I'm using all my strength to fight climate change, says Merkel

[CGW]

54 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

oddly the magnetic field is not nearly as crucial as one would take for granted

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51usJ74pPP8&t=10s

Yes & no! depends how deep you get into it, as the magnetic field "flips" it reduces the protection level earth has, cold areas will get colder, wet areas wetter. hot areas hotter, we are seeing that now on a small scale just with the magnetic reversal - until it happens we will never really know though! 

In the meantime "scientists will continue with their well paid for guessing game.

This presentation gives a different view than NASA (government funded!) 

 

[Saint Nick]

On 12/31/2019 at 9:21 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Soooo, she's banning all oil fuelled power stations, cars, trucks and farm tractors, banning holiday air travel, and home heating using gas or oil, plus mandatory sterilization after one child. Isn't she?

No she very well isn't!

Next!

[Saint Nick]

On 12/31/2019 at 4:55 PM, brokenbone said:

she is breaking german long standing competitiveness

with high energy cost, while at the same time make

those with low income chose between heating or food.

i think if i were german i would take up arms against my government

I am German and though I am not a Merckel- fan or even the slightest bit to the right, I am much more in favor of "my" government, than I would be for a bunch of others.

Choosing between heat and food?

You are aware that The Walking Dead is not a documentary, right!?

 

 

[Saint Nick]

On 1/1/2020 at 4:36 AM, brokenbone said:

that pipeline only ever became necessary after merkels brainfart

to shut down germanys coal & nuclear plants, and

replace it with notoriously unreliable windmill power,

the gas is needed for when the wind dont blow.

 

Jesus...the old "when the wind don't blow"- chestnut!

How do you people come up with this stuff?

 

[Saint Nick]

On 1/1/2020 at 1:43 PM, blazes said:

 

 

HA HA "transition". !!!!!

 

The Fukuyama tsunami (2011) scared Merkel (and the whole German govt) out of their lederhosen and OVERNIGHT they shut down all the nuke plants and regressed into the Stone Age....so that Germans were now going to pay HUGE increases in fuel costs AND go back to using the worst pollution emitters of the last 100 years.

 

Any sources to back that up?

One of the strongest and biggest economies in the world...from the stone age!

Yeah...right!

[brokenbone]

52 minutes ago, Saint Nick said:

Jesus...the old "when the wind don't blow"- chestnut!

How do you people come up with this stuff?

 

i 'came up with it' as i was watching a german engineer

detailing the issues, im taking his words for it

[Monomial]

4 hours ago, CGW said:

Yes & no! depends how deep you get into it, as the magnetic field "flips" it reduces the protection level earth has, cold areas will get colder, wet areas wetter. hot areas hotter, we are seeing that now on a small scale just with the magnetic reversal - until it happens we will never really know though! 

In the meantime "scientists will continue with their well paid for guessing game.

This presentation gives a different view than NASA (government funded!) 

 

 

"Suspicious Observers (Suspicious0bservers) is a pseudoscience YouTube channel run by ex-lawyer Ben Davidson who has a degree in economics from Denison University and a Juris Doctorate from Capital University Law School, but no actual science training. His ideas have been debunked by genuine climate scientists.[1] He has various websites on which he sells his scribblings and tickets to his "annual conference".[notes 1] Davidson makes far-fetched claims about dozens of scientists attending his conferences and conversing secretly with him, but there has only been one notable name at any of his meetings — John Coleman, another notable climate denier. "

 

Climate scientists don't get everything right. The grant money system self selects for the most extreme models. But, and this is important, they at least did study science and their models are based at least somewhat in physical principles.  As opposed to the rantings of a guy with a degree in economics and law, neither discipline being grounded even remotely in the limitations of the physical world.

 

So a healthy skepticism of climate scientists is a good thing. My favorite quote from Richard Feynman comes into play here:  "Science is the belief in the  ignorance of the experts."  On the other hand, saying a lunatic with no physical evidence must be right simply because the experts might be wrong is a great way to wind up looking incredibly stupid.

[CGW]

12 minutes ago, Monomial said:

Climate scientists don't get everything right. The grant money system self selects for the most extreme models. But, and this is important, they at least did study science and their models are based at least somewhat in physical principles.  As opposed to the rantings of a guy with a degree in economics and law, neither discipline being grounded even remotely in the limitations of the physical world.

When climate scientists don't get it right they "employ" websites like the one you have used to prove that they are correct?

