Climate Change: An unstoppable movement takes hold

[monkfish]

45 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

already did, but here it is again

http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html

Ok thanks for the link to that blog post by Nasif Nahle i will give it a read.
From the graph I see CO2 levels have been pretty stable for the last 5,000,000 years up until now.

It's like 450,000,000 years since CO2 was at 2000 ppm so maybe Dinosaurs will return soon when it gets back to that point but for us it won't be comfortable to breath.

Also interesting to note something like 40% Continental landmass was flooded.



But the point is we are speeding up, effecting this otherwise natural climate cycle process.


 

Edited October 7, 2019 by monkfish

[brokenbone]

11 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Ok thanks for the link to that blog post by Nasif Nahle i will give it a read.
From the graph I see CO2 levels have been pretty stable for the last 5,000,000 years up until now.

It's like 450,000,000 years since CO2 was at 2000 ppm so maybe Dinosaurs will return soon when it gets back to that point but for us it won't be comfortable to breath.

 

2000 ppm = 2000 part per million, or 0.02%,

it would have to climb from 0.02% to 35% before

it begin have any effect.

even if we burn all the 100 million billion tons of earth crust back into the atmosphere, we just cant get there,

even if we could theoretically dig up all old carbonized lifeforms somehow

[DrTuner]

3 hours ago, brokenbone said:

heres minnesota temperatures for past 100 years.

its a bit of amateur graph in that years before 1970

isnt hidden away, it would have given more credibility

to the red line that implies rising temperature.

ipcc chose to pick the ideal start date

for temperature to 1973, and hide the rest,

and then make some suggestional red dots taking off in the sky at the end of the graph, to really stimulate imagination

 

Fitting trend lines is an art. Those practising technical analysis know you can cheat yourself endlessly. Like the 1970-1995 part of that fitting quite badly.

[DrTuner]

1 hour ago, brokenbone said:

but while climate effects co2, its not the other way around,

so we dont actually need global warming,

we just need to re-introduce the co2 that has

during millions upon millions of years been buried by these very animals, those rocks that once were ammonites

still bind the co2 that the ammonites collected,

we need to burn them to give back to the cycle of life

the co2 that the ammonites et al took with them into their grave.

this, and to a lesser extent fossil fuel,

is what have depleted co2 levels to

now pose a very real threat to life on earth, its about time we burn and give back to nature what nature,

and by extension, we our self, need,

just to cling onto life.

 

you could say life forms that used

co2 to build shells is a threat to

life on earth, and we, the humans,

are salvation to life on earth by re-introducing that co2 back into the atmosphere when we drive our chopper

on the sois of pattaya,

jumping happy hour places as we go.

cheers to life, gimme another leo kap

There's just one caveat there. Dinosaurs. Humans wouldn't be the apex predators if the world starts to flourish again, although judging by the height of the women in Nordics there is a possibility of them growing into T-Rexes.

[brokenbone]

29 minutes ago, monkfish said:

 

 

But the point is we are speeding up, effecting this otherwise natural climate cycle process.


 

here they summarize the data

 

  At the moment, the area of continental flood is almost 7%; according to climatic succession, we expect the area of continental flood to increase to almost 10%, but never so massive that it will put human populations in danger, as the IPCC has taken to suggesting almost every day. Allow me to clarify that most of the claims regarding catastrophic climate change filling the newspapers are overblown and based on data that is being arbitrarily exaggerated to blame humanity for climatic changes which are absolutely natural.

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[monkfish]

19 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

here they summarize the data

 

  At the moment, the area of continental flood is almost 7%; according to climatic succession, we expect the area of continental flood to increase to almost 10%, but never so massive that it will put human populations in danger, as the IPCC has taken to suggesting almost every day. Allow me to clarify that most of the claims regarding catastrophic climate change filling the newspapers are overblown and based on data that is being arbitrarily exaggerated to blame humanity for climatic changes which are absolutely natural.

I agree some climate change is natural but a most is man made
At the current rate we are emitting CO2 we will reach 2000 ppm by the year 2250 

Now look at the graph and you will see NATURAL increase should take Millions years not a few hundred we are accelerating it.

According to the link below breathing at 2000 ppm probably not be so pleasant.
https://www.kane.co.uk/knowledge-centre/what-are-safe-levels-of-co-and-co2-in-rooms
But anyway its probably not going to effect us so why should we care right?

[brokenbone]

9 minutes ago, monkfish said:

I agree some climate change is natural but a most is man made
At the current rate we are emitting CO2 we will reach 2000 ppm by the year 2250 

Now look at the graph and you will see NATURAL increase should take Millions years not a few hundred we are accelerating it.

