Alaska, exposing the remains of woolly mammoths buried for thousands of years and flooding the gravesites of indigenous people who have lived in an icy world for centuries. Australia is a poster child for climate change. Wildfires are currently raging on the outskirts of its most iconic city and drought is choking a significant portion of the country. Nearly 100 fires are burning in New South Wales, nearly half of them out of control. Residents of the state, where Sydney sits, wear breathing masks to tolerate the heavy smoke, which has drifted more than 500 miles south to the outskirts of Melbourne. This is happening even though average atmospheric temperatures in Australia have yet to increase by 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). The ocean is another story. A stretch of the Tasman Sea right along Tasmania's eastern coast has already warmed by just a fraction below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), according to ocean temperature data from the Hadley Center, the U.K. government research agency on climate change. As the marine heat rises and the kelp simmers into goo, Dillon and other descendants of Tasmania's first people are losing a connection to the ocean that has defined their culture for millennia. Aboriginals walked to present-day Tasmania 40,000 years ago during the Stone Age, long before rising sea levels turned the former peninsula into an island. Cut off from Aboriginals on the mainland, about a dozen nomadic tribes were the first humans to live so close to the end of the Earth, fishing amid the giant kelp for abalone, hunting kangaroo and mutton birds, turning bull kelp into tools, and fashioning pearlescent snail shells into jewelry for hundreds of generations. But that was before British colonizers took their land and deployed an apartheid-like system to wipe them out. Now, as descendants try to finally get full recognition as the first people and original owners of Tasmania, climate change is threatening to remove the marine life that makes so much of their culture special. Two of the most severe marine heat waves ever recorded struck back to back (http://www.ametsoc.net/eee/2017a/ch20_EEEof2017_Perkins.pdf) in recent years. In the first, starting in 2015, ocean temperatures peaked at nearly 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) above normal in the waters between Tasmania and New Zealand. A blob of heat that reached 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) was more than seven times the size of Tasmania, an island the size of Ireland. The region's past heat waves normally lasted as long as two months. The 2015-2016 heat wave persisted for eight months. Alistair Hobday, who studied the event, compared it to the deadly 2003 European heat wave that led to the deaths of thousands of people. “Except in this case, it's the animals that are suffering,” said Hobday, a senior research scientist at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, a government agency. South of the equator, Australia's summer stretches from December to February — and soaring temperatures turned the mainland deadly this year. An estimated 23,000 giant fruit bats — about a third of that species's population in Australia — dropped dead from heat stress in Queensland and New South Wales in April. The bats, called flying foxes, cannot survive temperatures above 42 degrees Celsius (107.6 degrees Fahrenheit). Another 10,000 black flying foxes, a different species, also died. Bodies plopped into meadows, backyard gardens and swimming pools. A month later, more than 100 ringtail possums fell dead in Victoria when temperatures topped 35 degrees Celsius (95 degrees Fahrenheit) for four consecutive days. The warming waters off Tasmania are not just killing the giant kelp, but transforming life for marine animals. Warm-water species are swimming south to places where they could not have survived a few years ago. Kingfish, sea urchins, zooplankton and even microbes from the warmer north near the mainland now occupy waters closer to the South Pole. “There's about 60 or 70 species of fish that now have established populations in Tasmania that used not to be here,” said Craig Johnson, who leads the ecology and biodiversity center at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania. “You might see them occasionally as sort of vagrants, but they certainly did not have established populations.” But the region's indigenous cold-water species have no place to go. Animals such as the prehistoric-looking red handfish are accustomed to the frigid water closer to the shore. They cannot live in the deep-water abyss between the bottom tip of Tasmania and Antarctica. “It's a geographic climate trap,” Johnson said. Marine animals unique to Australia — the wallabies and koalas of the deep — could easily vanish. “So there's going to be a whole bunch of species here that we expect will just go extinct. “You know, it's not a happy story.” Genocide Every time he dives for abalone, Rodney Dillon plays his part in what is arguably Tasmania's saddest story of all. At 63, he's getting too old for the occasional plunge. Before a dive on a windy day in September, two people had to wrestle his wet suit over a thick athlete's body softened by time. Dillon persists because diving puts a favorite food on the family table, and, more important, it carries on a dying Aboriginal custom nearly ended by the British crown and the Australian governors it appointed. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/5BC75MXZEII6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/5BC75MXZEII6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Rodney Dillon, 63, on indigenous land on Bruny Island. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/Q42EDFXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/Q42EDFXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Dillon sheds his wet suit after hunting for abalone. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/N6TA2PXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/N6TA2PXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Dillon dives for abalone off Bruny Island. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Under the water, amid swaying emerald stalks of kelp, Dillon thought that he glimpsed the world his ancestors saw. “I sometimes got lost in the kelp. I would lose concentration from catching food and go to look, sort of sky-gaze, at the beauty of the light coming through,” he said. The light dimmed for the natives known as the Palawa in the late 1700s, when the British established a penal colony for convicted outcasts at Sydney harbor and looked south for more land to conquer. Between 4,000 and 7,000 Aboriginals were spread out over Tasmania, then known as Van Diemen's Land, when the British military arrived with a group of convicts in 1803. Within 50 years, all but 200 of the Aboriginals were dead. In a history that isn't widely known in Australia, let alone the wider world, Aboriginal land was seized without a treaty, said Lyndall Ryan, author of “The Aboriginal Tasmanians” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1863739653), a history of how the native people met their demise. When the natives tried to defend the kangaroo hunting and abalone fishing grounds that sustained them, they were routed. “Genocide was government policy for more than 200 years,” Ryan wrote in an email to The Washington Post. At the time, British archaeologists adhered to junk science that said Aboriginals were the last link between humans and apes. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/ILFKRLRFBAI6VHGJ4GOPXSD6KE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/ILFKRLRFBAI6VHGJ4GOPXSD6KE.jpg) William Lanne, the last full-blooded Tasmanian Aboriginal man, died in 1869. — Photograph: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images. When William Lanne, the last full-blooded Tasmanian Aboriginal man, died in 1869, a researcher cut off his head, stole it to England for study, then displayed it in a museum. After Truganini, the last full-blooded woman, died seven years later, her skeleton was placed on display at a museum in Tasmania against her wishes (https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1833&context=han). “Don't let them cut me,” she said on her deathbed. With their deaths, Tasmania declared that Aboriginal Tasmanians were extinct. Around 1910, after Australia became a nation under the British, officials launched a program that removed mixed-race Aboriginal children from their mothers. In his book, “Australia's Coloured Minority: Its Place in the Community” (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0007J4CJO), author A.O. Neville partly explained the young country's motive. Assimilation of black Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people could be assured only by “breeding out the colour” of their skin. As a “protector of Aborigines” in Western Australia for 21 years ending in 1936, Neville had a guiding influence on the child removal program. Over six decades, welfare workers across Australia took children, some of them at birth, from any parent the state deemed unfit, up to an estimated 50,000. Brown children were placed in white institutions, church social programs and homes to promote inter-mixing. “Generally by the fifth and invariably by the sixth generation, all native characteristics of the Australian Aborigine are eradicated,” Cecil Evelyn Cook, the “chief protector of Aborigines” in North Australia, said in 1933 (https://www.smh.com.au/national/caught-up-in-a-scientific-racism-designed-to-breed-out-the-black-20080214-gds108.html). “The problem of our half-castes will be quickly eliminated by the complete disappearance of the black race, and the swift submergence of their progeny in the white.” Ancient Aboriginals likely would not recognize the 20,000 or so Tasmanians who currently identify as their descendants. The large majority are white. Dillon said dark-complexioned Aboriginals on the mainland doubt his heritage because of his appearance. Like most Aboriginals in Tasmania, his skin is pale. His eyes are blue-green, the color of the sea. White locks atop his head swirl like ice cream. “People make nasty comments all the time,” he said. Dillon's great-great-grandmother, Fanny Cochrane Smith, is known as the last speaker of the indigenous Aboriginal language. He is considered an elder among his people in Tasmania, and he is leading them in speaking out against discrimination. The Tasmanian Aboriginal Center, formed in the 1970s, is demanding full recognition by the government. Nearly 200 years after the British arrived, Tasmania became the first Australian state to apologize for engaging in child removal and has also given back a small portion of land. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/P2P5QOHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/P2P5QOHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) An exhibit of indigenous shell necklaces at the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery in Hobart. The practice of stringing shells is an important part of Aboriginal women's culture in Tasmania. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. In 2008, then-prime minister Kevin Rudd apologized to the “Stolen Generations” (http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/306191/Stolen_Generations_Assessor_final_report.pdf). That year, the state of Tasmania agreed to dole out 5 million Australian dollars to victims and their kin. At her house in Launceston, Nanette Shaw, a descendant, clings to the traditions of her forebears by fashioning bull kelp into baskets. Shaw, 66, said she turned to basketmaking to ease the trauma she experienced while growing up as an Aboriginal. “It centers me,” Shaw said. She suffers from depression and alcoholism, and the craft is her distraction. “I have not been drinking for nearly 10 years. Sometimes the depression takes over, and rather than walk down and get a bottle, I'll do this.” But if impacts from climate change worsen, the traits can't be handed down to children, she said. The shells are disappearing amid a mix of warming water and pollution. As recently as two decades ago, it was hard to walk on the beach without stepping on them, she said. “Now you're walking on pure sand,” Shaw said. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/CFY5TAXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/CFY5TAXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Patsy Cameron, 72, collects bull kelp at Shelly Point. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/IXDJJSXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/IXDJJSXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Nanette Shaw, an Aboriginal elder, oils a kelp basket she created using traditional techniques at her home. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/DLYU4XHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/DLYU4XHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Marina shell necklaces made by Patsy Cameron, 72, collected in a traditional kelp basket. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Ninety miles away on Scamander Beach, her friend Patsy Cameron found bull kelp to gift to Shaw and several handfuls of jewelry-quality shells. But it now takes nearly a day to collect them, as opposed to two hours years ago. “If climate change destroys the seaweed, our shell supply will disappear along with the kelp forest,” said Cameron, 72. “It's getting hotter and that heat, it's affecting not only the giant kelp, but the color of the abalone is changing,” Dillon said. “We just take too much out of the Earth and we don't put it back,” Dillon said. “Australia is one of the worst if you know about coal. How much coal do we need to dig up? And we're too stupid to see what this is causing … because we make money out of it.” And now, Australia is caught in a record-breaking heat wave. The apocalypse The heartbreaking video went viral late in November: A koala bear slowly walked through wildfire. The marsupial, euthanized days later because its burns didn't heal, was just one victim of the many wildfires that started burning in the Australian spring and are still going at the start of summer. At least nine people have died and 700 homes have been destroyed. One woman in New South Wales took a few of her house's charred remains to Australia's Parliament in early December with a message for Prime Minister Scott Morrison. “Morrison, your climate crisis destroyed my home,” Melinda Plesman wrote in bold red letters. Morrison is an ardent supporter of coal excavation in a country that produced 44 million tons in 2017. Australia is the world's leading exporter of coal, mostly to Asia, and the fourth-largest producer. A few weeks before the koala — nicknamed Lewis — was euthanized, the newly re-elected prime minister took his advocacy for coal to a new level. He pledged to outlaw environmental demonstrations, calling the protests a “new breed of radical activism” that is “apocalyptic in tone.” One month later, a Sydney Morning Herald headline (https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/nsw-bushfires-apocalyptic-health-effects-of-sydney-s-toxic-air-20191211-p53ixc.html) described conditions in Australia's most iconic city as “apocalyptic,” as residents choked in a smoky haze from bush fires. A coalition of doctors and climate researchers declared it a public health emergency. The bush fires have arrived amid record heat and particularly dry conditions that experts say are being made more common thanks to climate change. The country experienced a five-day heat wave in the state of Victoria that shattered records. The Friday before Christmas was the hottest December day on record, measuring 47.9 degrees Celsius (118.2 degrees Fahrenheit) at the Horsham weather station. Rescuers searching for human survivors in the scorched remains of forests have discovered koalas, a creature found only in Australia, burned to death in eucalyptus trees where they sought shelter. At the Port Macquarie Koala Hospital, where Lewis was put down, it was called “a national tragedy.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/HI3ONPBH7MI6VHGJ4GOPXSD6KE.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/HI3ONPBH7MI6VHGJ4GOPXSD6KE.jpg) Two bush fires approach a house on the outskirts of Bargo, southwest of Sydney, on December 21. A “catastrophic” fire danger warning was issued for the greater Sydney region. — Photograph: David Gray/Getty Images. The tragedy playing out underwater is much worse, but invisible to most. In 1950, giant kelp stretched over 9 million square meters in a thick band along Tasmania's coast, said Cayne Layton, a research fellow at the marine and antarctic institute. Today, it covers fewer than 500,000 meters in little spots on the coastline. Giant kelp is lovely but fragile. It needs cool, clean, nutrient-rich water to survive, and it's losing all three. It is a serious loss. Divers coveted swimming amid plants that grew like the mythical beanstalk to glimpse some of the world's rarest creatures. Squid fed there, red handfish hid there, spiny pipehorse lounged about, and rock lobster were abundant. The most recent study — nearly 10 years old — estimated that 95 percent of giant kelp had been lost to warming and pollution, Layton said, and is probably much worse now. The less spectacular common kelp, which grows on the coastal slope leading to deep water, is overtaking the spaces where giant kelp grew, Layton said. Along with long, straplike bull kelp that clings to giant rocks near the shore, common kelp appears to be more tolerant to warming temperatures. But even these species aren't safe. The warming water has introduced a new plague: long-spine sea urchins, an animal that greedily devours kelp. A single urchin was found in the cold waters off Tasmania by divers conducting a survey in 1978. Now, there are more than 18 million, according to the most recent survey by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies. Sea urchins prefer warm water. They swarm rocky reefs where kelp grows, leaving oceans barren and devoid of life. Kelp forests' “importance is equal to forests on land,” said Layton, “so if you can imagine what the world would be like without trees, that's what a world without kelp forests would be like.” Scientists say there is only one explanation for why sea urchins migrated so far from their warmer natural habitat near Sydney to the cold waters around Tasmania: the East Australian Current. The current, made famous in the film “Finding Nemo”, is fed by a vast stream of tropical water that reaches Australia's coast after traveling all the way from South America. The water then flows south down the east coast of Australia and then swings back east just north of Sydney. At that point, the warm-water current splits, with some water flowing southward toward the Tasman Sea in the form of swirls of tropical water called eddies — and this secondary branch has intensified. This extension of the East Australian Current is spewing thousands of eddies deeper southward toward Tasmania, carrying the larvae of warm-water species to places they had never been. According to research compiled by Professor Gretta Pecl at the University of Tasmania, toxic algae blooms lurk where giant kelp once flourished. Abalone have gone from healthy to “stressed.” The brightly colored Maori octopus is being replaced by the gloomy octopus, more common to the waters near Sydney. And a yellow-bellied sea snake has migrated to the habitat. The warmer water disintegrated most of the giant kelp over two decades and contributed to the massive, record-breaking marine heat wave of 2015. “You can't say that this event was due to climate change,” said Holbrook, the ocean scientist. “But what you can say is that the intensity was much more likely due to climate change. “You liken it to smoking,” he said. “If you smoke cigarettes, you increase the likelihood of getting lung cancer.” Saving the farms The marine heat wave left something behind when it finally ended: disease. A sickening smell at the shallow Pipe Clay Lagoon is how Pacific oyster mortality syndrome introduced itself to Steve Calvert. The syndrome, known as POMS (https://www.imas.utas.edu.au/news/news-items/scientists-working-with-oyster-farmers-to-tackle-poms-this-summer), turned his small oyster farm in the lagoon into a mass grave, and the smell of the dead stretched for miles. Calvert lost 75 percent of his oysters in 2016. Other farmers in the region's five major farming areas lost nearly 100 percent of their stock. Oyster mortality disease had stricken France, China, the United States, New Zealand and even Sydney, but never pristine Tasmania. “We've got a reputation in Tasmania of having pure water and some of the freshest air in the world,” said Calvert's son, Liam, a manager at the farm. “So that's part of why there's an attraction to the Tasmanian oyster, because people think pristine-forest freshness and all that kind of thing.