"

RationalWiki differs in several ways from the philosophy of Wikipedia and some other informational wikis. It is written from a self-described "snarky point of view" (SPOV) rather than a "neutral point of view" (NPOV), and publishes opinion, speculation, and original research.[12] Many RationalWiki articles mockingly describe beliefs that RationalWiki opposes, especially when covering topics like alternative medicine or fundamentalist Christians.[10]

A significant fraction of activity on RationalWiki is critiquing and "monitor[ing] Conservapedia".[8] RationalWiki contributors, many of whom are former Conservapedia contributors, are often highly critical of Conservapedia, and according to an article published in the Los Angeles Times in 2007, RationalWiki members "by their own admission" vandalize Conservapedia.[8] Lester Haines of The Register stated: "Its entry entitled 'Conservapedia:Delusions' promptly mocks the claims that 'Homosexuality is a mental disorder', 'Atheists are sociopaths', and 'During the 6 days of creation G-d placed the Earth inside a black hole to slow down time so the light from distant stars had time to reach us'".[10]

[blazes]

4 hours ago, Saint Nick said:

Any sources to back that up?

One of the strongest and biggest economies in the world...from the stone age!

Yeah...right!

What is not mentioned in these articles is that Germany is hugely dependent, now, on coal and on imports of gas from RUSSIA!!! 

Hypocrisy reigns.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster

 

and this is from DW, the German equivalent of the BBC:

https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-fukushima-5-years-on-the-germans-are-crazy/a-19109743

 

If you keep up with German election results you will find that Merkel's party (CDU) has been suffering many setbacks all over the country.  By now, the turn against the CDU is attributed to the influx of a million immigrants, but (as you will see from reading the DW report) the shut-down of nuclear is still angering many taxpayers.

I even lost money myself, a lot, when she announced the closure of all nukes.

 

But do your own research.

[sawadee1947]

18 hours ago, donnacha said:

I am 100% certain that you are not a scientist if you are unaware that nuclear power has the lowest emissions footprint per watt of any energy source when you include manufacture and maintenance. 

Without a radical reconfiguration of existing economies and lifestyles, any serious attempt to reduce co2 must include nuclear.
 

 

Fusion power would be terrific but it has been "almost here" for my entire life.

If the suggestion is that too much co2 imperils the future of humanity, and that it may already be too late, it follows that a solution must involve technologies that are ready for production use today.
 

I'm always surprised and shocked to meet people who are favoring nuclear plants.

Obviously you don't know that up to now there is no solution for radioactive waste disposal.

Sure, with your idea the air might be clean but you will die because of radioactive contamination.

I suppose you don't know what you are talking about.

 

 

[brokenbone]

5 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

I'm always surprised and shocked to meet people who are favoring nuclear plants.

Obviously you don't know that up to now there is no solution for radioactive waste disposal.

Sure, with your idea the air might be clean but you will die because of radioactive contamination.

I suppose you don't know what you are talking about.

 

 

no, he isnt going to die of radioactive contamination, you are not going to die of radioactive contamination,

im not going to die of radioactive contamination,

i have no idea why you would come up with this theory

[sawadee1947]

1 hour ago, brokenbone said:

no, he isnt going to die of radioactive contamination, you are not going to die of radioactive contamination,

im not going to die of radioactive contamination,

i have no idea why you would come up with this theory

Man, where are you living? In the forests? 

[brokenbone]

1 hour ago, sawadee1947 said:

Man, where are you living? In the forests? 

in pattaya, and radioactive contamination

is at rock bottom on the list of potential causes of my death.

on the flip side, suicide would be at the top of that list without electric to moderate temperature in my condo,

electric for my puter and fridge, and a whole range of other

products that needs electric for my comfort,

such as cappuccino etc

[bristolboy]

11 hours ago, blazes said:

What is not mentioned in these articles is that Germany is hugely dependent, now, on coal and on imports of gas from RUSSIA!!! 

Hypocrisy reigns.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster

 

and this is from DW, the German equivalent of the BBC:

https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-fukushima-5-years-on-the-germans-are-crazy/a-19109743

 

If you keep up with German election results you will find that Merkel's party (CDU) has been suffering many setbacks all over the country.  By now, the turn against the CDU is attributed to the influx of a million immigrants, but (as you will see from reading the DW report) the shut-down of nuclear is still angering many taxpayers.

I even lost money myself, a lot, when she announced the closure of all nukes.

 

But do your own research.

Thanks for the suggestion:

How climate change transformed Germany’s Greens into the country’s most popular political party

https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-germany-greens-party-20190612-story.html

 

Anti-nuclear movement in Germany

The anti-nuclear protests were also a driving force of the green movement in Germany, from which the party The Greens evolved. When they first came to power in the Schröder administration of 1998 they achieved their major political goal for which they had fought for 20 years: abandoning nuclear energy in Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germany

 

 

[Saint Nick]

14 hours ago, blazes said:

What is not mentioned in these articles is that Germany is hugely dependent, now, on coal and on imports of gas from RUSSIA!!! 