According to the link below breathing at 2000 ppm probably not be so pleasant.
https://www.kane.co.uk/knowledge-centre/what-are-safe-levels-of-co-and-co2-in-rooms
But anyway its probably not going to effect us so why should we care right?

sorry im fatigued, up to 5% but no more

CO₂ toxicity in humans

Carbon dioxide at low concentration has little, if any, toxicological effects. At higher concentrations (>5%), it causes the development of hypercapnia and respiratory acidosis.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5380556/

 

ipcc are trolling with graphs to

mislead, ive shoved it enough times

and explained how its done,

you can troll anything with graphs

if it fits your dignity and ethics

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[monkfish]

36 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

sorry im fatigued, up to 5% but no more

CO₂ toxicity in humans

Carbon dioxide at low concentration has little, if any, toxicological effects. At higher concentrations (>5%), it causes the development of hypercapnia and respiratory acidosis.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5380556/

 

ipcc are trolling with graphs to

mislead, ive shoved it enough times

and explained how its done,

you can troll anything with graphs

if it fits your dignity and ethics

Was talking about your graph not ipcc

I've taken the liberty of adding a bit on the end to Illustrate just how unnatural it looks compared to the natural cycle in purple.
You see that bit on the end well that should normally take a couple of million years.
So yes that's out contribution and no one can deny it and even if there is no climate change and there will be 2000 ppm isn't good for people or wildlife.

[brokenbone]

37 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Was talking about your graph not ipcc

I've taken the liberty of adding a bit on the end to Illustrate just how unnatural it looks compared to the natural cycle in purple.
You see that bit on the end well that should normally take a couple of million years.
So yes that's out contribution and no one can deny it and even if there is no climate change and there will be 2000 ppm isn't good for people or wildlife.

the document on co2 toxicity on humans state

as long as it doesnt exceed 5% its fine.

2000 ppm =0.02%, we can safely increase that 250 times,

up to 500.000 ppm co2 is safe with no ill effects,

according to document on toxicity of co2

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[DrTuner]

39 minutes ago, monkfish said:

So yes that's out contribution and no one can deny it and even if there is no climate change and there will be 2000 ppm isn't good for people or wildlife.

I seem to remember to have seen we're adding something like 10ppm/y? So we'd need to add 1600 to the current 400, which is 160 years of burning fossils at that rate. Not sure if there are enough of them available for easy burns, all the easy ones have been extracted already.

 

EDIT: Ok wikipedia quotes it at 2 ppm/y increase, I was remembering the gigaton amount: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere , so we'd need to be burning 800 years. Will run out of stuff to burn before that.

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by DrTuner

[monkfish]

6 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

the document on co2 toxicity on humans state

as long as it doesnt exceed 5% its fine.

2000 ppm =0.02%, we can safely increase that 250 times,

up to 500.000 ppm co2 is safe with no ill effects

Well that wasn't my point but seriously 500,000? lol

 

[brokenbone]

5 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

I seem to remember to have seen we're adding something like 10ppm/y? So we'd need to add 1600 to the current 400, which is 160 years of burning fossils at that rate. Not sure if there are enough of them available for easy burns, all the easy ones have been extracted already.

its been suggested the reserves will last another 50 years,

we better step on it to get alternatives online, and its about time to build reactors and replace oil plants altogether,

oil has many uses, future generations are going to take a <deleted> on our graves if we deny them any at all

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[DrTuner]

1 minute ago, brokenbone said:

its been suggested the reserves will last another 50 years,

we better step on it to get alternatives online

Yes, this is a much worse problem. And the same people crying about CO2 are blocking nuclear Gen IV reactor research. Can't kill their cash cow.

[ExpatOilWorker]

2 hours ago, brokenbone said:

the document on co2 toxicity on humans state

as long as it doesnt exceed 5% its fine.

2000 ppm =0.02%, we can safely increase that 250 times,

up to 500.000 ppm co2 is safe with no ill effects,

according to document on toxicity of co2

You need to read up on CO2 and by the way 2000 ppm is 0.2%!

 

OSHA mandate max 5000 ppm for 8 hours.

You exhale air at 30-40,000 ppm

90,000 ppm for 10 min and you are on your way to check out of this world.

 

If we burn the KNOW coal, oil and gas reserves right now (today), we will have CO2 levels at 5,000 ppm globally.

[DrTuner]

1 hour ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

If we burn the KNOW coal, oil and gas reserves right now (today), we will have CO2 levels at 5,000 ppm globally.

Would be a decent bonfire, that. You'd need to get it all out first to burn it in one go and prevent the plants from converting it to biomass and O2. A huge asteroid strike might do it, obviously it would obliterate all life as well.

[brokenbone]

3 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

You need to read up on CO2 and by the way 2000 ppm is 0.2%!

 

OSHA mandate max 5000 ppm for 8 hours.