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/WRQUGTXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/WRQUGTXZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Oystermen work in Clifton Beach, Tasmania. Scientists are working with oyster farmers to reduce the impact of disease linked to warming waters. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/N37APHHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/N37APHHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Simon Neil works an oyster bed at Clifton Pacific Oysters in Clifton Beach. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/XIVUK2HZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/XIVUK2HZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Oysters are sorted by size and quality at Clifton Pacific Oysters. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. Climate change had raised the region's water temperatures to an ideal level for the contagion. POMS joined warm-water toxic algal blooms as a new threat to the region's aquaculture and fisheries. In an encouraging sign that Tasmania's aquaculture can adapt, scientists had prepared the Calverts and other farmers for the possibility that POMS would strike. “We've been working with industry for quite a long time, and we’ve always had the philosophy that scientists need to know how to farm and farmers need to know how to do science,” said Sarah Ugalde, a research fellow at the University of Tasmania. Ugalde and her team persuaded the farmers to buy oysters from other areas that survived a disease outbreak. They used that stock to cultivate a disease-tolerant oyster. The Calverts lost about a million oysters but rebuilt the stock with spat — oyster babies — recommended by scientists. Tasmania's $25-million-per-year oyster farming industry is thriving. The product price, driven up to $1 per oyster from demand during the disaster, stayed the same, helping the Calverts to increase revenue. “It's good performance work, and there's a good return for the hard work,” Steve Calvert said. “We still love this ocean.” It's a matter of adapting to a warming world. “Generally, there's been a lot of work that’s gone into trying to estimate how fisheries production … will change with climate change,” Johnson, the marine institute researcher, said. “For southeastern Tasmania, which accounts for most of Australia's fishery production, the projections are that the fishery production will decline,” Johnson said in his office by the water. “Like I said, it's not a particularly happy story.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/RABP3HHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/img/1800/RABP3HHZEMI6THQCDVC4WPP2R4.jpg) Waves crash near the shore in Cloudy Bay near Bruny Island. — Photograph: Bonnie Jo Mount/The Washington Post. __________________________________________________________________________ • Juliet Eilperin contributed to this story. • Darryl Fears (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/darryl-fears) joined The Washington Post as a general assignment reporter on the Metro staff in 1999. He went on the cover race, demographics and immigration on the national desk, and, for a brief time, urban affairs in the District of Columbia. Before joining The Washington Post, he was a staff writer for the Detroit Free Press, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution and the Los Angeles Times. Darryl has profesional affiliations with the National Association of Black Journalists and the Society of Environmental Journalists. He speaks conversational Spanish (fading for lack of practice). • Bonnie Jo Mount (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/bonnie-jo-mount) is a staff photojournalist for The Washington Post. She joined The Post as the Picture Editor in 2008. Bonnie Jo has lived in a variety of places, working as an editor, educator and photojournalist. Previous positions include: assistant professor at Hampton University (VA); deputy managing editor for visuals and interactive media at The News & Observer (North Carolina); director of photography at The Gazette (Colorado Springs, Cororado); photography editor at The Jackson Hole Guide (Wyoming); and photojournalist on the staffs of The Burlington Free Press (Vermont), The Knoxville News-Sentinel and The Tampa Tribune. Mount earned a B.A. in Fine Arts from the University of South Florida and studied in the MFA program at the Visual Studies Workshop. In 2002 she spent an academic year at Stanford University as a John S. Knight Fellow. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 28, 2019, 02:37:37 pm Yep … global warming/climate change combined with Australian racism. What a mix, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 28, 2019, 06:27:15 pm from The Washington Post… Australia braces for yet another ‘extreme’ heat wave that will escalate bush fire risks Australia is bracing for more bush fire risks as another “extreme” heat wave hits. By ANDREW FREEDMAN | 1:28PM EST — Friday, December 27, 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/twWqt8VnaGqopyWzyFxPcN2I8lc=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UPHFWPBCD4I6VMBU3Z64FNIZTM.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/twWqt8VnaGqopyWzyFxPcN2I8lc=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/UPHFWPBCD4I6VMBU3Z64FNIZTM.jpg) Bush fires burn a property in Balmoral, southwest of Sydney, on December 19. — Photograph: Peter Parks/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. JUST A WEEK after enduring one of its hottest December heat waves on record, much of Australia is bracing for another round of punishing, dry heat and bush fire dangers through the weekend and into next week. The new heat wave is forecast to be “extreme,” the most severe designation on the Australian Bureau of Meteorology's forecast scale. Such heat waves pose a health “risk for anyone who does not take precautions to keep cool, even those who are healthy,” the BOM states on its website (http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/heatwave/about.shtml). The hottest areas will be in inland South Australia on Friday and Saturday, while southeastern Australia, which has been severely affected by deadly bush fires that have burned an area nearly twice the size of Connecticut, is forecast to heat up by Sunday and into Monday. In Sydney, the high temperature is forecast to be close to 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 Celsius) on Sunday, although inland regions closer to the fire's front lines could soar into the 100s. The Rural Fire Service in New South Wales is predicting “very high” fire danger over the weekend, with “deteriorating weather conditions” early next week as hot, dry weather takes hold. “Extreme intensity” (http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/heatwave) heat wave conditions are probable for northern parts of Western Australia, the southeast portion of New South Wales, and far eastern Victoria during the three-day period starting Saturday, the BOM forecasts. For example, Canberra, the nation's capital, is forecast to reach 100 degrees Fahrenheit (38 Celsius) over the weekend. The typical high temperature in Canberra during the month of December is 81.5 degrees (27.5 Celsius). The heat is predicted to extend into the first week of the new year, which begins what is typically the country's hottest month. However, it may be difficult for Australia to eclipse the records set in December, with numerous all-time heat records falling in individual locations, and the country setting records for its hottest day ever measured. The country is in the grips of a serious drought, which is exacerbating the hot conditions as more of the sun's energy goes into heating the air rather than also evaporating water from vegetation. The extremely dry conditions have allowed tree types that typically do not burn to go up in flames as bush fires have raged for months along the eastern coast of Australia. One fire, known as the Gospers Mountain blaze, measures more than 1 million acres in size. The result of several fires combined, it is referred to as a “mega fire” and has been burning on the outskirts of Sydney, sending a plume of hazardous smoke into the country’s most iconic city week after week. (https://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/Washington%20Post%20pix/20191227twboma_TwitterBureauOfMeteorologyAustralia_zpsknzso4h3.jpg~original) (https://twitter.com/BOM_au/status/1210468975227871233) The heat and fires have become a political flash point in Australia, where the Liberal-National coalition government of Scott Morrison has come under fire (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/19/australia-has-its-hottest-day-second-straight-day-areas-face-catastrophic-fire-conditions) for its strident support of coal production and refusal to re-evaluate climate policies in the wake of the bush fires. Australia is a leading coal exporter, and burning coal to generate electricity is a major source of greenhouse gases that cause global warming. Telltale climate fingerprints Human-caused global climate change is making heat waves such as this one more likely to occur, more severe and longer-lasting. This year, natural climate variability is combining with climate change to strongly favor dry and hot weather in Australia, particularly in southeastern regions. An early analysis (https://twitter.com/SISeneviratne/status/1207906138819375105) of the previous December heat event shows that climate change may have made the Australian national heat record (https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1207921045044224001) at least 20 percent more likely to occur now than in a climate that had not been influenced by human emissions of greenhouse gases. Ongoing research into the event may conclude that it could not have occurred without human-caused global warming, as previous analyses (https://www.carbonbrief.org/northern-hemispheres-extreme-heatwave-in-2018-impossible-without-climate-change) of other extreme heat events have found. According to a new BOM report (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/statements/scs72.pdf) on the 2019 bush fires, spring brought the highest fire-weather danger on record in Australia, as measured by the Forest Fire Danger Index, with “record high values observed in areas of all States and Territories.” Long-term climate trends in Australia show clear warming and an increase in extreme heat events. Last summer, for example, was the country's hottest on record, and the BOM found that (http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate) climate change exacerbated extreme heat events as well as droughts during the year. Australia has warmed by just over 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) since 1910, with most of the warming occurring since 1950. The BOM has found an uptick in the frequency of extreme heat events and severity of drought conditions during this period. One of the most robust conclusions of climate science research is the link between general warming and increased occurrences and severity of extreme heat events. __________________________________________________________________________ • Andrew Freedman (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/andrew-freedman) is an editor for the Capital Weather Gang at The Washington Post. He has long covered science research and policy, with a focus on climate change, extreme weather and the environment. He was among the first reporters to popularize the term “polar vortex” during the infamous East Coast winter of 2013 to 2014. He joined The Washington Post in 2019, having worked as an editor and reporter for Axios, Mashable, Climate Central and other publications. Andrew holds a BA in political science from Tufts University; a MA in climate and society from Columbia University; and a MA from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. __________________________________________________________________________ Stories related to this topic by Andrew Freedman: • Australia sizzles through record heat wave as Sydney faces ‘catastrophic’ fire danger (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/20/australia-sizzles-through-record-heat-wave-sydney-faces-catastrophic-fire-danger) (December 20, 2019). • Australia has its hottest day for a second straight day as areas face ‘catastrophic’ fire conditions (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/19/australia-has-its-hottest-day-second-straight-day-areas-face-catastrophic-fire-conditions) (December 19, 2019). • Australia has its hottest day on record as Sydney residents brace for heat, fires and smoke (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/18/australia-has-its-hottest-day-record-sydney-residents-brace-heat-fires-smoke) (December 18, 2019). • Australia braces for highest temperatures in recorded history amid blistering heat wave (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/17/australia-braces-highest-temperatures-recorded-history-amid-blistering-heat-wave) (December 17, 2019). • Raging bush fires torch 5.3 million acres in New South Wales, Australia, turning beaches black with ash (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/10/raging-bushfires-have-torched-million-acres-new-south-wales-australia-turning-beaches-black-with-ash) (December 10, 2019). https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/27/australia-braces-yet-another-extreme-heat-wave-that-will-escalate-bush-fire-risks (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/27/australia-braces-yet-another-extreme-heat-wave-that-will-escalate-bush-fire-risks) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on December 28, 2019, 07:22:59 pm Quote An early analysis of the previous December heat event shows that climate change may have made the Australian national heat record at least 20 percent more likely to occur now than in a climate that had not been influenced by human emissions of greenhouse gases. Ongoing research into the event may conclude that it could not have occurred without human-caused global warming The town of Cloncurry in northwest Queensland holds the record for the highest temperature in the shade recorded in Australia, at 53.1 °C (127.5 °F) on 16 January 1889. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 28, 2019, 07:37:35 pm The idiot from Woodville reacts to reality... (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on December 30, 2019, 09:11:56 pm (https://misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/adbafb8d-ac5d-403a-b484-3dd70e70d03f.jpg) (https://misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/adbafb8d-ac5d-403a-b484-3dd70e70d03f.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 03, 2020, 05:23:02 pm The “NEW NORMAL” is now here… from The New York Times… Apocalypse Becomes the New Normal We're already in the early stages of climate crisis. By PAUL KRUGMAN | 6:45PM EST — Thursday, January 02, 2020 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/opinion/02krugmanWeb/merlin_166542144_8ebbc04f-7262-4d64-b300-d9a8c1f5a041-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/opinion/02krugmanWeb/merlin_166542144_8ebbc04f-7262-4d64-b300-d9a8c1f5a041-superJumbo.jpg) Australia is experiencing a catastrophic fire season. — Photograph: Matthew Abbott/for The New York Times. THE past week's images from Australia (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/world/australia/fires.html) have been nightmarish: walls of flame, blood-red skies, residents huddled on beaches as they try to escape the inferno. The bush fires have been so intense that they have generated “fire tornadoes” powerful enough to flip over heavy trucks. The thing is, Australia's summer of fire is only the latest in a string of catastrophic weather events over the past year: unprecedented flooding in the Midwest (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/opinion/midwest-flooding-climate-change.html), a heat wave in India that sent temperatures to 123 degrees Fahrenheit (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/world/asia/india-heat-wave-deaths.html), another heat wave that brought unheard-of temperatures (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/02072019/climate-change-attribution-europe-heat-wave-hottest-june-record-wildfires-world-weather-data) to much of Europe. And all of these catastrophes were related to climate change. Notice that I said “related to” rather than “caused by” climate change. This is a distinction that has flummoxed many people over the years. Any individual weather event has multiple causes, which was one reason news reports used to avoid mentioning the possible role of climate change in natural disasters. In recent years, however, climate scientists have tried to cut through this confusion by engaging in “extreme event attribution” (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/extreme-event-attribution-climate-versus-weather-blame-game), which focuses on probabilities: You can't necessarily say that climate change caused a particular heat wave, but you can ask how much difference global warming made to the probability of that heat wave happening. And the answer, typically, is a lot: Climate change makes the kinds of extreme weather events we've been seeing much more likely (https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/). (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub/02oz-fires-sub-jumbo-v2.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub/02oz-fires-sub-superJumbo-v2.jpg) Monitoring a fire on Thursday in East Gippsland, Victoria, where 17 people were missing. — Photograph: Darrian Traynor/Getty Images. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub3/merlin_166569390_b72df21d-5558-45ef-b3b0-34d4424ad645-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub3/merlin_166569390_b72df21d-5558-45ef-b3b0-34d4424ad645-superJumbo.jpg) Lake Conjola, in New South Wales. — Photograph: Robert Oerlemans/via Associated Press. And while there's a lot of randomness in weather outcomes, that randomness actually makes climate change much more damaging in its early stages than most people realize. On our current trajectory, Florida as a whole will eventually be swallowed by the sea, but long before that happens, rising sea levels will make catastrophic storm surges commonplace. Much of India will eventually become uninhabitable (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/climate/india-heat-wave-summer.html), but killing heat waves and droughts will take a deadly toll well before that point is reached. Put it this way: While it will take generations for the full consequences of climate change to play out, there will be many localized, temporary disasters along the way. Apocalypse will become the new normal — and that's happening right in front of our eyes. The big question is whether the proliferation of climate-related disasters will finally be enough to break though the opposition to action. There are some hopeful signs. One is that the news media has become much more willing to talk about the role of climate change in weather events. Not long ago it was all too common to read articles about heat waves, floods and droughts that seemed to go to great lengths to avoid mentioning climate change. My sense is that reporters and editors have finally gotten over that block. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires2/merlin_166567695_1e55080f-2641-4fad-b8a2-5a9c407f9c08-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires2/merlin_166567695_1e55080f-2641-4fad-b8a2-5a9c407f9c08-superJumbo.jpg) The remains of a house outside Batemans Bay on Thursday. — Photograph: Peter Parks/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires/merlin_166569285_e9c8b42b-00e7-43e0-8b95-806927517338-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires/merlin_166569285_e9c8b42b-00e7-43e0-8b95-806927517338-superJumbo.jpg) Cars leaving Batemans Bay in New South Wales on Thursday. — Photograph: Peter Parks/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. The public also seems to be paying attention, with concern about climate change (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/28/u-s-concern-about-climate-change-is-rising-but-mainly-among-democrats/) growing substantially over the past few years. The bad news is that growing climate awareness is mainly taking place among Democrats; the Republican base is largely unmoved. And the anti-environmental extremism of conservative politicians has, if anything, become even more intense as their position has become intellectually untenable. The right used to pretend that there was a serious scientific dispute about the reality of global warming and its sources. Now Republicans, and the Trump administration in particular, have simply become hostile to science in general (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/28/climate/trump-administration-war-on-science.html). Hey, aren't scientists effectively part of the deep state? Furthermore, this isn't just a U.S. problem. Even as Australia burns, its current government is reaffirming its commitment to coal and threatening to make boycotts of environmentally destructive businesses a crime (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/11/01/australias-prime-minister-pledges-outlaw-climate-boycotts-arguing-they-threaten-economy). The sick irony of the current situation is that anti-environmentalism is getting more extreme precisely at the moment when the prospects for decisive action should be better than ever. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub4/merlin_166569747_64228d83-d8fa-46e5-b8f8-a78c1fce24e3-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/02/world/02oz-fires-sub4/merlin_166569747_64228d83-d8fa-46e5-b8f8-a78c1fce24e3-superJumbo.jpg) Dust and smoke from Australia’s bushfires are reaching New Zealand, with its effects visible in snow near Franz Josef Glacier. — Photograph: STUFF NZ/Reuters. On one side, the dangers of climate change are no longer predictions about the future: We can see the damage now, although it's only a small taste of the horrors that lie ahead. On the other side, drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions now look remarkably easy to achieve, at least from an economic point of view. In particular, there has been so much technological progress in alternative energy that the Trump administration is trying desperately to prop up coal (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/12/23/21031112/trump-coal-ferc-energy-subsidy-mopr) against competition from solar and wind. So will environmental policy play a role in the 2020 campaign? Most Democrats seem disinclined to make it a major issue, and I understand why: Historically, the threat posed by right-wing environmental policy seemed abstract, distant and hard to run on compared with, say, Republican attempts to dismantle Obamacare. But the wave of climate-related catastrophes may be changing the political calculus. I'm not a campaign expert, but it seems to me that campaigns might get some traction with ads showing recent fires and floods and pointing out that Donald Trump and his friends are doing everything they can to create more such disasters. For the truth is that Trump's environmental policy is the worst thing he's doing to America and the world. And voters should know that. __________________________________________________________________________ • Paul Krugman (https://www.nytimes.com/by/paul-krugman) joined The New York Times in 1999 as an Op-Ed columnist. He is distinguished professor in the Graduate Center Economics Ph.D. program and distinguished scholar at the Luxembourg Income Study Center at the City University of New York. In addition, he is professor emeritus of Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School. In 2008, Mr. Krugman was the sole recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade theory. Mr. Krugman received his B.A. from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from M.I.T. in 1977. He has taught at Yale, M.I.T. and Stanford. At M.I.T. he became the Ford International Professor of Economics. Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 27 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the “new trade theory,” a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. In recognition of that work, in 1991 the American Economic Association awarded him its John Bates Clark medal. Mr. Krugman's current academic research is focused on economic and currency crises. At the same time, Mr. Krugman has written extensively for a broader public audience. Some of his articles on economic issues, originally published in Foreign Affairs, Harvard Business Review, Scientific American and other journals, are reprinted in Pop Internationalism and The Accidental Theorist. His column (https://www.nytimes.com/by/paul-krugman) appears every Tuesday and Friday. Read his blog, The Conscience of a Liberal (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com), and follow him on Twitter (https://twitter.com/NYTimeskrugman). • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Friday, January 3, 2020, on Page A22 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Apocalypse Becomes the New Normal”. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Australia Fires Intensify: ‘It's Going to Be a Blast Furnace’ (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/australia/fires.html) (January 2, 2020). • See Where Australia’s Deadly Wildfires Are Burning (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/02/climate/australia-fires-map.html) (January 2, 2020). • Why the Fires in Australia Are So Bad (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/world/australia/fires.html) (January 1, 2020). • Apocalyptic Scenes in Australia as Fires Turn Skies Blood Red (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/31/world/australia/fires-red-skies-Mallacoota.html) (December 31, 2019). • Australia's Volunteer Firefighters Find It Hard to Pause, Even for Christmas (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/24/world/australia/volunteer-firefighters.html) (December 24, 2019). • Australia Burns Again, and Now Its Biggest City Is Choking (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/06/world/australia/sydney-fires.html) (December 6, 2019). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/opinion/climate-change-australia.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/opinion/climate-change-australia.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 04, 2020, 02:39:04 pm from The New York Times… Australia Is Committing Climate Suicide As record fires rage, the country's leaders seem intent on sending it to its doom. By RICHARD GLANAGAN | 8:25PM EST — Friday, January 03, 2019 (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan1/merlin_164266401_a35a2d0a-0a32-4613-b2fd-4b152d464f11-superJumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan1/merlin_164266401_a35a2d0a-0a32-4613-b2fd-4b152d464f11-superJumbo.jpg) An out-of-control fire in Hillville, in the Australian state of New South Wales, on November 12. — Photograph: Matthew Abbott/for The New York Times. BRUNY ISLAND, AUSTRALIA — Australia today is ground zero for the climate catastrophe. Its glorious Great Barrier Reef is dying, its world-heritage rain forests are burning (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-27/bushfires-devastate-ancient-forests-and-rare-wildlife/11733956), its giant kelp forests have largely vanished (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/world/climate-environment/climate-change-tasmania), numerous towns have run out of water (https://www.thefifthestate.com.au/articles/day-zero-might-mean-tough-choices-for-90-towns-looking-at-new-locations/) or are about to, and now the vast continent is burning on a scale never before seen (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/world/australia/fires.html). The images of the fires are a cross between “Mad Max” and “On the Beach”: thousands driven onto beaches in a dull orange haze, crowded tableaux of people and animals almost medieval in their strange muteness — half-Bruegel, half-Bosch, ringed by fire, survivors' faces hidden behind masks and swimming goggles. Day turns to night as smoke extinguishes all light in the horrifying minutes before the red glow announces the imminence of the inferno. Flames leaping 200 feet into the air. Fire tornadoes. Terrified children at the helm of dinghies, piloting away from the flames, refugees in their own country. The fires have already burned about 14.5 million acres (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/01/02/australian-bushfires-numbers-highlight-sheer-scale-unfolding/) — an area almost as large as West Virginia, more than triple the area destroyed by the 2018 fires in California and six times the size of the 2019 fires in Amazonia. Canberra's air on New Yea'’s Day was the most polluted in the world (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7841561/Canberra-rings-New-Year-worlds-worst-smoke.html) partly because of a plume of fire smoke as wide as Europe. Scientists estimate that close to half a billion native animals have been killed (https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/animals/half-a-billion-animals-perish-in-bushfires/news-story/b316adb4f3af7b1c8464cf186ab9f52c) and fear that some species of animals and plants may have been wiped out completely. Surviving animals are abandoning their young in what is described as mass “starvation events” (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/starvation-event-shows-wildlife-may-need-human-help-to-survive-20200101-p53o3t.html). At least 18 people are dead and grave fears are held about many more. All this, and peak fire season is only just beginning. As I write, a state of emergency has been declared in New South Wales and a state of disaster in Victoria, mass evacuations are taking place, a humanitarian catastrophe is feared, and towns up and down the east coast are surrounded by fires, all transport and most communication links cut, their fate unknown. An email that the retired engineer Ian Mitchell sent to friends on New Year's Day from the small northern Victoria community of Gipsy Point speaks for countless Australians at this moment of catastrophe: “All we and most of Gipsy Point houses still here as of now. We have 16 people in Gipsy pt. No power, no phone no chance of anyone arriving for 4 days as all roads blocked. Only satellite email is working We have 2 bigger boats and might be able to get supplies 'esp fuel at Coota. We need more able people to defend the town as we are in for bad heat from Friday again. Tucks area will be a problem from today, but trees down on all tracks, and no one to fight it. We are tired, but ok. But we are here in 2020! Love Us” The bookstore in the fire-ravaged village of Cobargo, New South Wales, has a new sign outside: “Post-Apocalyptic Fiction has been moved to Current Affairs”. And yet, incredibly, the response of Australia's leaders to this unprecedented national crisis has been not to defend their country but to defend the coal industry, a big donor to both major parties — as if they were willing the country to its doom. While the fires were exploding in mid-December, the leader of the opposition Labor Party went on a tour of coal mining communities expressing his unequivocal support for coal exports. The prime minister, the conservative Scott Morrison, went on vacation to Hawaii (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-20/andrew-probyn-analysis-scott-morrison-hawaii-holiday/11817356). Since 1996 successive conservative Australian governments have successfully fought to subvert international agreements on climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/01/australia-kyoto-climate-targets-cabinet-papers) in defense of the country's fossil fuel industries. Today, Australia is the world's largest exporter of both coal and gas. It recently was ranked 57th out of 57 countries (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/11/australia-ranked-worst-of-57-countries-on-climate-change-policy) on climate-change action. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan2/merlin_166276443_2d2c873b-c60b-4c2f-b839-f5312ea31698-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan2/merlin_166276443_2d2c873b-c60b-4c2f-b839-f5312ea31698-superJumbo.jpg) Prime Minister Scott Morrison of Australia. — Photograph: Joel Carrett/European Pressphoto Agency/via Shutterstock. In no small part Mr. Morrison owes his narrow election victory last year to the coal-mining oligarch Clive Palmer, who formed a puppet party to keep the Labor Party — which had been committed to limited but real climate-change action — out of government. Mr. Palmer's advertising budget for the campaign (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2019/10/25/clive-palmer-election-spend/) was more than double that of the two major parties combined. Mr. Palmer subsequently announced plans to build the biggest coal mine in Australia (https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/mining/clive-palmer/clive-palmer-more-information). Since Mr. Morrison, an ex-marketing man, was forced to return from his vacation and publicly apologize, he has chosen to spend his time creating feel-good images of himself, posing with cricketers or his family. He is seen far less often at the fires' front lines, visiting ravaged communities or with survivors. Mr. Morrison has tried to present the fires as catastrophe-as-usual, nothing out of the ordinary. This posture seems to be a chilling political calculation: With no effective opposition from a Labor Party reeling from its election loss and with media dominated by Rupert Murdoch — 58 percent of daily newspaper circulation (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/sep/20/very-australian-coup-murdoch-turnbull-political-death-news-corps) — firmly behind his climate denialism (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2020/01/02/michael-pascoe-murdoch-climate/), Mr. Morrison appears to hope that he will prevail as long as he doesn't acknowledge the magnitude of the disaster engulfing Australia. Mr. Morrison made his name as immigration minister, perfecting the cruelty of a policy that interns refugees (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/nov/13/offshore-detention-nauru-immigration-history-human-rights) in hellish Pacific-island camps, and seems indifferent to human suffering. Now his government has taken a disturbing authoritarian turn, cracking down on unions (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/commentisfree/2019/nov/12/the-government-is-in-authoritarian-mode-and-now-is-not-the-time-for-complacency), civic organizations and journalists (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-48537374). Under legislation pending in Tasmania, and expected to be copied across Australia, environmental protesters now face up to 21 years in jail for demonstrating (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/bob-brown-and-others-say-new-anti-protest-law-bid-wont-work/11705296). “Australia is a burning nation led by cowards,” wrote the leading broadcaster (https://10daily.com.au/views/a191119irujf/hugh-riminton-we-are-a-burning-nation-led-by-cowards-20191119) Hugh Riminton, speaking for many. To which he might have added “idiots,” after Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack blamed the fires on exploding horse manure (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2019/dec/19/nsw-and-qld-fires-australia-braces-for-extreme-bushfires-danger-amid-sweltering-heatwave-live). Such are those who would open the gates of hell and lead a nation to commit climate suicide. (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan3/merlin_166541997_fbe673dd-ca49-488a-9c6b-6ebe6bf05819-jumbo.jpg) (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/03/opinion/03flanagan3/merlin_166541997_fbe673dd-ca49-488a-9c6b-6ebe6bf05819-superJumbo.jpg) A man drags away plastic garbage bins from a property engulfed in flames in Lake Conjola in New South Wales. — Photograph: Matthew Abbott/for The New York Times. More than one-third of Australians (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/25/factcheck-why-australias-monster-2019-bushfires-are-unprecedented) are estimated to be affected by the fires. By a significant and increasing majority (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/26/more-voters-think-australia-not-doing-enough-on-climate-guardian-essential-poll-shows), Australians want action on climate change, and they are now asking questions about the growing gap between the Morrison government's ideological fantasies and the reality of a dried-out, rapidly heating, burning Australia. The situation is eerily reminiscent of the Soviet Union in the 1980s, when the ruling apparatchiks were all-powerful but losing the fundamental, moral legitimacy to govern. In Australia today, a political establishment, grown sclerotic and demented on its own fantasies, is facing a monstrous reality which it has neither the ability nor the will to confront. Mr. Morrison may have a massive propaganda machine in the Murdoch press and no opposition, but his moral authority is bleeding away by the hour. On Thursday, after walking away from a pregnant woman asking for help, he was forced to flee the angry, heckling residents of a burned-out town. A local conservative politician described his own leader's humiliation as “the welcome he probably deserved” (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/go-back-to-kirribilli-morrison-heckled-by-angry-residents-in-cobargo-20200102-p53ogb.html). As Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, once observed, the collapse of the Soviet Union began with the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl in 1986. In the wake of that catastrophe, “the system as we knew it became untenable,” he wrote in 2006 (https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/turning-point-at-chernobyl). Could it be that the immense, still-unfolding tragedy of the Australian fires may yet prove to be the Chernobyl of climate crisis? __________________________________________________________________________ • Richard Miller Flanagan (born 1961) is an Australian writer, “considered by many to be the finest Australian novelist of his generation,” according to The Economist. Each of his novels has attracted major praise and received numerous awards and honours. He also has written and directed feature films. He won the 2014 Man Booker Prize for “The Narrow Road to the Deep North”. The New York Review of Books described Flanagan as “among the most versatile writers in the English language. That he is also an environmental activist and the author of numerous influential works of nonfiction makes his achievement all the more remarkable.” • A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Saturday, January 4, 2020, on page A23 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Australia Is Committing Climate Suicide”. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • ‘Nowhere Else to Go’: Some Defy Warnings to Flee Australian Fires (http://) (January 03, 2020). • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: The Australia Wildfires in Pictures (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/world/australia/wildfires-pictures.html) (January 03, 2020). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opinion/australia-fires-climate-change.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opinion/australia-fires-climate-change.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 05, 2020, 08:15:43 am (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENdhFiyUEAAAn2M.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1213545382677897216) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 06, 2020, 12:42:13 pm An excellent opinion piece appeared on The Washington Post early this morning, written by an Australian author and volunteer firefighter who lives in rural South Australia. Tom Toles' brilliant editorial cartoon published in the newspaper is also highly appropriate and “hits the nail right on the head”. from The Washington Post… In fire-ravaged Australia, climate denial goes up in smoke By JENNIFER MILLS | 2:05PM EST — Sunday, January 05, 2020 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MOH2M2RNX4I6VG3AQF6MDDHROM.jpg&w=899) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/MOH2M2RNX4I6VG3AQF6MDDHROM.jpg&w=1440) Bushfires burn between the townships of Bemm River and Cann River in eastern Gippsland, Victoria, Australia. — Photograph: Darrian Traynor/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. MUCH OF Australia's forested East Coast was already on fire by the time images emerged last month of Scott Morrison, our prime minister, holidaying in Hawaii (https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/photo-emerges-of-scott-morrison-holidaying-in-hawaii-before-he-announces-decision-to-return-to-australia/news-story/101aafa60250d92d3cc69c32f839d571). Sydney was blanketed in smoke. I'd been frantically updating emergency-services maps, checking on friends and relatives in four states, making sure my parents knew which kind of masks to get. I wondered whether Morrison realized he was on the verge of a Hurricane Katrina moment — whether he would rush back with a swift response, if only out of fear for his own political reputation. “I don't hold a hose, mate,” he said on talk radio from Hawaii (https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/australia/australia-firefighter-death-intl-hnk-scli/index.html). “I don't sit in a control room.” Like many volunteer firefighters, I am furious. Six months before the fires, and then again in September, Morrison declined to meet with a group of former fire chiefs who wanted to warn him that an emergency like this was on the horizon. Rural firefighting services in Australia are state-based and largely voluntary. They are often woefully underresourced, and some have been subject to recent budget cuts. Volunteer firefighters like me watched this season approach — the deadly combination of intense heat and Australia's worst drought in decades — with dread. Where were the extra resources we needed? And why was Australia still refusing to act on the climate emergency? And so 2020 has begun with mass evacuations of towns (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/houses-were-exploding-in-australias-fire-horror-heartbreak-and-relief/2020/01/03/adc1f534-2dd9-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html) in New South Wales and Victoria, as families flee in an unprecedented internal migration. On social media, Australians wish each other a safe new year as we scroll images of the sea blackened by soot, of families sheltering on red-lit beaches, of children rowing onto a lake in P2 face masks to escape the flames. Our holiday snaps are hashtagged #apocalypse. Since November, at least 23 people have died as a direct result of the fires, three of them volunteer firefighters. The severe health impacts from this smoke-filled summer will be harder to quantify. Morrison did come home from Hawaii a little early, and he then wandered onto the fire ground in search of caring imagery. But out of the smoke has emerged a man of ashes. Video is making the rounds of this desperately awkward man getting a cold reception in the New South Wales town of Cobargo, where three people died and the main street burned to the ground last week. “I don't really want to shake your hand,” muttered an exhausted-looking firefighter (https://tinyurl.com/ss8s9av). “Piss off,” residents called after Morrison (https://www.insider.com/australia-bushfires-scott-morrison-heckled-cobargo-videos-2020-1) as he fled his own media event. Australians see ourselves as tough characters who take care of each other in a crisis. Country people don't express our feelings easily; we don't like to make a fuss. But in rural areas, volunteer firefighters give up days and nights to respond to incidents as they arise. We do this because someone has to. When we rise to challenges such as this one, we expect something similar from our leaders. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2DCFTECJYJCD5GR7DBLDL636EE.jpg&w=699) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/01/climate-down-under-out/) Firefighters are learning and adapting to changing conditions. After 173 people died in Victoria's Black Saturday fires (https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/bushfire-black-saturday-victoria-2009/) in 2009, warning and evacuation systems were overhauled. Catastrophic fire danger warnings were introduced; trucks have been upgraded. All brigades are required to undertake annual burnover drills, which teach us how to avoid death inside our trucks in the event they are overtaken by fire. But these fires are occurring at an intensity, duration and scale we have not seen before. That fewer lives have been lost so far is a testament to these upgrades, to the dedication of firefighters and to public education about the risks. Sadly, the fires are also an illustration of the principle that while a nation might share the same facts, its people can still refuse to share a reality. Morrison likes to note that (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/21/scott-morrison-says-no-evidence-links-australias-carbon-emissions-to-bushfires) Australia produces just 1.3 percent of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions. But Australia is also the world's biggest exporter of coal (http://www.worldstopexports.com/coal-exports-country/), and we have regularly sided with other big, fossil fuel-dependent nations to stymie global climate negotiations. At December's climate talks in Madrid (https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/australia-s-betrayal-of-trust-emissions-plan-to-be-tested-in-madrid-20191208-p53hyv.html), we came under fire for attempting to fiddle with the books to hide increased emissions. Australia is not just dragging its feet on climate change; it is actively making things worse. Internationally, there is a sense that we are getting what we deserve. Months into the crisis, defense force reserves are finally being deployed to provide much-needed logistical support to firefighters. But Morrison still must answer for all the delays, for failing to communicate with rural fire services and for his government's continued advocacy of fossil fuels. “This is not about any one individual,” Morrison said (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-03/scott-morrison-responds-to-angry-criticism-bushfire-victims/11839674) when asked about the public anger he is facing, and in a way he is right. Experts have been warning governments about the effects of warming for at least 30 years, and few in Canberra — or in Washington D.C., or in so many other centers of power around the world — have listened. But no longer can the climate emergency be posed as a problem of the future. We are moving beyond denial and into a hazy twilight of blame. __________________________________________________________________________ • Jennifer Mills (http://www.jenjen.com.au/blog/about) is the author of the novel “Dyschronia” (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0772F28DC) and a volunteer firefighter in rural South Australia. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Australia wildfires turn New Zealand's sky an apocalyptic orange (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/01/05/australia-wildfires-are-turning-new-zealand-sky-an-apocalyptic-orange) • Australia's fires intensify as prime minister calls up army reservists to help contain the crisis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-fires-intensify-as-prime-minister-calls-up-army-reservists-to-help-contain-crisis/2020/01/04/1ade9670-2e54-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html) • Richard Glover: Australia’s bush fires reveal how Scott Morrison has lost his way (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/03/australias-bushfires-reveal-how-scott-morrison-has-lost-his-way) • Richard Glover: Australia's catastrophic bushfires should be an inflection point (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/25/australias-bushfires-are-catastrophic-when-will-politicians-learn) https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/in-fire-ravaged-australia-climate-denial-goes-up-in-smoke/2020/01/05/fcc90c0a-2e63-11ea-9b60-817cc18cf173_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/in-fire-ravaged-australia-climate-denial-goes-up-in-smoke/2020/01/05/fcc90c0a-2e63-11ea-9b60-817cc18cf173_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 07, 2020, 02:15:03 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENZOpTtU4AAvnZG.jpg)
We don’t just have a bushfire crisis. We have an arson crisis, too Arthur Chrenkoff (https://spectatorau.imgix.net/content/uploads/2020/01/4.jpg?auto=compress,enhance,format&crop=faces,entropy,edges&fit=crop&w=820&h=550) According to my calculations and estimates, the number of individuals around Australia whose arson has contributed to the current bushfire crisis has now passed 200. This figure is not presented as a counter-argument to those who blame the fires on climate change. Most people (I hope) understand that trees tend not to spontaneously combust, no matter what the air temperature is; when we talk about bushfires starting naturally, we are talking about lightning strikes igniting tinder. The climate change argument posits that the more extreme weather conditions – higher temperatures, drought and so forth – make fires, however started, much more destructive and much more difficult to control and extinguish. These are debates to be had between climatologists, forestry experts and firefighters. What is painfully clear, however, that Australia has a firebug crisis. It will no doubt be up to future royal commissions and inquiries to calculate exactly what proportion of the current loss and destruction can be attributed to human action, but I suspect it will be a significant one. Mankind may be causing climate change, but man is most definitely making fires start. Where’s the proof, you ask? Below is a sample of news reports from around the country over recent months. August 24: Three teenage girls have been arrested for arson over 13 grassfires police allege were deliberately lit on the New South Wales mid-north coast. The girls, aged 12, 13 and 14, were arrested in South Kempsey on Wednesday by officers from Strike Force Tronto, which was set up to investigate the fires.No-one was hurt in the blazes, which damaged grassland before being controlled by rural firefighters. The teens will be dealt with under the Young Offenders Act. September 10: Police have located a 12-year-old boy in Queensland who allegedly lit a fire deliberately that destroyed bushland and part of a storage facility in Slacks Creek in Logan, about 5pm Monday. The boy was with a group of juveniles in bushland off Kingston Rd, behind Woodridge Skate Park, when he allegedly started the fire, which spread quickly to a nearby storage facility, destroying a fence, two shipping containers and their contents, and police say he will be dealt with under the provisions of the Youth Justice Act. Another two 14-year-old girls are also assisting police with their inquiries after allegedly deliberately lighting a fire in bushland in Ormeau on the Gold Coast this morning. November 13: NSW police believe 12 bushfires may have been deliberately lit by arsonists during Tuesday’s “catastrophic” fire conditions…A suspected arsonist was arrested after a chase through the Royal National Park, south of Sydney by an army Black Hawk helicopter. The crew of the 6th Aviation Regiment unit in the Black Hawk spotted a man “acting suspiciously” in the northern area of the park, The Daily Telegraph reported. A fire had begun nearby. After coordinating with police on the ground, the man was arrested late in the evening and was being questioned. A crime scene has been established near scorched bushland at South Turramurra where police are investigating the origins of the fire to try to confirm whether it was sparked by an arsonist…Authorities are also probing the circumstances around several suspicious fires at Katoomba in the Blue Mountains, at Berkeley near Wollongong, and at Moonbi near Tamworth. November 14: Police allege a teenager started a central Queensland bushfire that has destroyed 14 homes…Police say the 16-year-old boy has not been charged with arson, but will be dealt with under the state’s Youth Justice Act. The Cobraball fire, near Yeppoon, is still burning days after it destroyed homes, sheds and cars. November 20: Last week we learnt that the Binna Burra fire, which destroyed the historic Binna Burra Lodge in South East Queensland, was started by a carelessly discarded cigarette. And the Gold Coast hinterland bushfires the week before may have been started by army live-firing exercises at the Kokoda Barracks, a spokesperson for the Australian Defence Force has conceded. November 20: More than half of the 18 people who have been dealt with by police over recent Queensland bushfires are children, police have revealed. Since a state of emergency was declared in Queensland on November 9, police said they had taken action against 18 people for deliberately lighting fires. Of that, police said, 10 are juveniles who are being dealt with under the Youth Justice Act. In the two years to the end of 2018, 136 children were charged with endangering property in Queensland by lighting fires — just 18 were convicted. Several teens were charged over recent fires including a 16-year-old boy who allegedly started a fire west of Yeppoon that destroyed 30 structures and two other teens over a September blaze at Peregian on the Sunshine Coast. November 27: A volunteer firefighter in Australia has been charged with deliberately lighting blazes during the nation’s bushfire crisis. Police arrested the man, 19, for seven counts of alleged arson in an area south of Sydney, New South Wales. December 17: NSW Rural Fire Service Inspector Ben Shepherd has revealed investigators are close to charging more than a dozen suspected arsonists believed to have deliberately lit bushfires as the state remains in the grip of an ongoing bushfire crisis. It comes amid revelations at least 56 people have already been charged or cautioned with 71 bushfire-related offences since August, with 16 ongoing investigations into suspicious fires, including a blaze that threatened the rim of suburban Sydney in South Turramurra, on Sydney’s Upper North Shore, on November 12. So that’s up to 72 people in NSW. December 20: Almost 100 firebugs have deliberately started blazes across Queensland that have destroyed homes and consumed thousands of hectares of bushland. Some 65 fires continue to burn across the state on Friday, jumping from 55 reported on Thursday, as the fire threat deepens heading into the weekend. As firefighters remain on high alert, police revealed 103 of the destructive fires that have lashed Queensland since September were deliberately lit. Figures obtained by AAP reveal 98 people – 31 adults and 67 juveniles – have been dealt with by Queensland police for deliberately setting fires. And 98 in Queensland so far. December 23: Police in the central-western NSW town of Wellington have arrested an 11-year-old boy in relation to a fire along the Bell River. At 7 pm on Sunday emergency services responded to reports of a grass fire at a reserve at the western end of the town. A group of boys had allegedly been seen running from the area. December 23: As devastating bushfires ravage Australian communities, claiming lives and homes, firebugs have continued to ignite blazes across the weekend in WA. Firefighters were called to a “suspicious” blaze in the south-eastern suburb of Byford on Sunday afternoon, just hours after WA Police had made a public call-out for information about a bushfire that tore through Armadale on Saturday. The Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) claimed the fire was deliberately lit just after 5 pm near Warrington Road… In Armadale, bushland was burnt and several roads were forced to close on Saturday afternoon due to a “suspicious” blaze that ignited about 11am near the Ranford and Armadale Road intersection. The incident prompted police to ask for public assistance to identify a man captured on CCTV who they want to question as part of their investigation. December 29: A series of suspicious grass fires across Victoria are under police investigation. A grass fire in Glenmore that broke out at 3.50 pm yesterday, burning about 10 hectares, was followed less than 30 minutes later by another suspicious grass fire in Bacchus Marsh. A third suspicious blaze then broke out in Parwan just five minutes later. It came after a suspicious grass fire threatened businesses and homes in the Bendigo suburb of White Hills about 3.30 pm yesterday. Meanwhile, police have charged a 71-year-old man for allegedly lighting a fire without a permit northwest of Moruya on the NSW south coast, causing a 40-hectare bushfire in the Wandera State Forest, and charged another man for allegedly lighting two bushfires near Cessnock in the Hunter. December 31: A bushfire that threatened lives and homes in suburban Melbourne is under investigation, amid suspicions it may have been deliberately lit… Another series of fires allegedly set in Melbourne’s eastern suburbs earlier in December have resulted in a man being charged with five criminal counts of arson. The 41-year-old was arrested on Monday after police executed warrants for fires in the Cranbourne and Dandenong areas lit on December 17 and December 28. The man faced court on Tuesday and was remanded in custody until his next appearance at Dandenong Magistrates Court on January 21. December 31: As South Australian firefighters continue to battle blazes that broke out during catastrophic conditions on Monday, a suspicious grassfire has come close to a popular camping area south of Adelaide. The fire, at Second Valley on the Fleurieu Peninsula south of Adelaide, was an unwelcome sight to campers as it burned in hills overlooking the Rapid Bay caravan park. January 1: A deliberately-lit bushfire in northeast Tasmania is sparking an emergency warning as winds increase.The blaze is part of a network of suspicious fires near Fingal which have burned across more than 6600 hectares. January 2: Police have arrested and charged a man following reports he allegedly started a fire in East Gippsland last night. The 36-year-old man, of no fixed address, is accused of starting a fire in Johnsonville, east of Bairnsdale. January 3: The Tasmania Fire Service said on Friday that uncontrolled fires in the state’s north-east had burnt down a house and destroyed a car at Tower Hill. Police believe the fire was started by arson on Monday. There are no conspiracies here. Though arson has been tried and called for before as a tool of terror, the Australian fires seem to result from the actions of unconnected individuals who are either disturbed or reckless. This is nothing new; as ecological criminologist Paul Read wrote back in November: A 2015 satellite analysis of 113,000 fires from 1997-2009 confirmed what we had known for some time – 40 per cent of fires are deliberately lit, another 47 per cent accidental. This generally matches previous data published a decade earlier that about half of all fires were suspected or deliberate arson, and 37 per cent accidental. Combined, they reach the same conclusion: 87 per cent are man-made… If I had to guess, I’d say about 10,000 arsonists lurk from the top of Queensland to the southern-most tip of Victoria, but not all are active and some light fires during winter. The most dangerous light fires on the hottest days, generally closer to communities and during other blazes, suggesting more malicious motives. Only a tiny minority will gaze with wonder at the destruction they have wrought, deeply fascinated and empowered. Others get caught up with the excitement of chaos and behave like impulsive idiots. As for children, they are not always malicious. Children and youths follow the age-crime curve where delinquency peaks in their late teens. Playing with fire is just one of many forms of misbehaviour. The great majority grow out of it. Four overlapping subgroups include accidental fire-play getting out of control; victims of child abuse – including sexual abuse – and neglect; children with autism and developmental disorders; and conduct disorder from a younger age, which can be genuinely dangerous. The more fires, proportionally the more arsonists. And the recent mega-fires are really bringing out all the firebugs out of the woodwork (or into the woodwork to be more accurate). It is disturbing, but sadly not surprising or unexpected. As some have suggested already, the current crisis, with its large sample of arsonists, provides a good opportunity for more research into the psychology, motivation and behaviour of fire-starters. This might help in the future, but clearly arsonists will always be with us. The task is to make their work more difficult, for example through better management of our forests to make them less combustible. But as much as bushfires are an environmental and land management problem, as we search for solutions we can’t forget that they are also a criminal one. https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/01/we-dont-just-have-a-bushfire-crisis-we-have-an-arson-crisis-too/ why is Australia so hot https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/15/whats-cranking-up-heat-south-eastern-australia weather report https://www.weather-forecast.com/maps/Australia Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 07, 2020, 06:20:39 pm A stupid moron reacts to SCIENTIFIC FACTS about the reality of global warming & climate change… (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-detail/118215825/the-detail-what-to-say-when-uncle-bruce-tells-you-climate-change-is-a-hoax) …he's probably the village idiot from Woodville, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 08, 2020, 09:55:41 am (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENstMT2VUAAW7Cn.jpg) (https://twitter.com/domesticanimal/status/1214614233209393152) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 08, 2020, 05:12:24 pm Australia has a long history of heatwaves and bush fires going back thousands of years which has nothing to do with global warming
1,371,000 square kilometres, or 18% of the Australian mainland. However, approximately 35% of the Australian continent receives so little rain it is effectively desert. The deserts in Australia are primarily distributed throughout the western plateau and interior lowlands of the country. it's about the weather conditions, firebugs lightning strikes or powerlines coming down all they need is fire breaks around built-up areas which the greens and the government are too stupid to make I lived there for a few years it's hot Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 08, 2020, 06:12:09 pm Yeah, you just keep on burying your head in the dirt and pretending that everything is all hunky dory. 'cause that's going to make it even funnier when global warming fucks up your grand-kids and great-grand-kids lives and snuffs them out. (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) (https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/x/b/3/z/d/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.1240x700.1ydrwx.png/1576436716112.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 11, 2020, 03:28:55 am thing is by the time any bad shit happens you will be dead and finding out if you're a ghost
