So - how do you see climate change effects Thailand?

[runamok27]

20 hours ago, blackprince said:

Actually, the terminology is "anthropomorphic climate change" but "anthropomorphic" is an even rarer word than "anthropological", especially for people who are unfamiliar with the issues, which obviously includes the overwhelming majority of deniers.

 

That's why I call it "man made climate change", after all it has been largely men, acutally largely white men, responsible for the man made climate disasters that are already with us.

 

I've posted uncontestable evidence from NASA confirming man made climate change a couple of times on other threads in the last couple of weeks. I assume that even the vast majority of deniers would accept that NASA is not part part of a global conspiracy.

Actually the terminology is anthropogenic climate change, smart ass. 

[runamok27]

19 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

The USA is the biggest polluter, in every regard. 

Even when trying to disregard and convince otherwise.

Actually China passed the U.S. already and is pulling away.

[runamok27]

13 hours ago, sandyf said:

I doubt if anyone would dispute that change is a natural phenomena. What is a concern is the acceleration in the rate of change.

I grew up in the north of Scotland and as a child snow was a certainty, the only variable was duration. Now it is the exception as opposed to the rule.

That has come about over 3 to 4 decades and you may well consider nothing unusual in that.

If however the experts say that should have taken 3 to 4 centuries I know who I would be more inclined to believe.

Sure but where I grew up in California in the U.S. it used to reach 100 degrees F every year during the summer, now it barely reaches the low 90's and only for a very short period of time. Localized weather is not climate change. Just because the overall temperature goes up does not mean it gets uniformly hotter everywhere. Thailand, as an example, could get cooler. 

[billsmart]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Revenge of Gaia on humanity for destroying the nice planet she gave us?

I don't believe in any supernatural forces like "Gaia," but I do think human extinction is inevitable. We're like a cancer on this planet. The only hope is that we go before we destroy the ecosystem for all other lifeforms.

[Moonlover]

10 hours ago, Thunglom said:

do we then deduce that climate change isn't happening because some claimed 60 degrees Celsius on Thaivisa?

 

I think it's more persuasive to look at the map below.......courtesy of Yale Climate connection.....

The Al Jazeera article I referred to earlier tells a similar tale. The reason that I rounded on the 60 Deg claim was because showing the true data is more compelling that making exaggerated claims.

 

Mapping the hottest temperatures around the world

[Stargeezr]

Seeing the water temperature map, I have a stupid question?

Is it man-kinds fault for the warmer water in the oceans? 

  Knowing that China, India and some other places still use coal to fire 

power plants, or industrial furnaces for steel making, or in the case of 

some developing countries, coal is still used for heating homes,  in the cold times

of the year.  Those countries will be the same 50 years from now.                                                                                                                                                                             In far northern and southern countries, solar power is only

practical in the Summer months when the sun is out and about for long enough

hours.  Winds are still not constant as well so wind power is a bit unreliable.

  Not every where has rivers from mountains to have hydro power.

  Which leaves oil, natural gas, or propane, or nuclear power, the only year round reliable

power sources. Electric cars and trucks still need a lot of oil product to build them and their large batteries.

  ECs also need electricity to charge them each night, and day.     Before the last ice age, there were large

trees growing in the Arctic regions of Canada, and the center of Canada had a massive inland sea, So yes

there was a time when water levels used to be higher. That is a few thousand or million years ago.                                                                                                                           Oh and bokningar, were you talking about the extra, 

cold temperatures in the Antarctic this last year as maybe making some new ice form in that region, which

may slightly balance the melt of the Arctic this Summer?       Sorry the climate change folk, may not want

to see any reason to talk without panic in their voices.  There is also snow fall in the Arctic during the Winters

  but I guess not enough to balance the Summer melt of the glaciers. Guess we are all doomed for a change,

but it is no reason for any government to put a carbon tax on their people, how ever that is exactly what

the Canadian PM has done to Canada.  I hate the tax, and would rather see more efforts for carbon

storage and other means of improving on the pollution.                                                                                                                                                                                       Enough rambling.