You exhale air at 30-40,000 ppm

90,000 ppm for 10 min and you are on your way to check out of this world.

 

If we burn the KNOW coal, oil and gas reserves right now (today), we will have CO2 levels at 5,000 ppm globally.

yes i saw the errors when i posted but was too fatigued to fix it, my interest was in saying the co2 that was good enough for t-rex is good enough for me,

and superb for vegetation, i think high co2 in precambrian & cambrian period played a part in evolution and expansion of animals too.

 

yes you would get a spike if you burned it all in a single day, but it would seek equilibrium to everything eager to absorb it, photosynthesis would gulp up a good portion of available co2, and ocean would seek uptake when atmosphere has more,

resulting in increasing biomass both on land and in ocean

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[olfu]

Yes, I see a lot of noise about climate.

In the meantime the crime rate is same for previous 6000 years and number of homeless same too.

Great!

[englishoak]

Brother runs a plant farm guess what they use tonnes of to encourage growth and increase yields ? CO2.... hundreds of litres of the stuff a year, its seen and used as a nutrient not a problem.... but hey muh climate change <deleted> says the very opposite...  

 

Climate change is a natural cycle and im sick of hearing the BS since forever about cooling, heating, flooding, scorching... every single claim made has been false and not even close, even the Ozone hole fixed on its own within a decade, i suspect there wasnt even a hole.., Sun gives you cancer, yea sure it does, never met anyone ever with skin cancer directly proven to be caused by the sun... dont see cancer spikes in hot countries etc .. just another lie

 

Meat is bad for you and we need go vegan to save the planet.... phooey.. the volume of area to grow plants to compensate is literally impossible, or hydroponic which is fresh water excessive and the chemical usage is massive and only a tiny % of those chemicals are organic.... then theres the culling of billions of animal herds and leaving plant growing regions fallow for years.. fresh water again becomes a problem for massive areas of plant growth and the transport....  

 

Dont even get me started on the green taxes and the carbon tax coupon international exchange scam. These countries literally buy coupons from others to pretend they are offsetting their own carbon footprint ... personally i think its all one big scam for moving money around and payoffs. The science community also has a skewed and vested funding interest, in other words science research has become corrupted by funding bias.

 

The climate has always changed, it will continue to if we all just vanished tomorrow... 

 

Last thing ill be doing is listening to the stupid climate goons who all prance about screeching while taking selfies on their smart phones dying their hair with chemicals and talking about going green while they shop in waitrose or spend on a cab to go out and eat in a vegan cafe... say one thing do another is all i see from these clowns and drama queens. 

 

 

 

 

[DrTuner]

8 minutes ago, englishoak said:

Brother runs a plant farm guess what they use tonnes of to encourage growth and increase yields ? CO2.... hundreds of litres of the stuff a year, its seen and used as a nutrient not a problem.... 

Yes, it's because of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

 

 

The high CO2 levels when dinosaurs roamed the earth likely produced enormous plant growth, which enabled herbivores to grow big and was followed by carnivores eating them up. A lot of it is now captured in the carbon beneath our feet and in the oceans beds. That'd be the fossil fuels, when you burn it, the O2 in the atmosphere oxidizes the carbons and produces CO2, which the plants again convert back to C fro their own growth and O2 for our enjoyment. It's not really all that complicated once you step back and look at the big picture, instead of listening to the fear mongers using a miniscule timeframe to make up their own cash producing theories.

 

https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

Edited October 7, 2019 by DrTuner

[monkfish]

Just a small taste of what's to come.
We may be able to adapt quickly to climate change but most wildlife can't adapt that quick.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/03/populations-of-uks-most-important-wildlife-have-plummeted-since-1970

Edited October 7, 2019 by monkfish

[brokenbone]

37 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Just a small taste of what's to come.
We may be able to adapt but wildlife can't so quick.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/03/populations-of-uks-most-important-wildlife-have-plummeted-since-1970

also referred to as 'bad intellectual climate' i call it signal to noise ratio out of proportion and dignity, its embarassing

when noise levels gets this high and still pretending to refer to science.

the end isnt nigh

 

heres an article about the modern phenomena

of sensationalism by patrick moore on this very issue. FUD has become Modus Operandi within all things related to nature these days,

the loonier the merrier

http://ecosense.me/2012/12/30/key-environmental-issues/

 

skip the first 1/4, its just introduction,

start reading from Exotic Species

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[DrTuner]

31 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Just a small taste of what's to come.
We may be able to adapt quickly to climate change but most wildlife can't adapt that quick.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/03/populations-of-uks-most-important-wildlife-have-plummeted-since-1970

Yeah, when human population gets bigger, others suffer as we expand our grounds by hacking away forests. Wolves are particularly badly affected. Once again the land of forests, Finland, is very aware of these issues. It's been going on for as long as humans stopped being hunter gatherers.