Hypocrisy reigns.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster

 

and this is from DW, the German equivalent of the BBC:

https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-fukushima-5-years-on-the-germans-are-crazy/a-19109743

 

If you keep up with German election results you will find that Merkel's party (CDU) has been suffering many setbacks all over the country.  By now, the turn against the CDU is attributed to the influx of a million immigrants, but (as you will see from reading the DW report) the shut-down of nuclear is still angering many taxpayers.

I even lost money myself, a lot, when she announced the closure of all nukes.

 

But do your own research.

Germany is seeking ways out of the dependency, by f.e. investing resourced into hydropower and windpower!

Especially wind is doing pretty fine, thank you!

 

I know DW and it is very well NOT the equivalent of the BBC!

I am keeping up with German election results and the downfall of the CDU may have many causes: exiting nuclear- power is -at best- the smallest of points!

Many things are angrying the almighty "Tax payer"- again, nuclear power or the exit out of it isn't a major point!

 

I did my own research and you are talking a hole lot of ...well...you make very debatable points!

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, Saint Nick said:

Germany is seeking ways out of the dependency, by f.e. investing resourced into hydropower and windpower!

Especially wind is doing pretty fine, thank you!

 

I know DW and it is very well NOT the equivalent of the BBC!

I am keeping up with German election results and the downfall of the CDU may have many causes: exiting nuclear- power is -at best- the smallest of points!

Many things are angrying the almighty "Tax payer"- again, nuclear power or the exit out of it isn't a major point!

 

I did my own research and you are talking a hole lot of ...well...you make very debatable points!

You'll notice how Blazes completely ignores the rise of the Greens.

[Saint Nick]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

You'll notice how Blazes completely ignores the rise of the Greens.

I really don't know, where these people get their information from!

I am German and a whole lot of what is said here is just hogwash!

[sawadee1947]

7 hours ago, brokenbone said:

in pattaya, and radioactive contamination

is at rock bottom on the list of potential causes of my death.

on the flip side, suicide would be at the top of that list without electric to moderate temperature in my condo,

electric for my puter and fridge, and a whole range of other

products that needs electric for my comfort,

such as cappuccino etc

I'll buy it. 

So I suppose your house is fully equipped with solar panels on the roof, proper insulation and doubled walls? 

I have to admit that I did not expect that. 

My apologies.

[brokenbone]

2 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

I'll buy it. 

So I suppose your house is fully equipped with solar panels on the roof, proper insulation and doubled walls? 

I have to admit that I did not expect that. 

My apologies.

what are you on about ?

[yourauntbob]

Obama is a huge climate change advocate.  According to him the coast line will be wiped out in the next 20 years (or sooner).  So the Obama's did the logical thing and bought a $20,000,000 house on the coast.  I guess they just got really good insurance.  

[bristolboy]

32 minutes ago, yourauntbob said:

Obama is a huge climate change advocate.  According to him the coast line will be wiped out in the next 20 years (or sooner).  

Stop lying.

[brokenbone]

according to UNEP we had 50 million eco refugees

by years 2010 already due to rising sea lv etc etc,

im one of the unfortunate, i left the rising scandinavia

and seek refuge in pattaya,

the hardship one has to go to.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-disappearing-attempt/

 

@bristolboy UNEP didnt want to appear as an almity oracle so the original source is taken down .

perhaps they wanted to 'hide the decline' ? ????

 

ed: added observed sea lv rise for a doze of reality innit

 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, brokenbone said:

according to UNEP we had 50 million eco refugees

by years 2010 already due to rising sea lv etc etc,

im one of the unfortunate, i left the rising scandinavia

and seek refuge in pattaya,

the hardship one has to go to.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-disappearing-attempt/

 

@bristolboy UNEP didnt want to appear as an almity oracle so the original source is taken down .

perhaps they wanted to 'hide the decline' ? ????

 

ed: added observed sea lv rise for a doze of reality innit

 

"according to UNEP we had 50 million eco refugees"

Wrong. You couldn't even be bothered to read the first line of the Guardian article

"Rising sea levels, desertification and shrinking freshwater supplies will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade, experts warn today. "

And there's this:

"In 2017, 68.5 million people were forcibly displaced, more than at any point in human history. While it is difficult to estimate, approximately one-third of these (22.5 million^[4] to 24 million^[5] people) were forced to move by “sudden onset” weather events—flooding, forest fires after droughts, and intensified storms. While the remaining two-thirds of displacements are the results of other humanitarian crises, it is becoming obvious that climate change is contributing to so-called slow onset events such as desertification, sea-level rise, ocean acidification, air pollution, rain pattern shifts and loss of biodiversity."