Geezer

[toolpush]

16 hours ago, Surasak said:

43 years ago I assisted building a boathouse for the local sea scouts. The gate to the compound was 4 meters from the waters edge. That same gate is now 7 meters back from the waters edge and they have had to build a jetty out into the river to launch boats. This is on a tidal area of the river and no changes to the course of the river have been made either up or down stream, over the past 65 years.

Perhaps someone would like to explain rising water levers.

 

There you go: using facts and logic during a discussion on an emotional topic like the GoreBull Warming Hoax.

[sandyf]

11 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

What "massive acceleration"?

Like all skeptics, if you can't see it, it's not happening.

Obviously you will never have cancer until you actually feel the lump, even then you will probably contest the diagnosis.

It is the basic principle of autopilot, if the rate of change is accelerating unless a reciprocal action is applied the outcome will become uncontrollable.

A principle that has unfortunately been proven time after time over decades.

[Thunglom]

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Er, wrong, we do not all know that.   Quote that "99% result of studies" specifically, please.

sorry but there IS a consensus - and sealioning is the response of someone with no answer.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Thunglom

[Thunglom]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Like all skeptics, if you can't see it, it's not happening.

they aren't skeptics - skepticality is the basis of all science, climate deniers are not scientific, thy do not engage is critical thinking, they are "believers" in baseless hypotheses

[BritManToo]

2 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

they aren't skeptics - skepticality is the basis of all science, climate deniers are not scientific, thy do not engage is critical thinking, they are "believers" in baseless hypotheses

Which is funny, as I see climate alarmists as believers of wealthy globalist propaganda.

Backed up by second rate scientists who sold their souls for silver.

Edited November 14, 2021 by BritManToo

[Thunglom]

5 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

Seeing the water temperature map, I have a stupid question?

Is it man-kinds fault for the warmer water in the oceans? 

  Knowing that China, India and some other places still use coal to fire 

power plants, or industrial furnaces for steel making, or in the case of 

some developing countries, coal is still used for heating homes,  in the cold times

of the year.  Those countries will be the same 50 years from now.                                                                                                                                                                             In far northern and southern countries, solar power is only

practical in the Summer months when the sun is out and about for long enough

hours.  Winds are still not constant as well so wind power is a bit unreliable.

  Not every where has rivers from mountains to have hydro power.

  Which leaves oil, natural gas, or propane, or nuclear power, the only year round reliable

power sources. Electric cars and trucks still need a lot of oil product to build them and their large batteries.

  ECs also need electricity to charge them each night, and day.     Before the last ice age, there were large

trees growing in the Arctic regions of Canada, and the center of Canada had a massive inland sea, So yes

there was a time when water levels used to be higher. That is a few thousand or million years ago.                                                                                                                           Oh and bokningar, were you talking about the extra, 

cold temperatures in the Antarctic this last year as maybe making some new ice form in that region, which

may slightly balance the melt of the Arctic this Summer?       Sorry the climate change folk, may not want

to see any reason to talk without panic in their voices.  There is also snow fall in the Arctic during the Winters

  but I guess not enough to balance the Summer melt of the glaciers. Guess we are all doomed for a change,

but it is no reason for any government to put a carbon tax on their people, how ever that is exactly what

the Canadian PM has done to Canada.  I hate the tax, and would rather see more efforts for carbon

storage and other means of improving on the pollution.                                                                                                                                                                                       Enough rambling.

Geezer

OMG! just about every premise in this post is incorrect. - I really underlines the lack of comprehension of the basic science of MMCC, It would be impossible to start to explain as it requires starting for 2+2 = 4

[BritManToo]

1 minute ago, Thunglom said:

I really underlines the lack of comprehension of the basic science of MMCC

What science did you get your degree in?

[Liverpool Lou]

33 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

13 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Er, wrong, we do not all know that.   Quote that "99% result of studies" specifically, please.

sorry but there IS a consensus

Where?  Why can't anyone quote it...with the source?

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Where?  Why can't anyone quote it...with the source?

that ship has sailed.

[Liverpool Lou]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

What "massive acceleration"?

Like all skeptics, if you can't see it, it's not happening.