 

https://www.efi.int/knowledge/maps/forest

Edited October 7, 2019 by DrTuner

[DrTuner]

BTW I do have a solution to the CO2 if we want to get it down, which we might not. Legalize growing ganja. Before you know it, there are bushes growing everywhere, using all that CO2 to produce the good stuff. Just don't burn the useless parts, bury deep underground.

 

Also, don't opt for cremation when you croak. That captured carbon is best put together with the aforementioned. Happily ever after.

[monkfish]

6 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

BTW I do have a solution to the CO2 if we want to get it down, which we might not. Legalize growing ganja. Before you know it, there are bushes growing everywhere, using all that CO2 to produce the good stuff. Just don't burn the useless parts, bury deep underground.

 

Also, don't opt for cremation when you croak. That captured carbon is best put together with the aforementioned. Happily ever after.

Or maybe just stick our head in a bucket of sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist that's much easier.
 

[DrTuner]

1 minute ago, monkfish said:

Or maybe just stick our head in a bucket of sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist that's much easier.

The upcoming increase in biodiversity due to forests growing faster thanks to CO2 might result in a wolf gnawing at your backside though.

[sunnyboy2018]

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/07/the-madness-of-extinction-rebellion/

This article summarises the extinction rebellion neatly as a deluded, middle class death cult:

This is a quote taken from the article.

"Extinction Rebellion. Let us no longer beat around the bush about these people. This is an upper-middle-class death cult.
This is a millenarian movement that might speak of science, but which is driven by sheer irrationalism. By fear, moral exhaustion and misanthropy. This is the deflated, self-loathing bourgeoisie coming together to project their own psycho-social hang-ups on to society at large. They must be criticised and ridiculed out of existence."

Read the full article from the link above.

[sunnyboy2018]

1 hour ago, monkfish said:

Just a small taste of what's to come.
We may be able to adapt quickly to climate change but most wildlife can't adapt that quick.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/03/populations-of-uks-most-important-wildlife-have-plummeted-since-1970

The Guardian lies constantly. 

[Odysseus123]

1 hour ago, sunnyboy2018 said:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/07/the-madness-of-extinction-rebellion/

This article summarises the extinction rebellion neatly as a deluded, middle class death cult:

This is a quote taken from the article.

"Extinction Rebellion. Let us no longer beat around the bush about these people. This is an upper-middle-class death cult.
This is a millenarian movement that might speak of science, but which is driven by sheer irrationalism. By fear, moral exhaustion and misanthropy. This is the deflated, self-loathing bourgeoisie coming together to project their own psycho-social hang-ups on to society at large. They must be criticised and ridiculed out of existence."

Read the full article from the link above.

Yes-I have faithfully read your posted article.

 

At first I was puzzled..Alien influence?Bad ganja?

But then I realized that it was gun oil fumes..poor ventilation and all that...

 

My daddy always told me "Never, ever oil your AR 15 whilst crouched over your computer in granny's old basement."

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by Odysseus123

[brokenbone]

2 hours ago, sunnyboy2018 said:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/07/the-madness-of-extinction-rebellion/

This article summarises the extinction rebellion neatly as a deluded, middle class death cult:

This is a quote taken from the article.

"Extinction Rebellion. Let us no longer beat around the bush about these people. This is an upper-middle-class death cult.
This is a millenarian movement that might speak of science, but which is driven by sheer irrationalism. By fear, moral exhaustion and misanthropy. This is the deflated, self-loathing bourgeoisie coming together to project their own psycho-social hang-ups on to society at large. They must be criticised and ridiculed out of existence."

Read the full article from the link above.

the red-green death is the plague of our age,

and like the plagues before, we lack the necessary resistance to this parasite.

mankind havnt been exposed to lack of ethics and

ridiculing of science on this scale.

media plays the role as the rats that carries this disease.

How do we develop a proper immune system to combat the ongoing pandemic ?

or is the answer to contain the disease

so it doesnt spread ?

recognize ipcc as a terrorist organization

aiming to destroy our civilization ?

with media as affiliates

as of now, there is no cure to infection of junk science propaganda.

come to think of it, i am immune to it,

maybe its genetics, or education or ethics,

or perhaps a combination thereof

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by brokenbone

[ExpatOilWorker]

4 hours ago, monkfish said:

Just a small taste of what's to come.
We may be able to adapt quickly to climate change but most wildlife can't adapt that quick.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/03/populations-of-uks-most-important-wildlife-have-plummeted-since-1970

A simple trip down memory lane will confirm this. As a kid I remember the family car being smeared in insects after a road trip. The windscreen and grill was often covered in bugs, ladybirds, butterflies and dragonflies.

Drive around today and the car appears nice and clean. RIP insects.