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-climate-crisis-migration-and-refugees/

 

And I see you still can't be bothered to include links to your charts. And of course considering that the scale is in thousands of years, naturally any current reading would look small. But we do know that sea level rise is accelerating again. Just like the big rises from 20 to 6 thousand years ago, deglaciation is the main factor.

"Between 1900 and 2016, the sea level rose by 16–21 cm (6.3–8.3 in). More precise data gathered from satellite radar measurements reveal an accelerating rise of 7.5 cm (3.0 in) from 1993 to 2017, which is a trend of roughly 30 cm (12 in) per century."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise

Damn lying satellites!

 

 

[brokenbone]

49 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

 it is becoming obvious that climate change is contributing to so-called slow onset events such as desertification, sea-level rise, ocean acidification, air pollution, rain pattern shifts and loss of biodiversity."

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise

Damn lying satellites!

 

 

firstly desertification is for the most part

caused by poor people that go out of their way

to cut wood since they havnt got electric to cook.

co2 as the molecule of life actually makes plants more water efficient, more tolerant to drought.

secondly temperature increase causes more precipitation,

rain like you should be familiar with in england.

 

corals evolved in cambrian era with 2500 ppm co2,

they would never have evolved to use co2 as a building

block in the first instance if co2 levels had been as lousy

as today.

 

agree on air pollution, but co2 is not an pollutant,

it is as critical to life as water.

 

biomass and biodiversity is a function of temperature & co2, the more the merrier

 

wiki ?

i stick to the premier scientist in the field thank you,

as did 1st ipcc report btw, but they had a fallout

when his research contradicted their narrative.

none the less they did acknowledge some of his

conclusions in that early era, before they caught on

the link between scaremongering and their salary

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336685904_The_Gulf_Stream_Beat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SByP1IGBYJA

 

[Prairieboy]

On 12/31/2019 at 8:00 AM, webfact said:

fighting climate change with all her strength

Yes Angela, good luck with that, Mother Nature is a formidable opponent.

[Prairieboy]

21 hours ago, Saint Nick said:

Especially wind is doing pretty fine,

Most of the wind is hot air containing methane gas being released by politicians and environmentalists around the world.

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, brokenbone said:

6 hours ago, brokenbone said:

firstly desertification is for the most part

caused by poor people that go out of their way

to cut wood since they havnt got electric to cook.

co2 as the molecule of life actually makes plants more water efficient, more tolerant to drought.

secondly temperature increase causes more precipitation,

rain like you should be familiar with in england.

 

corals evolved in cambrian era with 2500 ppm co2,

they would never have evolved to use co2 as a building

block in the first instance if co2 levels had been as lousy

as today.

 

agree on air pollution, but co2 is not an pollutant,

it is as critical to life as water.

 

biomass and biodiversity is a function of temperature & co2, the more the merrier

 

wiki ?

i stick to the premier scientist in the field thank you,

as did 1st ipcc report btw, but they had a fallout

when his research contradicted their narrative.

none the less they did acknowledge some of his

conclusions in that early era, before they caught on

the link between scaremongering and their salary

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336685904_The_Gulf_Stream_Beat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SByP1IGBYJA

 

 

Wow! Another poster who is apparently immortal. So for someone like you, it won't matter much that it takes at least 10's of thousands of years for new species to evolve and create a highly diverse ecosystem.  (Or do you suffer from the belief that when 1 species disappears another instantly pops up to take its place?) But for the rest of humanity, and keep in mind that civilization as a human phenomenon is about 10,000 years old, it might be just a bit concerning. Anyway, enjoy snorkeling among those new corals and the huge variety of life they will eventually be hosting. Be sure to send postcards to all of us living in the past.  (And by the way, corals do not use CO2 as a building block.)

 

And more rain is necessarily good? Just ask the farmers in the American midwest about that. The fact is that due to ACC some areas of Earth will get more rain and some less.

And what about the billions of people who depend on rapidly shrinking glaciers for their water supplies?

Same silly kind of "if something is good then more is better" infects your thinking about CO2.

 

And once again you resort to using dubious graphics that have no links. There is a good reason that the moderators frown on that. I do know that denialist websites take a sentence or two out of context and make all sorts of wild claims for it.

 

And this ridiculous notion about Nils-Axel Mörner being "the premium scientist in the field". Who awarded Morner that honor? Was he awarded a medal by the scientific community recognizing him as such? Here's a little tidbit about Morner.