Obviously you will never have cancer until you actually feel the lump, even then you will probably contest the diagnosis.

It is the basic principle of autopilot, if the rate of change is accelerating unless a reciprocal action is applied the outcome will become uncontrollable.

A principle that has unfortunately been proven time after time over decades.

I'm well aware of what "acceleration" is but I asked a specific question, what "massive acceleration", massive acceleration of what?   With evidence.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I'm well aware of what "acceleration" is but I asked a specific question, what "massive acceleration", massive acceleration of what?   With evidence.

It rained on Greenland glaciers for the first time.

 

https://youmatter.world/en/rain-fell-on-greenland-sheet-for-the-first-time-on-record/

 

On your wider question, climate change deniers are an endangered species lately.

 

[micmichd]

5 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I'm well aware of what "acceleration" is but I asked a specific question, what "massive acceleration", massive acceleration of what?   With evidence.

Guess massive acceleration of global warming. 

https://climate.nasa.gov/resources/global-warming-vs-climate-change/

[JensenZ]

On 11/12/2021 at 5:29 PM, 3NUMBAS said:

60 degrees is now common in the   middle east and drought so no/little  crops can be grown ,your gonna fry ,at 60 to 70 degrees

Come on, the highest recorded temperatures on earth are around 130 - 134F or 56 - 58C (there's a debate about which is accurate). You don't measure the ground in direct sunlight, you measure the air temperature above the ground in shade. These temperatures were recorded as far back as 1913 and many times in the years between.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by JensenZ

[JensenZ]

*deleted*

Edited November 14, 2021 by JensenZ

[Liverpool Lou]

13 minutes ago, micmichd said:

21 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I'm well aware of what "acceleration" is but I asked a specific question, what "massive acceleration", massive acceleration of what?   With evidence.

Guess massive acceleration of global warming. 

https://climate.nasa.gov/resources/global-warming-vs-climate-change/

No mention of massive acceleration of anything in that link.

[Liverpool Lou]

18 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

24 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I'm well aware of what "acceleration" is but I asked a specific question, what "massive acceleration", massive acceleration of what?   With evidence.

It rained on Greenland glaciers for the first time.

 

https://youmatter.world/en/rain-fell-on-greenland-sheet-for-the-first-time-on-record/

 

On your wider question, climate change deniers are an endangered species lately.

So what if Greenland got a bit of rain?

 

I didn't ask a "wider question", I asked a specific question! 

 

Who said that people with a different opinion to yours on this subject are an endangered species?  Any evidence of that?  You lot are very good at making unsubstantiated claims!

 

[JustAnotherHun]

Between 1901 and 2010 the sea level rose in average 1.7 MILLIMETERS a year.

Between 1993 and 2010 it was 3.2 MILLIMETERS/year.

In 2018 it was scaring 3.7 MILLIMETERS.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by JustAnotherHun

[Fat is a type of crazy]

Climate deniers seem to start with the fact they haven't noticed at their local town.

Or that most scientists don't believe its true.

Then it's that most scientists believe it but they are corrupt.

Then it's climate change is happening but its part of a natural cycle.  

Then it's man made climate change is happening but it won't be bad.

Then it's that we'll just have to adapt.

They see anyone trying to do something as short sighted do gooders influenced by the secret rich illuminati or something. 

To be honest I don't give the topic much thought, but the outright denial that some action might be appropriate, is somewhat confounding. It is as if, for some, the possible fact that there are people who are smarter than them, and actually can take action, goes against their outlook that anyone with education and knowledge and some power to do good must ultimately be greedy, corrupt, or foolish. 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Fat is a type of crazy

[BritManToo]

32 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Climate deniers seem to start with the fact they haven't noticed at their local town.

I haven't noticed it in my lifetime, I've lived in many towns.

As for scientists, I have a degree in science, I am a scientist.

But I've noticed most climate alarmists didn't even finish high school ...... like Greta.

 

Even if it were real, and would kill everyone at some time in the future.

Why would I care, doubt I've got five years left.

 

PS. My home is 300m above sea level.