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 11, 2020, 11:48:49 am Your grand-kids and great-grand-kids will be mouthing off about their selfish, fuck-you grandfather and great-grandfather as the planet wipes out the human race and adjusts to a new equilibrium which doesn't include the human beings who trashed their only lifeboat in the vastness of space. And all the other living things will die too, but they won't be the selfish twats who caused it, nor will they know it was selfish, ignorant twats like YOU. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 11, 2020, 06:40:09 pm (https://static.seattletimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Climate-change-Republicans-ONLINE-COLOR-1020x680.jpg) (https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/where-theres-power-from-profit-theres-climate-denial/) (it's safely clickable too) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 11, 2020, 09:57:52 pm fake science a good scam
I think you go to China and India try to get get them to clean up their mess to save the planet also, tell their people and all the people in the world a green carbon tax means their good life is over, shut down all their factories and all their coal plants its time for everyone to go back to the stone age to save the planet unless you got a better way to do it STFU Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 12, 2020, 04:57:22 am Too right fake science is a scam. Just look at all the global warming deniers who hide behind “fake science” while supporting America's stupid “fake president”. It's amazing there are so many dumbfucks in the world. Do people in Woodville point and laugh at you for being one of those? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 13, 2020, 07:36:52 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 13, 2020, 07:37:58 pm from The Washington Post… In Australia, the air poses a threat; people are rushing to hospitals in cities choked by smoke “It's sort of like medicine meets ‘Mad Max’,” said one doctor. By DARRYL FEARS and BRADY DENNIS | 4:28PM EST — Sunday, January 12, 2020 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/3R2YXHBPN4I6VP76AIGIRM7REA.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/3R2YXHBPN4I6VP76AIGIRM7REA.jpg&w=1440) Amid an early-morning smoky haze, a man cleans the forecourt of Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, on January 5. — Photograph: Lukas Coch/Reuters. JENNY EDWARDS didn't want to go back home to Canberra, the Australian capital. She added seven days to a five-day family vacation “specifically to stay out of the smoke.” But it didn't matter. Within a day of returning, her eyes were irritated, her chest felt tight, her head hurt and a small but persistent cough couldn't clear a tickle in her throat. Three massive fires were still burning about 60 miles away, and even though the heaviest smoke had momentarily lifted, the misery of living in a brownish haze remained. Air quality in Canberra on New Year's Day was among the worst of any major city in the world. Australia's bush fires have blanketed parts of the continent with pollution, affecting hundreds of thousands of people who are not in immediate danger from the flames. Government agencies and medical officials say distress calls, ambulance runs and hospital emergency room visits have surged. Even some federal departments in the capital had to temporarily shutter offices (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6567114/departments-shut-doors-as-smoke-lingers/) and tell non-essential staff to stay away. Stores have seen an overwhelming demand for smoke filtration masks, and in recent days government officials have begun rationing them (https://health.act.gov.au/public-health-alert/heavy-smoke-and-hot-conditions-act) to particularly vulnerable people, including pregnant women, the elderly and those with chronic heart and lung conditions. On Facebook, residents have posted pictures of doors and windows sealed with thick tape in an effort to keep smoke out their houses. And 7News Sydney posted a “Ciggie Index” — the equivalent number of cigarettes each resident consumes daily from inhaling smoke. In east Sydney, it's 19. A key question lingers as the fires that began last year continue to burn, in some cases merging into megafires: What are the long-term health implications of so many people exposed to thick smoke for so long? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5UC53ERR6II6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5UC53ERR6II6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=1440) This photo taken on January 7 by the Royal Australian Air Force shows smoke and haze over mountains in Cooma in New South Wales. — Photograph: Murray Staff/Royal Australian Air Force/Agence France-Presse. Wildfire smoke that lingers for weeks doesn't just get into people's eyes and the pores of their skin, researchers say. It enters their minds, settles in their thoughts and affects their mental health. That was a finding from studies following the deadly Black Saturday fires in Victoria in 2009, when both firefighters and residents suffered from post-traumatic stress. “I'm predicting that the effect is going to be far greater than before because the fires have been burning for such a long time,” said Mirella Di Benedetto, a researcher and clinical psychologist at RMIT University in Melbourne. The 2009 fires were isolated to Victoria, but the current fires are burning nationwide, near Australia's largest cities. “Even where there are no fires, smoke is moving down to these areas,” Di Benedetto said. “The air quality is really bad in Sydney. I think the mental health and physical health impact will be huge in the months to come.” Little research exists about the long-term consequences of exposure to wildfire smoke, but Kari Nadeau and Mary Prunicki, scientists at Stanford University, are working to change that. They're closely following hundreds of people affected by devastating wildfires in California, taking blood samples and asking them about everything from their use of air filters to their psychological responses to the experience. Earlier research has linked air pollution from wildfires to a range of acute conditions, including asthma, heart ailments and strokes, but Nadeau and Prunicki hope to solve a deeper mystery. “Are there irreversible consequences over time?” said Nadeau, director of Stanford's Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research. The work is urgent, Prunicki said, not only because existing research is limited, but also because the rapidly warming climate is likely to make the unprecedented fires in Australia only more common there and elsewhere around the globe. “They are not going to go away,” she said. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/AGB6OFBR6MI6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/AGB6OFBR6MI6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=1440) A man wears a face mask as Bondi Beach in Sydney is shrouded in haze on January 8. — Photograph: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg News. In Australia, the smoke is affecting cities in unexpected ways. At one of Canberra's public hospitals, workers kept the hospital's exterior doors shut to keep smoke from clouding the hallways and patient rooms, said David Caldicott, an emergency room physician. Some nurses wore breathing masks, and the smoke temporarily incapacitated some local MRI machines, he said. At his own house, the smoke detector kept blaring one day until Caldicott finally muffled it with a towel at 3 a.m. In an arid country where residents are accustomed to a wildfire season, he said, the past weeks have been unlike any he has experienced. “It's sort of like medicine meets ‘Mad Max’,” Caldicott said, referring to the vintage Australian action movie about a dystopian, post-apocalyptic future. In the state of New South Wales, home to Sydney, health officials said emergency room visits for asthma and breathing problems increased more than 34 percent in the period from December 30 to January 5 compared to a year earlier. Ambulance calls for respiratory issues were also higher, about 2,500 compared to the five-year average of about 1,900. Similarly, hospital admissions increased to more than 430, surpassing the five-year average of 361. Four of Australia's five largest population centers are experiencing the effects of the fires. At least 25 people have died, nearly 2,000 homes have been destroyed and more than 14 million acres have burned. So much smoke has been produced, there's evidence that some is circumnavigating the planet (https://twitter.com/NOAASatellites/status/1214225215300882433) and has reached South America, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YLC3X3RNE4I6VP76AIGIRM7REA.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YLC3X3RNE4I6VP76AIGIRM7REA.jpg&w=1440) Pedestrians wear masks as smoke shrouds Canberra on January 2. — Photograph: Mark Baker/Associated Press. Bush fires are a known trigger for asthma attacks, said Bruce Thompson, dean of the School of Health Sciences at Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne. “This is a very significant health concern. Here in Australia, we're making sure people are moving themselves from the outdoors as best they can,” Thompson said. Inside bush-fire smoke, water vapor intermingles with tiny particles measured in micrometers. It also contains gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. Wood dust from exploded trees and chemicals from melted tires and scorched steel also hitch a ride. Particles as large as 5 micrometers “stick in your nose; you wake up with a runny nose and itchy eyes,” Thompson said. Particles as small as 2.5 micrometers — known by researchers as PM 2.5 — are scarier, he said. “They can get to the very edges of the lungs,” Thompson said. “We had a coal mine fire a few years ago and it's been demonstrated that four years after, children close to the plume had worse lung function. So this is bad.” Smaller particles in smoke can hinder cardiac function in adults. Thompson said the developing lungs of children can be permanently damaged in varying degrees. “The lung becomes inflamed, and you cough as the lung tries to adjust,” Thompson said. “The lung is bad at repairing itself. It tries to get rid of particles by making you cough, but it produces scar tissue, and you don't want that in the lung because it changes the efficiency of the lung.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/GOPQSIRR6MI6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/GOPQSIRR6MI6VFY3IO7MH74YMA.jpg&w=1440) A woman wearing a face mask sits near the Sydney Opera House shrouded in haze on January 8. — Photograph: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg News. Fay Johnston, an environmental health professor at the University of Tasmania's Menzies Institute for Medical Research, said most people exposed to the smoke won't be harmed — as long as the fires end soon. “If the smoke goes away, a healthy person can withstand it,” said Johnston, who specializes in the health effects of bush-fire smoke. “Healthy people will come through it without any long-term harm.” But relief from the yearly rainy season isn't expected until February. Like other researchers, Johnston worries about what will happen if the fires continue, particularly for old and young asthma sufferers. “What's the long-term legacy of it?” she said. “We really don't know.” Few studies have delved into the consequences of long-term exposure to bush fires. Johnston and other researchers conducted the study Thompson referenced, on health impacts on children and mothers in the wake of a 2014 fire at a Victoria coal mine that burned for more than a month, blanketing the nearby town of Morwell with smoke. Young children exposed to the smoke were more likely to get an antibiotic prescription in the year after the fire, and pregnant women were more likely to develop gestational diabetes, Johnston said. Bin Jalaludin, a professor at the University of New South Wales and chief investigator at the Centre for Air Pollution, Energy and Health Research, said government officials and academics in Australia already have been brainstorming ways to study the long-term health implications of the “truly unprecedented” fires. “What we want to look at is things like ER visits, deaths, hospitalizations, ambulance call-outs for respiratory problems, birth outcomes — do women who are pregnant and exposed to high levels of smoke, does it have an impact on the newborn?” he said. “It will take time, although we are trying to expedite it and get some of this work done quickly.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FNUWT2RP2MI6VEP5QLKOASR7VQ.jpg&w=975) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FNUWT2RP2MI6VEP5QLKOASR7VQ.jpg&w=1440) A kangaroo stands in bushland surrounded by an early-morning smoky haze in Canberra on January 5. — Photograph: Lukas Coch/Reuters. Meanwhile, south of Sydney in Bowral, Peggy Stone said she's fighting off feelings of depression. “We haven't seen the sun for weeks,” she said. The sky is sometimes fiery orange, sometimes smoky gray. The day she spoke, she said, “The sun is trying to penetrate the smoke. Occasionally it might try to get through and we get a little ray.” Farther south in Canberra, Jenny Edwards, who has asthma, made an appointment to see a doctor. “I'm quite worried about the next couple of months,” Edwards said. “Air quality is so hard to predict with so many large fires in our region and the possibility of new ones starting.” She's thinking of leaving Canberra — again. But she knows that option is also risky because it's hard to escape the reach of the fires. “I am considering returning to stay with my mother-in-law near Lake Macquarie,” she said. “Mind you, there are big fires inland from there, and while staying there last week we had three small fires break out within 10 kilometers of us.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Darryl Fears (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/darryl-fears) joined The Washington Post as a general assignment reporter on the Metro staff in 1999. He went on the cover race, demographics and immigration on the national desk, and, for a brief time, urban affairs in the District of Columbia. Before joining The Washington Post, he was a staff writer for the Detroit Free Press, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution and the Los Angeles Times. Darryl has profesional affiliations with the National Association of Black Journalists and the Society of Environmental Journalists. He speaks conversational Spanish (fading for lack of practice). • Brady Dennis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/brady-dennis) is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment and public health issues. He previously spent years covering the nation's economy. Dennis was a finalist for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for a series of explanatory stories about the global financial crisis. Before that, he was a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times (Florida). __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • PHOTOGRAPH GALLERY: Australia sees worst wildfires in decades (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-photos-australia-sees-worst-wildfires-in-decades/2020/01/02/63417f72-2d64-11ea-9b60-817cc18cf173_gallery.html) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/01/12/australia-air-poses-threat-people-are-rushing-hospitals-cities-choked-by-smoke (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/01/12/australia-air-poses-threat-people-are-rushing-hospitals-cities-choked-by-smoke) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 14, 2020, 07:57:08 pm (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOIWLp1UUAA6eJw.jpg) (https://twitter.com/JeffBellNZ/status/1216559246596173824) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 23, 2020, 06:29:45 am https://banned.video/watch?id=5da4ca3b9329370013a6fff5
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 23, 2020, 08:42:33 pm I'm not even going to click on that, 'cause I KNOW it will be stupid stuff. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Im2Sexy4MyPants on January 24, 2020, 11:39:30 am i dont expect you to look at it so please dont
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on April 22, 2020, 02:56:11 pm from The Washington Post… This year is on track to be Earth's warmest on record, beating 2016, NOAA says The U.S. oceans and atmosphere agency puts the odds of a new record at 75 percent. By ANDREW FREEDMAN | 12:37PM EDT — Tuesday, April 21, 2020 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/5rrpg_CCmRDqS08GLVnB_JDHH-c=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BGNXHZQ5YAI6VF32CWTHCDWW3I.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/5rrpg_CCmRDqS08GLVnB_JDHH-c=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BGNXHZQ5YAI6VF32CWTHCDWW3I.jpg) A man looks up as police and fire personnel move in to remove climate activists outside a E.U. summit meeting in Brussels on December 12. — Photograph: Francisco Seco/Associated Press. THERE IS a 75 percent chance 2020 will set a record for the warmest year since instrument records began in 1880 (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/202003/supplemental/page-2), the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration is projecting, beating out 2016 for the distinction. This is somewhat unexpected, since there is no declared El Niño event in the tropical Pacific Ocean, which tends to provide a natural boost to global temperatures that are already elevated due to the human-caused buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The NOAA projection, made late last week, is based on statistical modeling now that the first quarter of 2020 is off to a near-record warm start, coming in as the second-warmest January through March period since instrument records began in 1880. Both Europe and Asia had their warmest first quarter of the year. Only 2016 was warmer during this period, and that year featured an unusually intense El Niño event. Remarkably, the global temperature differences from average in February and March were among the largest of any of the 1,680 months in the agency's records. March had the second largest anomaly of any month, said Derek Arndt, the head of climate monitoring at NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information in Asheville, North Carolina, during a news conference call. February and March were the warmest two non-El Niño months in NOAA’s temperature database, Arndt said. He said March was also the 44th straight March and 423rd straight month that had global average temperatures at least nominally above the 20th century average. March has warmed by 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit (0.7 degrees Celsius) since 1991, he said. More on the 2020 prediction Despite the lack of an officially-declared El Niño, in which temperatures in the tropical Pacific must rise above a particular threshold, ocean temperatures have nevertheless been running above average in recent months, Arndt said, contributing to the warm start to 2020. He said that in 2016, the anomalous warmth was front loaded due to El Niño conditions that peaked early in the year, before easing as the El Niño diminished later. The first quarter of this year has run neck and neck with 2016's temperatures so that if monthly global average temperatures remain relatively steady during the rest of the year, 2020 will move into the top spot, he said. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/zZyBm5iBA01Arn938m0SYnco-1k=/1280x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YDF4GCSEUFEYJMWBNBQRCVFS2Q.png) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/zZyBm5iBA01Arn938m0SYnco-1k=/1280x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YDF4GCSEUFEYJMWBNBQRCVFS2Q.png) Year-to-date global temperatures for 2020 compared with the top 10 warmest years. — National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. The oceans and atmosphere agency also found there is a 99.9 percent chance 2020 will end up being a top 5-warmest year. “A lot of that has to do with the fact that the year 2016 became the warmest year on record largely because it was very, very warm in the first half of the year, and it was actually not nearly as impressively warm in the second half of the year,” Arndt said. “So the way this might play out is, by staying close to 2016 early on, it does look like a better than half probability that we will finish the year warmest on record.” The NOAA is not just making a guess at the final temperature ranking for the year. Instead, scientists are using a statistical model that takes monthly temperatures during the past four decades and generates about 10,000 potential outcomes. With March data included, about three-quarters of the model runs showed 2020 would at least nominally beat 2016. This model does not incorporate El Niño or La Niña conditions, the latter of which can dampen global average temperatures, so if either of these phenomena develop, the projection may be off target. Separately, Gavin Schmidt, who leads NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, puts the odds of a record this year at closer to 60 percent, based on NASA's data set, which has slightly different rankings than has NOAA. However, he said that when applying NOAA's methods to NASA’s monthly data, the odds would increase to 67 percent. Other temperature monitoring agencies such as the U.K. Met Office have forecast 2020 will be one of the top 5 warmest years on record. In any case, climate scientists do not place too much emphasis in annual rankings for monitoring and attributing global climate change, but rather focus more on long-term trends in greenhouse gas emissions, air and sea temperatures and climate indicators such as melting glaciers, sea level rise and changes in precipitation patterns. The land and oceans respond to the amount of greenhouse gases in the air, rather than emissions rates, which means the sudden cut in carbon emissions (https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-coronavirus-set-to-cause-largest-ever-annual-fall-in-co2-emissions) related to the coronavirus pandemic will not affect global average surface temperatures in the near future. __________________________________________________________________________ • Andrew Freedman (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/andrew-freedman) is an editor for the Capital Weather Gang (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/weather) at The Washington Post. He has long covered science research and policy, with a focus on climate change, extreme weather and the environment. He was among the first reporters to popularize the term “polar vortex” during the infamous East Coast winter of 2013 to 2014. He joined The Washington Post in 2019, having worked as an editor and reporter for Axios, Mashable, Climate Central and other publications. Andrew holds a B.A. in political science from Tufts University; a M.A. in climate and society from Columbia University; and a M.A. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/04/21/earth-warmest-year-likely-2020 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/04/21/earth-warmest-year-likely-2020) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 04, 2020, 08:24:27 pm from The Washington Post… Rapid Arctic meltdown in Siberia alarms scientists The Arctic region is enduring its own summer of discontent, with record-breaking temperatures, raging wildfires, thawing permafrost, crumbling infrastructure and vanishing sea ice. It was 100 degrees in Siberia on June 20, hotter than Dallas or Houston. By ISABELLE KHURSHUDYAN, ANDREW FREEDMAN and BRADY DENNIS | 5:56PM EDT — Friday, July 03, 2020 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CSOA4UF5HUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CSOA4UF5HUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) A wildfire in the village of Melnichnaya Pad in Russia's Irkutsk region is seen on May 27, 2019; volunteers managed to stop the fire from spreading to a summer camp for children. — Photograph: Kirill Shipitsin/Tass/Getty Images. ALEXANDER DEYEV can still taste the smoke from last year's wildfires that blanketed the towns near his home in southeastern Siberia, and he is dreading their return. “It just felt like you couldn't breathe at all,” said Deyev, 32, who lives in Irkutsk, a Siberian region along Lake Baikal, just north of the Mongolian border. But already this year, fires in the spring arrived earlier and with more ferocity, government officials have said. In the territory where Deyev lives, fires were three times as large this April as the year before. And the hot, dry summer lies ahead. Much of the world remains consumed with the deadly novel coronavirus (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/02/28/what-you-need-know-about-coronavirus). The United States, crippled by the pandemic, is in the throes of a divisive presidential campaign and protests over racial inequality. But at the top of the globe, the Arctic is enduring its own summer of discontent. Wildfires are raging amid record-breaking temperatures. Permafrost is thawing, infrastructure is crumbling and sea ice is dramatically vanishing (http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews). (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TBFPUYV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TBFPUYV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) An aerial view shows floodwaters after the ice-choked Lena River spilled its banks in remote settlements in the Sakha Republic (Yakutia), Russia, on May 13. — Photograph: Andrey Sorokin/Sputnik/Associated Press. In Siberia and across much of the Arctic, profound changes are unfolding more rapidly than scientists anticipated only a few years ago. Shifts that once seemed decades away are happening now, with potentially global implications. “We always expected the Arctic to change faster than the rest of the globe,” said Walt Meier, a senior research scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “But I don't think anyone expected the changes to happen as fast as we are seeing them happen.” Vladimir Romanovsky, a researcher at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, said the pace, severity and extent of the changes are surprising even to many researchers who study the region for a living. Predictions for how quickly the Arctic would warm that once seemed extreme “underestimate what is going on in reality,” he said. The temperatures occurring in the High Arctic during the past 15 years were not predicted to occur for 70 more years, he said. Neither Dallas nor Houston has hit 100 degrees yet this year, but in one of the coldest regions of the world, Siberia's “Pole of Cold,” the mercury climbed to 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/06/21/arctic-temperature-record-siberia) (38 degrees Celsius) on June 20. If confirmed, the record-breaker in the remote Siberian town of Verkhoyansk, about 3,000 miles east of Moscow, would stand as the highest temperature in the Arctic since record-keeping began in 1885. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FFID32F5KII6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=599) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FFID32F5KII6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1484) The triple-digit record was not a freak event, either, but instead part of a searing heat wave. Verkhoyansk saw 11 straight days with a high temperature of 86 degrees Fahrenheit (30 degrees Celsius) or above, according to Rick Thoman, a climate scientist at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. The average June high at that location is just 68 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius). This week, Ust'-Olenek, Russia, about 450 miles north of the Arctic Circle, recorded a temperature of 93.7 degrees Fahrenheit (34.3 degrees Celsius), about 40 degrees above average for the date. On May 22, the Siberian town of Khatanga, located well north of the Arctic Circle, recorded a temperature of 78 degrees Fahrenheit — about 46 degrees above normal. Much of Siberia experienced an exceptionally mild winter, followed by a warmer-than-average spring, and it has been among the most unusually warm regions of the world during 2020. During May, parts of Siberia saw an average monthly temperature that was a staggering 18 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius) above average for the month, according to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. “To me, these are kind of the key ingredients of things you expect in a warming climate,” Freja Vamborg, a senior scientist at Copernicus, said of the recent heat records, coupled with prolonged months of higher-than-average temperatures. The persistent warmth has helped to fuel wildfires, eviscerate sea ice and destabilize homes and other buildings constructed on thawing permafrost. It allegedly even contributed to a massive fuel spill (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-arctic-oil-spill-siberia/2020/06/04/a1d24ad8-a667-11ea-b619-3f9133bbb482_story.html) in Norilsk in late May that prompted Russian President Vladimir Putin to declare a state of emergency in the environmentally sensitive region. Already, sea ice in the vicinity of Siberia is running at record-low levels for any year since reliable satellite monitoring began in 1979. Scientists have long maintained that the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world. But in reality, the region is now warming at nearly three times the global average. Data from NASA shows that since 1970, the Arctic has warmed by an average of 5.3 degrees Fahrenheit (2.94 degrees Celsius), compared with the global average of 1.71 degrees Fahrenheit (0.95 degrees Celsius) during the same period. Scientists refer to the phenomenon as “Arctic amplification.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TRHPXLV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TRHPXLV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) Amid an unprecedented heat wave, children play in Krugloe Lake outside Verkhoyansk in Russia's Sakha Republic on June 21. — Photograph: Olga Burtseva/Associated Press. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YKAYUBF5HAI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YKAYUBF5HAI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) Employees of Russia’s state-owned oil pipeline monopoly Transneft take part in a cleanup operation on June 10, following a massive oil spill in the Ambarnaya River outside Norilsk. — Photograph: Irina Yarinskaya/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images. The melting of snow and ice earlier in the spring exposes darker land surfaces and ocean waters. This switches these areas from being net reflectors of incoming solar radiation to heat absorbers, which further increases land and sea temperatures. That means more warmth in the air, more melting of snow and ice, and drying of vegetation in a way that creates more fuel for wildfires. What happens in the Arctic matters for the rest of the globe. Greenland ice melt is already the biggest contributor to sea-level rise worldwide, studies show. The loss of Arctic sea ice is also thought to be leading to more-extreme weather patterns far outside the Arctic, in a complex series of ripple effects that may be partly responsible for extreme heat and precipitation events that have claimed thousands of lives in recent years. The fires that have erupted in Siberia this summer have been massive, sending out plumes of smoke that have covered a swath of land spanning about 1,000 miles at times. While much of the fire activity has occurred in the Sakha Republic, known for such blazes, scientists are observing more fires farther north, above the Arctic Circle, in peatlands and tundra. “This seems to be a new pattern,” said Jessica McCarty, a researcher at Miami University in Ohio. In past years, fires “were sparse if not unheard of in these regions.” One concern is that such fires could be destabilizing peatlands and permafrost — the carbon-rich frozen soil that covers nearly a quarter of the Northern Hemisphere's land mass, stretching across large parts of Alaska, Canada, Siberia and Greenland. Merritt Turetsky, director of the Institute for Arctic and Alpine Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder, said fires in Siberia are burning “in areas where we expect permafrost to be more vulnerable.” Typically, these fires would break out in July and August, but this year they spiked in May, a sign of the unusual heat and early snow melt. Turetsky said the fires are removing the blanket of vegetation that covers permafrost, making it more vulnerable to melting. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WHWLPHV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WHWLPHV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) An aerial view on April 23 of the ruins of a summer house destroyed by a fire in a dacha community in Moshkovo district, in Novosibirsk in southern Siberia. The region is experiencing hundreds of fires believed to have been caused by burning old grass. — Photograph: Kirill Kukhmar/Tass/Getty Images. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WRXJGZV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WRXJGZV4VUI6VF6BNTYRN77CNQ.jpg&w=2400) A forest fire in the central Sakha Republic on June 2. — Photograph: Yevgeny Sofroneyev/Tass/Getty Images. Satellite observations of Arctic wildfires in June also showed that fires this year are emitting more greenhouse gases than the record Arctic fires in 2019, according to Mark Parrington, who tracks wildfires around the world with the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service. Some of these blazes appear to be what are known as “zombie fires,” which survive the winter season smoldering underground only to erupt again once snow and ice melts the following spring. Similar fires have been observed in Alaska this summer. Ted Schuur, a professor at Northern Arizona University who researches permafrost emissions, said the rapid warming is turning the Arctic into a net emitter of greenhouse gases — a disconcerting shift that threatens to dramatically hasten global warming. The unusually mild conditions in Siberia are particularly worrisome, as the region is home to the largest zone of continuous permafrost in the world. There has long been concern throughout the scientific community that the approximately 1,460 billion to 1,600 billion metric tons of organic carbon stored in frozen Arctic soils, from Russia to Alaska to Canada, could be released as the permafrost melts. That is almost twice the amount of greenhouse gases trapped in the atmosphere. Recent research by Schuur and others shows that warmer temperatures allow microbes within the soil to convert permafrost carbon into carbon dioxide and methane. A report late last year that Schuur co-authored found that permafrost ecosystems could be releasing as much as 1.1 billion to 2.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year — nearly as much as the annual emissions of Japan and Russia in 2018, respectively. “A decade ago we thought more of the permafrost would be resistant to change,” said Schuur. The more scientists look for destabilizing permafrost and an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, the more they find such evidence. Rapid warming has altered their calculations. “We're basically setting records in the Arctic year after year,” Schuur said. “These emissions are now adding to our climate change problem. What happens in Siberia is going to affect everything through the global climate system.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/S2LAXMEW3II6VEOXZ5CCHVDWQM.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/S2LAXMEW3II6VEOXZ5CCHVDWQM.jpg&w=2400) Permafrost, seen at the top of a cliff, melts into the Kolyma River in eastern Siberia on July 6, 2019. — Photograph: Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FXCLW4V4V4I6VDHVTQNY274EYY.jpg&w=1099) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FXCLW4V4V4I6VDHVTQNY274EYY.jpg&w=2400) Cranes tower over a coal station in the Siberian town of Zyryanka on the Kolyma River on July 9, 2019. — Photograph: Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post. Researchers have watched as the changes sweeping the Arctic threaten major infrastructure, including homes and cities in the region. “Will roads, buildings, oil and gas pipelines be able to survive without emergency [interventions], due to permafrost degradation?” Alexander Fedorov, deputy director of the Melnikov Permafrost Institute in the regional capital of Yakutsk, said in an email. “One must live on stable lands. In Siberia and the Arctic, many settlements and infrastructure were built before global warming, before there were problems. The main thing is not to be late with the solutions, because many villages are located in dangerous and vulnerable areas.” For all the disconcerting signals coming out of the Arctic right now, the potential for troubling events remains high in the coming months, Meier said. Sea ice typically reaches its minimum in September, he noted. Ice melt accelerates in Greenland during June and July. Wildfires have the potential to worsen as summer drags on. Intense summer storms can cause permafrost degradation and worsen coastal erosion. “Certainly, 2020 is a strange year all around, for a lot of reasons beyond climate,” Meier said. “But it's certainly setting up to be an extreme year in the Arctic.” That might seem like a distant problem to the rest of the world. But those who study the Arctic insist the rest of us should pay close attention. “When we develop a fever, it's a sign. It's a warning sign that something is wrong and we stop and we take note,” Turetsky said. “Literally, the Arctic is on fire. It has a fever right now, and so it's a good warning sign that we need to stop, take note and figure out what's going on.” __________________________________________________________________________ • Isabelle Khurshudyan reported from Moscow. Olga Massov in Washington D.C. contributed to this report. • Isabelle Khurshudyan (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/isabelle-khurshudyan) is a foreign correspondent based in Moscow. A University of South Carolina graduate, she has worked at The Washington Post since 2014, previously as a sports reporter covering the Washington Capitals (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/capitals), high school sports and local colleges. • Andrew Freedman (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/andrew-freedman) is an editor for the Capital Weather Gang (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/weather) at The Washington Post. He has long covered science research and policy, with a focus on climate change, extreme weather and the environment. He was among the first reporters to popularize the term “polar vortex” during the infamous East Coast winter of 2013 to 2014. He joined The Washington Post in 2019, having worked as an editor and reporter for Axios, Mashable, Climate Central and other publications. Andrew was educated at Tufts University, where he earned a B.A. in political science; at Columbia University, where he earned a M.A. in Climate and Society; and he holds a M.A. from Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. • Brady Dennis (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/brady-dennis) is a national reporter for The Washington Post, focusing on the environment. He previously has covered food and drug issues, public health crises such as the Ebola epidemic, and the nation's economy, including the global financial crisis that began in 2008. He worked for the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times and The Seattle Times prior to coming to The Washington Post. Brady was educated at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. __________________________________________________________________________ Related to this topic: • Dangerous new hot zones are spreading around the world (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climate-environment/climate-change-world) • Radical warming in Siberia leaves millions on unstable ground (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climate-environment/climate-change-siberia) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/rapid-arctic-meltdown-in-siberia-alarms-scientists/2020/07/03/4c1bd6a6-bbaa-11ea-bdaf-a129f921026f_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/rapid-arctic-meltdown-in-siberia-alarms-scientists/2020/07/03/4c1bd6a6-bbaa-11ea-bdaf-a129f921026f_story.html) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 05, 2020, 10:04:40 am (https://misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/94826b33-72cd-40cb-a733-a738cf17df8c.jpg) (https://misc.pagesuite.com/3630c326-c935-42f5-b0da-daebc36b7646/images/94826b33-72cd-40cb-a733-a738cf17df8c.jpg) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on July 10, 2021, 04:30:20 pm Loony left hysteria based activism continuously beaten up by the braindead media for clicks and thus profit. You know you're soaking in it? ;D
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on July 21, 2022, 01:05:31 pm Tried warning you all way back when it would have made a difference.