He claimed that dowsing could be used not only to find water, but also to discover Curry and Hartmann lines...

The renowned American skepticist James Randi offered him a reward of USD$971000 if Mörner could show that dowsing worked in a scientifically controlled experiment. Mörner later rejected the offer.^[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_Mörner

 

 

[brokenbone]

26 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

(And by the way, corals do not use CO2 as a building block.)

yes they do, due to the abundance of co2 when they evolved, like every other living specie they thrive at higher co2,

that is the origin of their history,

that is what they optimized to live in

https://phys.org/news/2014-11-corals-benefit-climate-effects.html

 

26 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And what about the billions of people who depend on rapidly shrinking glaciers for their water supplies?

they are not rapidly shrinking, it fluctuate as usual,

and currently the net result is zero.

and nobody depend on arctic ice for water supply either

26 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And once again you resort to using dubious graphics that have no links. There is a good reason that the moderators frown on that.

i linked to all images except the two that

has ipcc written all over it, try harder

26 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And this ridiculous notion about Nils-Axel Mörner being "the premium scientist in the field". Who awarded Morner that honor? Was he awarded a medal by the scientific community recognizing him as such?

among others, ipcc acknowledge him as the worlds premiere expert, they contracted him as head of sea level group for the first ipcc report

[bristolboy]

28 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

yes they do, due to the abundance of co2 when they evolved, like every other living specie they thrive at higher co2,

that is the origin of their history,

that is what they optimized to live in

https://phys.org/news/2014-11-corals-benefit-climate-effects.html

 

they are not rapidly shrinking, it fluctuate as usual,

and currently the net result is zero.

and nobody depend on arctic ice for water supply either

i linked to all images except the two that

has ipcc written all over it, try harder

among others, ipcc acknowledge him as the worlds premiere expert, they contracted him as head of sea level group for the first ipcc report

"yes they do, due to the abundance of co2 when they evolved, like every other living specie they thrive at higher co2,

that is the origin of their history,

that is what they optimized to live in

https://phys.org/news/2014-11-corals-benefit-climate-effects.html"

Nonsense. Calcium carbonate in various forms is the building block of Coral.

As for that article you link to, it's typical of your, at best, carelessness and at worst dishonesty. You take a study about one species of coral and generalize to all corals. Ridiculous.

"The study showed that this species of coral (Siderastrea siderea) exhibited a peaked or parabolic response to both warming and acidification, that is, moderate acidification and warming actually enhanced coral calcification, with only extreme warming and acidification negatively impacting the corals," Ries said. "This was surprising given that most studies have shown that corals exhibit a more negative response to even moderate acidification."

https://phys.org/news/2014-11-corals-benefit-climate-effects.html

 

"they are not rapidly shrinking, it fluctuate as usual,

and currently the net result is zero."

Himalaya Glaciers Shrinking at Faster Rate, Study Finds
Scientists attribute melting to warmer temperatures, says glaciers’ retreat threatens water source for 2 billion people in South Asia

A new study—based partly on declassified spy-satellite data—found that glaciers in the Himalayas were losing volume at much faster rates in recent years, adding more evidence suggesting that a changing climate is affecting an important water source.

The rate at which Himalayan glaciers lost volume more than doubled between 2000 and 2016, compared with the rate between 1975 and 2000, according to the study, which was published Wednesday in the journal Science Advances.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/himalaya-glaciers-shrinking-at-faster-rate-study-finds-11560967200

 

Melting in the Andes: Goodbye glaciers

Researchers are racing to determine how shrinking glaciers in the Andes will affect the water supply of millions of people

According to Rabatel, glaciers above 5,400 metres — such as those on Huascarán, Peru's highest peak — will shrink but survive because temperatures there will remain relatively cool. But those at lower elevations are doomed to disappear. In the past few decades, those glaciers have lost twice as much mass as ones at higher elevations¹.

https://www.nature.com/news/melting-in-the-andes-goodbye-glaciers-1.11759

 

"among others, ipcc acknowledge him as the worlds premiere expert, they contracted him as head of sea level group for the first ipcc report"

The present tense of "acknowledge"? Really? When was the first IPCC report issued? I got a clue for you: earlier than 1991.

 

And just because a graphic has the name of the IPCC on it, doesn't mean it came from the IPCC. Why are you so reluctant to reveal the source of that graphics? For that matter, I don't see links to any of the other images you've posted.

 

 

 

[Number 6]

Too bad it's not used to fight crime and illegal immigration.

 

She should have left politics a decade ago on the upside, reputation intact.