 

But if I did believe in climate change, and CO2 was causing it, and had power.

I'd immediately ban all recreational air travel and foreign holidays.

Prohibit the private ownership of motor vehicles.

And force everyone to live within walking/cycling distance of their place of work.

No single unit homes, or private home ownership, forced house sharing for everyone.

No immigration, you live and die within walking distance of your birth place.

That would be just for a start.

Edited November 14, 2021 by BritManToo

[Chad3000]

I don't buy into the theory entirely. I am certain there's record breaking pollution, and carbon dioxide, monoxide in the air.

 

I just see extreme weather. Extreme heat and storms. Potential crop losses.

 

Thai rice crop will be entirely farmed / mechanized.

 

Thailand will finally get serious about doing something with it's gas reserves.

 

Flooding will not get better anywhere and worsen in areas.

 

Dams will have issues with water retention and maintenance.

 

Mekong will continue to be mismanaged.

 

Thailand and especially BKK will need excessive amounts of electricity to cool cement boxes.

 

Everyone will try to live and work indoors. Quasi subterranean lifestyle.

 

Insects will be incorporated into foodstuffs.

 

Bangkok won't progress and will look much like it does today save for a few more rail lines.

 

[ed strong]

To the people saying Bangkok will be undrwater in 5 10 or 15 years, im more than happy to bet that this does not happen.

 

Thailand the country where every year it gets confused as to why their reservoirs are over flowing during the rainy season and then come the dry season there is a water shortage! Every year now im no climate expert or water enthuasiast but perhaps a couple more reservoirs would potentially help bother annual issues that seem to happen.

 

The best is when they turn off the water to the poor communities but still water the golf course that's up the road!

 

Its 85 % theatrical!

[JensenZ]

1 hour ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Between 1901 and 2010 the sea level rose in average 1.7 MILLIMETERS a year.

Between 1993 and 2010 it was 3.2 MILLIMETERS/year.

In 2018 it was scaring 3.7 MILLIMETERS.

 

This is absolutely terrifying. I'm sure a lot of people who live back from the beach wish it would speed up a bit.

 

Here's some very interesting stats. We always hear about extreme high and low temperatures in various locations around the world, but what about an area's average yearly temperature, The average temperature of 24 hours x 365. That seems to make more sense in determining which place are hotter.

 

In this article, written back in 2014, Klong Thoey in Bangkok is the 3rd warmest place on earth.

 

https://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/warmest-places-on-earth-average-annual-temperature.html

 

1. Africa: Dallol, Ethiopia: 94.0°F/34.4°C (POR 1960-1966)

2. Asia: Makkah (Mecca), Saudi Arabia: 30.7°C/87.3°F (POR 1980-2009)

3. Asia: Klong Thoey, Bangkok, Thailand: 30.3°C/86.5°F (POR 1981-2010).

 

The data is a bit old, but still interesting. 

 

Outside of the Arabian Peninsula, it now appears Bangkok (specifically the downtown Klong Thoey site) has become the hottest site in Asia thanks to the Bangkok’s massive urbanization over the past 30 years (the metro population is estimated to be around 10 million). Daily high temperatures reach 33°C (90°F) almost everyday of the year and the actual average annual temperature year around in Klong Thoey District is a sweltering 30.3°C (86.5°F) according to the most recent POR of 1981-2010.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by JensenZ

[JustAnotherHun]

13 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

This is absolutely terrifying. I'm sure a lot of people who live back from the beach wish it would speed up a bit.

For those living near the sea level too. Until 2041 they will have to build a huge, nearly 7 centimeters high dam to survive.

 

Thank god, I live appr. 2-3m above that level. So I will have a couple of hundred years left.

Edited November 14, 2021 by JustAnotherHun

[JensenZ]

On 11/13/2021 at 9:19 AM, zzaa09 said:

The USA is the biggest polluter, in every regard. 

Even when trying to disregard and convince otherwise.

It is not proper to make such statements without references to the source of your data. It could be a politically motivated statement to help further Green policies. If you cannot back up your statement, it's nothing more than what Greta Thunberg constantly utters "blah blah blah".