No one listened and now it's too late. ??? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: DazzaMc on July 22, 2022, 10:36:05 am https://twitter.com/Lidotajs/status/1549439524354269186?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1549439524354269186%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stuff.co.nz%2Fenvironment%2Fclimate-news%2F300643407%2Fa-uk-meteorologist-warned-of-deadly-heat-then-he-was-told-to-cheer-up
Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on July 23, 2022, 10:51:04 pm Tried warning you all way back when it would have made a difference. No one listened and now it's too late. ??? Yeah, and now the stupid fuckheads expect the taxpayers or ratepayers to cough-up to fix their homes which are destroyed by extreme weather which was predicted by scientists a long, long time ago. Or in the case of stupid, religious-right American fuckheads, they think they can destroy the planet and the son of their god will come flying over the horizon to fix everything and take them on a naked flight into outer-space. In a way I'm kinda glad I don't have any kids to pass this fucked-up world onto. How's it going, Dazza. I just had major open-heart surgery in Wellington on Tuesday. I'll be in hospital for a wee while yet, but they are going to fly me over the hill to Wairarapa in a couple of weeks and transfer me into Wairarapa Hospital for a couple of weeks of final recovery closer to home. On Tuesday night, I had more than sixty tubes, wires, cables, drains and other stuff connecting me up to all sorts of machines. Tonight, I'm down to just seven in total and another one will come out tomorrow. I've got a wee way to go yet, but the body is healing up fast. Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: aDjUsToR on September 01, 2022, 05:16:52 pm Still playing with yourself on here I see ;D
Hope you get well from the heart issues quickly. Fun fact for you hysterical eco-bullshit worshippers; Looking at ice core records, the previous interglacial period was warmer than the current one (in case you don't know, that was approx 120,000 years ago). Also there is nothing "unprecedented" about the current fires, floods, droughts, sea level rise, rate of sea level rise, rate of temp increase etc etc. Try not to have a mental meltdown. Eventually you'll get it! Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 02, 2022, 09:28:30 pm Oh dear, another stupid climate-change denier. I guess you'll rail against your insurance company when they ramp-up your premiums through the roof because of global warming. Talk about a fucking idiot, eh? Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on September 28, 2022, 02:39:30 pm (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on October 27, 2023, 10:08:56 pm from The Washington Post… For New Zealand's Māori communities, climate change is already hurting Indigenous communities along New Zealand's long coastline are feeling the double whammy of climate change and colonialism as extreme weather makes marginal land uninhabitable. By RACHEL PANNETT | 12:01AM EDT — Friday, October 27, 2023 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QWW2LGQP6ZM6ZO3W6CL5TKUR7U_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QWW2LGQP6ZM6ZO3W6CL5TKUR7U.JPG) Eight months after a destructive cyclone hit New Zealand, Maori communities such as this one in the Tangoio Valley are still clearing away piles of silt from ruined fields. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. TANGOIO, NEW ZEALAND — The wharenui, or meeting house, stood forlorn. Usually the hub of this remote Māori community, it had been stripped of its wooden carvings. The bare cinder block shell gave the building an unclothed appearance. Wind whistled through holes bashed out by floodwaters. An official red notice prohibited entry to the adjacent dining hall, where the walls were askew, jammed with twigs and debris. The preschool was shuttered, the children gone. Down the valley, dump trucks whirred as they hauled silt from ruined fields. Eight months have passed since a powerful cyclone (https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2023/02/13/new-zealand-cyclone-gabrielle-auckland/) struck northern New Zealand, killing 11 people and displacing more than 10,000. The storm's path across the Hawke's Bay region was indiscriminate: it pummeled low-rent housing alongside million-dollar homes, wineries, orchards and factories. But the barriers to recovery here highlight the double whammy dealt to Indigenous communities by climate change, as extreme weather events exacerbate already high rates of homelessness and economic disadvantage. In parts of Hawke's Bay, February's cyclone is in the rear-view. Streets have been tidied up. Insurance claims lodged. Levees repaired. Meanwhile, communities like Tangoio face painful choices about their future after authorities declared their land too risky to reinhabit. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TREY2I535Y37QN53VVPYSOBD3Q_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/TREY2I535Y37QN53VVPYSOBD3Q.JPG) The dining hall at Tangoio was deemed uninhabitable by authorities after the February cyclone. Shared meals are a big part of Māori community life. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. Tangoio and dozens of Māori communities are on the front lines of climate change, a dark legacy of British colonization which saw Indigenous people consigned to inhospitable land. Many are on flood plains or near the sea. Historically, tribes moved between coastal villages and fortified hilltop settlements when they faced bad weather or enemy attacks. Colonial land confiscations changed that. “Some of these marae don't have any other land if you take them off that flood plain,” said Bayden Barber, chairman of Ngāti Kahungunu, the main Māori tribe in the region. (The marae is a sacred Maori meeting ground for tribal gatherings, encompassing a wharenui, dining hall and urupa, or burial grounds.) “They used to own that whole region. That in itself is a travesty. And now climate change is pushing our people off the last little bit of whenua [land] that they actually own,” Barber said. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YHVWJDXMVG6K3OAU43PNTEN4DM_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YHVWJDXMVG6K3OAU43PNTEN4DM.JPG) Twisted railway lines near the east coast city of Napier pay grim tribute to the February storm's ferocity. — Photograph: Kerry Marshall/Getty Images. The government has agreed to split with local authorities the cost of buying out homeowners affected the most to get them to relocate. But the plan doesn't account for Māori communities' deep spiritual connection to ancestral land, or for shared land ownership. Nor does it consider previous legal settlements the government has signed with Indigenous groups guaranteeing access to tribal land and resources, including seafood. The government has been compensating tribes across the country since the late 1980s as redress for colonial wrongs. In 2013, officials came to Tangoio to apologize for a brutal history of military attacks and land confiscations that had left them “virtually landless” (https://tangoio.maori.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Hon-Chris-Finlayson-Speech_25_May_2013.pdf), according to the government minister in charge at the time. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WFC5N4FOGWJNYQCQTRGKJ3UBEQ_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WFC5N4FOGWJNYQCQTRGKJ3UBEQ.JPG) The meeting house at Waipatu Marae near Hastings, which became an evacuation center for displaced cyclone survivors. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. Although the buyout plan is voluntary, categorizing land as uninhabitable has made it problematic to insure (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300896005/thinking-of-rebuilding-in-a-high-risk-zone-dont-count-on-getting-insurance) against future disasters (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/03/natural-disaster-climate-insurance/). “We don't want to build a marae, which is priceless, on a piece of land where the insurers won't touch us,” said Hori Reti, chairman of Tangoio marae, which counts 6,373 people in its community. Relocated by force during colonial times, climate change is forcing another kind of relocation on Tangoio. Experts call it “managed retreat.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YZ4BGRVWTJXOB7JSW3LHF4AKRM_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YZ4BGRVWTJXOB7JSW3LHF4AKRM.JPG) The eroding coastline at Tangoio beach. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. ‘They call me Moses’ When the storm struck Tangoio in February, Reti was trapped as a wall of water approached like a freight train. He huddled with his wife in the pitch dark. Somehow, trees uprooted by the storm piled up like a dam behind their home, parting the floodwaters around them. “They call me Moses,” Reti said wryly. For Reti, 44, the cyclone is a reminder of historic loss: firstly through colonial land confiscations, and later the Public Works Act, which allowed land to be claimed for roads. He pointed toward a vacant plot where his great-grandmother's house once stood. Authorities plowed a road right through her front garden, Reti said with exasperation. Similarly, a coastal highway that curves into the valley, away from the Pacific, cut so deeply into the hillside that a historic home atop it had to be demolished. When municipal valuers visited after the cyclone, Reti said he couldn't fathom their language. They spoke of assets: a bridge and the state highway. For Reti, value is in the spot in the river where his ancestors gave birth and the sacred ground where they're buried. “How will we get that mirror effect on another piece of land?” he said. Reti is set on restoring the Tangoio marae for its people to return to. But they've weathered six big floods since they were hemmed onto this plain. With their land-holdings reduced from around 275,000 acres to a mere four acres, Reti asks, where can they go? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/LCJXV5KGEJOK2BQPB4CADPNBF4_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/LCJXV5KGEJOK2BQPB4CADPNBF4.JPG) The Māori community at Waipatu became an evacuation center for people displaced by the cyclone. Tane Tomoana works inside a storage container filled with donations for families in need. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. Climate warriors Tangoio's struggles highlight the difficult issues around managed retreat: Who decides when to retreat and on what basis, and how do you pay for it? It foreshadows the troubles that could befall other low-lying communities as storms intensify and seas rise. In the United States, the Biden administration last year gave a number of Native American tribes money to help them relocate (https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration-makes-135-million-commitment-support-relocation-tribal) away from rivers and coastlines. This 200-mile stretch of coastline has one of the highest rates of erosion and sea level rise in New Zealand. Tens of thousands of people are expected to have to move out of harm's way around the country in coming decades. So far, New Zealand's only case of managed retreat — after a massive landslide (https://www.rnz.co.nz/programmes/the-detail/story/2018843338/matata-the-town-that-had-to-retreat) — took nearly two decades to resolve. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FZ6ZRIKPWQZ6XLWYKSOVGETDQA_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FZ6ZRIKPWQZ6XLWYKSOVGETDQA.JPG) A local sports club was repurposed to house displaced cyclone survivors. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. “Are we going to be courageous enough, as the elected leaders, to say we'll do something different, or will we just be another footnote in history?” said Nigel Bickle, the chief executive of Hawke's Bay District Council. “What is going to mark out the countries globally are those that are going to be prepared to deal with this.” Bickle, who has clashed with tribal officials over relocation proposals, understands the quandary. “We've come in and said there's an intolerable risk to life and you shouldn't be living there,” he said. “And they're saying: ‘Who is going to help us find a piece of land that is safe?’” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FEJ4NGKBIK44PXDLHS73MIH5CE_size-normalized.JPG&w=675) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FEJ4NGKBIK44PXDLHS73MIH5CE.JPG) Hiria Tumoana, a Māori elder, was rescued from head-high waters that inundated her home. She has been living in temporary accommodation since February in a Māori community that avoided the deluge. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. or years, the Tangoio community has been exploring ways to protect the settlement from climate change — including relocating to higher ground. They approached several landowners (https://tangoio.maori.nz/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Marae-Options-Booklet-2018.pdf) about repurchasing land within their traditional borders. All three declined. Before the cyclone, the community was preparing to redevelop the meeting house (https://tangoio.maori.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/MTT_Locality_Plan_version-1.2_compressed.pdf) on a raised platform. Those plans are now in doubt. Even before local authorities ruled the area unsafe, some were questioning the merits of rebuilding in a flood zone. They're seeking regulatory support to purchase “resilient land” (https://tangoio.maori.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/MTT_Locality_Plan_version-1.2_compressed.pdf). The previous center-left Labour administration was looking to include Indigenous knowledge in its climate change planning (https://environment.govt.nz/assets/publications/climate-change/Community-led-retreat-Issues-and-options.pdf) to avoid a repeat of past wrongs. But Tom Fitzgerald, a climate expert, said officials are “building the plane as they are flying it,” combining their disaster response with climate plans still under development. A national election in October that moved New Zealand sharply to the right (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/14/new-zealand-election-national-act-coalition/) adds to the uncertainty. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/N6MX2HRLZTCZRMHUVNGUH75PTE_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/N6MX2HRLZTCZRMHUVNGUH75PTE.JPG) Children's rain boots sit outside a destroyed Kohanga Reo (Māori Language preschool) at Tangoio. Some community members worry the children won't return to the area. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. Hilltop fortresses For many Māori communities, relocation is not an unfamiliar concept. There is evidence of managed retreat occurring as far back as the 1800s, when a volcanic eruption (https://nzhistory.govt.nz/eruption-of-mt-tarawera) forced Māori communities to relocate, said Akuhata Bailey-Winiata, an Indigenous scholar (https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/handle/10289/14567) at Waikato University. Other tribes offered land to those whose settlements were buried in tons of ash and debris. (https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/oo227/Kiwithrottlejockey/20231027_HawkesBayMap_768x681.jpg) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/27/new-zealand-maori-climate-change-indigenous/) About 35 miles south of Tangoio, the Omahu marae community is planning a 10-year retreat to a historic hilltop fort after the cyclone inundated their meeting house and burial grounds, exposing human bones. North of Tangoio, plans are afoot to move the community (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/kahu/cyclone-gabrielle-relocating-te-karaka-needs-50-per-cent-support-of-the-community-willie-te-aho/3NKJH7GXENAFXPWDWCYQXV5SWE/) — and possibly the entire town of Te Karaka — to higher ground. For some Māori, the cyclone underscored their resilience. At Omahu, around 1,200 people came to help. Within days they were providing meals and shelter to families displaced by floodwaters. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4ZQ2GMAOAX7PTDNRBDTMAX35ZY_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4ZQ2GMAOAX7PTDNRBDTMAX35ZY.JPG) Hiria Tumoana in her temporary shared sleeping quarters at Waipatu Marae. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. At nearby Waipatu marae, Tane Tomoana had just completed civil defense training when an army truck carrying 120 flood survivors turned up. That training was no longer academic. “We remembered who we were meant to be. It's a really good reset. Māori, catering for everybody, with joy and gusto,” he said. Eight months on, some flood survivors are still living at Waipatu, including 69-year-old Hiria Tumoana, whose home was inundated by head-high waters. She was rescued by a neighbor who saw her candle flickering and found her clinging to an upturned bed. Returning to Māori village life felt like a home-coming, she said. At night, she sleeps in a communal space with other families. That companionship helps, she said, especially when it rains — a sound many survivors find triggering. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QGISWOCPC6FONVX3ZMQKC42DWI_size-normalized.JPG&w=1111) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QGISWOCPC6FONVX3ZMQKC42DWI.JPG) Carvings from the damaged meeting house at Tangoio were recently removed to restore them for the day they return to sacred ground. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. Uneven hand For others, the recovery is not so easy because they have so little land left. At Petane marae, just south of Tangoio, the community had just renovated their dining hall and were about to build a new meeting house when the storm hit. Now, like Tangoio, they've been zoned uninhabitable. “We are unable to build our wharenui for our people to come back to us,” community chairwoman Rose Hiha said one recent afternoon, wiping away tears. Some members want to fortify the area with levees. Others are afraid to return. Twisted railway lines pay grim tribute to the storm's ferocity. Wrecked cars are frozen in time where they washed up. A Māori school is half-buried in debris. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5BTKCYMOO7RHRNKO5P3SFGXKSM_size-normalized.JPG&w=675) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/5BTKCYMOO7RHRNKO5P3SFGXKSM.JPG) Joe Taylor, the master carver of Tangoio Marae, restores a carving in a temporary workshop in Napier. — Photograph: Te Aho Jordan/for The Washington Post. At a Napier warehouse one afternoon, Joe Taylor, a Tangoio elder, chiseled away at a limestone sculpture, beginning a restoration project he predicted will outlive him. Under the 82-year-old's guidance, the remaining artifacts were recently removed from Tangoio to preserve them for the day they return to sacred ground. __________________________________________________________________________ • Rachel Pannett (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/rachel-pannett/) writes about global news for The Washington Post. She started as a journalist in her home country New Zealand, and has reported from around the world including Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, Vietnam, East Timor and Papua New Guinea. She has covered wildfires and terrorist attacks, elections and political upheavals, and traced the journeys of Myanmar Rohingya refugees and Afghan migrants seeking a better life abroad. On a less-serious note, she has also written about beer-can boat races, Elvis impersonators in the Outback and Australia's ‘Route 66’. She joined The Washington Post's foreign desk in 2021 after more than a decade with The Wall Street Journal, where she was deputy bureau chief for Australia and New Zealand. Rachel was educated at Massey University in NZ, where she earned a Bachelor of Arts in Social Anthropology and Journalism. In addition to English, she also speaks fluent Norwegian. | Honors and Awards: Asia 2000 annual travel award for journalists reporting in the Asia-Pacific. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/27/new-zealand-maori-climate-change-indigenous (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/27/new-zealand-maori-climate-change-indigenous/) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on November 12, 2023, 01:28:48 am (https://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ly7jf9aNie1r186ivo1_500.gif) Title: Re: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” Post by: Kiwithrottlejockey on January 02, 2024, 12:03:17 am from The Washington Post… The climate future arrived in 2023. It left scars across the planet. The year will mark a point when humanity crossed into a new climate era — an age of “global boiling”, as the U.N. Secretary General called it. By CHICO HARLAN | 6:00AM EST — Sunday, December 31, 2023 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WNMQOIC32SRS2NT5LX4THSPYB4_size-normalized.jpg&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WNMQOIC32SRS2NT5LX4THSPYB4.jpg) Residents watch a fire near Alexandroupolis, Greece, on August 21, 2023. Wildfires in the country charred several islands over the summer. — Photograph: Achilleas Chiras/Associated Press. AVAS, GREECE — By the time the flames were barreling down the slope, heading for 40 miles of parched forest, the fire chief said he already knew: This was the big one. His part of Greece had gone two months without rain. A record heat wave had baked the area for weeks. Within hours, the fire had sprinted through acres of pines, hissing and spouting 120-foot flames, reaching the brink of a village where a single home — belonging to Kostas Dinas, a retired attorney — was perched on the hillside outskirts. Dinas, 66, had figured he'd live in that home until they “carried me out flat.” But then came the hottest year humanity had ever seen. It had been a year that had started with merely very hot temperatures and then intensified mid-way. What made the subsequent months stand out wasn't so much any single record but rather the heat's all-consuming relentlessness. It went day by day, continent by continent, until people all over the map, whether in the Amazon or the Pacific islands or rural Greece, had glimpsed a climate future for which they are not prepared. “It felt like the earth was about to explode,” Dinas said. Even if its extremes are ultimately eclipsed, as seems inevitable, 2023 will mark a point when humanity crossed into a new climate era — an age of “global boiling” (https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/07/1139162), as United Nations Secretary General António Guterres called it. The year included the hottest single day on record (July 6) and the hottest ever month (July), not to mention the hottest June, the hottest August, the hottest September, the hottest October, the hottest November, and probably the hottest December. It included a day, November 17 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/11/19/climate-change-2c-temperature-heat-record/), when global temperatures, for the first time ever, reached 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial levels. Discomfort, destruction, and death are the legacy of those records. In Phoenix, a heat wave went on for so long, with 31 consecutive days above 110 Fahrenheit, that one NASA atmospheric scientist called it “mind-boggling” (https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/151632/relentless-heat-in-the-southwest). The surrounding county recorded a record number of heat deaths (https://www.maricopa.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/5734), nearly 600. In Brazil, drought (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/11/10/amazon-drought-deforestation/) sapped the normally lush Amazon, causing towns to ration drinking water, contributing to the deaths of endangered pink dolphins, and choking off the river-based system of travel and commerce. In the Antarctic, winter-time sea ice was at an all-time low (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/event-tracker/2023-antarctic-sea-ice-winter-maximum-lowest-record-wide-margin). An unprecedented marine heat wave upended coral ecosystems. At one point the coastal Florida Keys waters reached 100 degrees, comparable to a hot tub. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2Y3YKFIX26NQUJZNFECEGSVW34.JPG&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2Y3YKFIX26NQUJZNFECEGSVW34.JPG) Scorched land and charred trees are seen following a wildfire, near Avantas, Greece, in August. — Photograph: Alexandros Avramidis/Reuters. And in Greece, in the wake of extreme heat, fires broke out on many fronts — none bigger than the blaze that arrived on August 21 in Avas, a village of 400 people with a taverna, a tidy cluster of stone homes, including one high above the others, at the end of a winding road overlooking the town. Dinas had bought that house from a friend in 2012, seeking a way to move from a nearby city back to his home village. He'd poured his savings into a renovation. He'd stocked the home with his books and vinyl records. From his window, he could see the mountains, the sea six miles away, and squirrels playing in his front yard. In the evenings, he'd tucker down the hill to a bar, right off the town square, where he'd play cards with friends he'd known since high school. On the night of August 21, he was in that square again, looking up as the fire raged across the hillside. Volunteers and firefighters had spread out across the lower part of the village, having dug trenches, armed with hoses and water buckets, to defend the other properties. But nobody could save Dinas's home. The fire consumed it in minutes, and Dinas gulped thinking about everything going up in flames. His books of poetry, handwritten notes in the margin. His degrees. Photos of his daughter. “My whole life,” he said. When the fire stopped, he looked up at the hill. His house had no door, no roof. Even the windows had melted. “It must have been so, so hot,” Dinas said. Anomalies ‘off the charts’ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/KRHEMMBUVRH4SHARDKCRPD6NCE.jpg&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/KRHEMMBUVRH4SHARDKCRPD6NCE.jpg) The sun shines on coral showing signs of bleaching at Cheeca Rocks off the coast of Islamorada, Florida. Scientists saw devastating effects from prolonged hot water surrounding Florida. — Photograph: Andrew Ibarra/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Associated Press. One explanation for 2023's extreme heat is El Niño — a recurring oceanic phenomenon that warms the waters in the Pacific and causes a global ripple of consequences. But the scale of this year's heat — amplified by human-caused factors and the burning of fossil fuels — is still well beyond what most scientists had thought possible. Some have theorized that planetary warming may be accelerating (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/12/26/global-warming-accelerating-climate-change/). Others have said there's not enough evidence. What they agree upon, though, is that the earth is trending toward more extreme heat. That means that the experiences of 2023 can seem astonishing in the short-term but will one day look tame. This year, then, will wind up as the first — and almost surely not the last — in which temperatures were at or near 1.5 Celsius above pre-industrial levels, a threshold the Paris agreement has aimed to avoid. Though different climate tracking groups wind up with slightly different measurements of the global temperatures, most are within the same margin of error. “All data sets tell us that we are uncomfortably close to 1.5 already,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of Europe's Copernicus Climate Change Service. Buontempo said on December 21 that 2023 had been so warm that even an immediate deep planetary freeze wouldn't stop the year from breaking the all-time annual heat record. “You'd need an asteroid hitting the planet, and even so I don't know if you'd manage,” he said. “The anomalies this year are just that much off the charts.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J5E3YBFEE6IUUISTM7INDKPS4I.jpg&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/J5E3YBFEE6IUUISTM7INDKPS4I.jpg) Phoenix firefighters assist a resident having trouble breathing during a heat wave in Phoenix. The unrelenting heat in surrounding Maricopa County caused at least 600 deaths. — Photograph: Caitlin O'Hara/Bloomberg News. The heat was so sustained that it set records day after day. The University of Maine's Climate Change Institute logs daily global temperatures (https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/?dm_id=world) going back to 1940. From this July on, almost without fail, every daily temperature in 2023 topped the daily temperature from the same date in any of the prior 83 years. On October 7 — yes, the hottest since at least 1940 — Matthias Huss, a glaciologist, shared video on social media (https://x.com/matthias_huss/status/1710715732818854286) from western Switzerland of melting glaciers dripping onto rocks as if it were a rainstorm. Normally, in October, the melting had stopped, replaced by a thick level of snow. “It's very sad,” said Huss, who'd seen Switzerland's glaciers lose 10 percent of their mass over the past two years. “We are witnessing this transition into a new world.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CM4CTVWOQ7KPGIFBKEVSJAB4NY.jpg&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CM4CTVWOQ7KPGIFBKEVSJAB4NY.jpg) Severe drought hit the Rio Negro, a major tributary of the Amazon in Brazil. The river reached historic lows this year, causing several problems in the region. — Photograph: Andre Coelho/European Pressphoto Agency/Agencia-EFE/Shutterstock. Nine days later in Brazil, the Rio Negro, one of the Amazon's main tributaries, fell to its lowest level since record keeping began more than a century earlier. A victim of Brazil's historic drought, that sapped waterway up-ended lives across the region, including in the city of Manaus, an industrial hub that suddenly couldn't receive shipments from huge vessels. Some factories were forced to shut down, unable to receive raw materials. Supermarkets rationed beans and rice. Many of the goods that did arrive had to be ferried in from nearly 1,000 miles away, a trip that required six or seven days. “The rivers are like our roads,” said Geyce Ferreira, who lives in Manaus and handles logistics for a retail company. “Your normal life, your day-by-day life, is seeing the river. And then one day you can't see it anymore. Everything stopped.” “When you imagine that this is your future, how can you live here?” Then, on October 25, halfway across the world, a Category 5 cyclone made landfall in the small Pacific island nation of Vanuatu. Hurricanes and cyclones are increasingly supercharged by warmer ocean temperatures, and this one — Lola — was one of the most intense off-season cyclones ever recorded in the Southern Hemisphere. The cyclone obliterated several remote islands, uprooting vegetation, blowing away homes, destroying schools. Kelly Pabi, a regional official in the hardest-hit area, said by phone that two months later most children in the disaster zone still hadn't returned to school. “Until today, people still don't even have access to safe drinking water,” Pabi said. Refugees caught in the flames (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/N344LKFYXJOVCY6DFRTHGVZ2VQ_size-normalized.JPG&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/N344LKFYXJOVCY6DFRTHGVZ2VQ.JPG) Dadia National Park was once popular with hikers. It was torched by a fire that lasted for three weeks and created a 1,000-mile smoke plume that flew into Tunisia. — Photograph: Chico Harlan/The Washington Post. Greece's northeastern fire was the largest recorded in Europe since at least the turn of the century, with a smoke plume stretching 1,000 miles to Tunisia. But by the standards of an off-the-charts year, such a blaze did not even qualify as massive. Greece lost one percent of its land to the August wildfire. Canada, meantime, lost an area the size of Greece. Still, even within that one percent of razed Greek land, months after the smoke cleared, one can find deep scars left by the hottest year. Loggers are working their way through the decimated Dadia National Park, cutting down the charred remains of trees, some 200 or 300 years old. They find the carcasses of fox and deer along paths once used by hikers. “An entire ecosystem is shaken,” said Kristos Dmitrescu, 49, one of the loggers. The firefighters, who battled flames for three weeks, are still stunned by the scale of what they saw and how unstoppable it was. Working 24-hour shifts, and with the help of crews rushed in from other parts of Europe, they saved most of the area's village homes. But even now the regional fire chief, Spyros Koutras, scrolls through his phone, looking at photos of the fury. Horizons lit raging orange. Spires of twirling fire. Crews marching toward fronts resembling movie explosions. And then, later in the scrolling: Photos of the blackened aftermath. “You know, it's your place. You want to defend it,” Koutras said. “The damage was so big. That hurts.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/3P7GMEANEX2PNGCHUCP23KJL3Y_size-normalized.JPG&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/3P7GMEANEX2PNGCHUCP23KJL3Y.JPG) Pavlos Pavlidis, a Greek coroner, standing at the hospital where he works in front of one of the freezer trailers holding the remains of un-documented immigrants killed in the country's wildfires. — Photograph: Chico Harlan/The Washington Post. Twenty people died in the fire. They were undocumented immigrants, on a journey farther north into Europe, moving along a forested path that had long been a common route. A shepherd had found the first of the bodies just after the fire roared through, and then police arrived to find more. The remains, so charred and reduced, scarcely resembled human form, and the fire had done away with any tattoos, surgical scars, or jewelry. Police took DNA samples. A few Syrian families eventually provided matches and claimed the remains. But the 18 others have become the responsibility of a chain-smoking local coroner, Pavlos Pavlidis, who still has folders for each case on his computer, and who has stored the bodies in two freezer trailers behind the hospital where he works. “They're right outside my office window,” he said. He said he would keep the bodies for as long as he had space for them, or until they are claimed by relatives. On his office wall he has a map of the region, separated from Turkey by a river. Being a coroner in this part of Greece means dealing with immigrant deaths, and over decades he's handled hundreds of cases — drownings, traffic accidents, train accidents, plus one of the most common causes of death: hypothermia. “This was the first year nobody died of the cold,” Pavlidis said. Dinas, the retired attorney, lived just miles away from where the bodies were discovered, and said those deaths left him shaken. “A house can be rebuilt. But life?” he said. The skeleton of his home still straddles the hillside, its interior nothing more than a bed of fragments from shingles that once made his roof. Dinas said it's taken months to fully realize what has been lost, even into winter, his favorite season, when he'd typically gather at his home with friends, drinking around the fireplace, watching the snow outside. Of course this year there's no fireplace. And no snow. Dinas said he feels depressed, unmoored. He's waiting on government compensation, but it probably won't be enough to rebuild. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/A7JQTQUBUPC7M7LSEVGS3OZEHI_size-normalized.JPG&w=1024) (https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/A7JQTQUBUPC7M7LSEVGS3OZEHI.JPG) The remains of the home of retired attorney Kostas Dinas. He had bought and renovated the home in 2012, thinking it would be the last house he ever lived in. — Photograph: Chico Harlan/The Washington Post. “At a certain point, it's a lonely path,” he said. For months, he's been living with a friend in a nearby coastal city. Almost every evening, he returns to his old village by car, walking into his old bar, playing cards with his friends. For a while, during those games, it feels like he still has a home in Avas. Then the game ends and he heads back out of town. __________________________________________________________________________ • Elinda Labropoulou contributed to this report. • Chico Harlan (https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/chico-harlan/) is The Washington Post's global climate correspondent. He joined The Washington Post in 2008, first covering the Washington Nationals baseball team and then spending four years as the paper's East Asia bureau chief, focusing on Japan and the Korean Peninsula. He moved to Europe in 2018 as Rome bureau chief, where he covered migration, the pandemic, and wrote several defining investigative stories about the Catholic Church's abuse crisis. Previously, Harlan covered economic issues and spent a year on The Washington Post's national enterprise team. Harlan worked at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and The Daily Telegraph, in Sydney, prior to coming to The Washington Post. He grew up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Chico was educated at Syracuse University. | Honors and Awards: Gerald Loeb Award, finalist, beat reporting, 2017; Gerald Loeb Award, finalist, feature writing, 2016; Madeline Dane Ross Award, Overseas Press Club, “Disaster in Japan”, 2011. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/12/31/2023-record-heat-temperatures (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/12/31/2023-record-heat-temperatures/) |