Heartbreaking Photos Reveal Melting Swiss Glaciers: A 15-Year Comparison

[Yellowtail]

So, twenty years of leftist green policies, trillions spent, and Germany is buying gas from a Russia they are effectively at war with, and the Seine is too polluted to swim it, much less drink. 

 

Stay the course! 

[Yellowtail]

Oh, and CO2 levels are higher than ever. 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

I bet you aren't. 

You win that bet. 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

You win that bet. 

 

Why can't people read and comprehend before they comment? Will B cut and pasted nearly a whole page of stuff which basically agreed with what I've said on this topic. And I didn't mention any photos.

[cooked]

On 8/12/2024 at 12:11 PM, placeholder said:

 

Maybe it's not convincing to you but why should anyone care about the conviction or lack of it in the case of an anonymous poster on thaivisa who offers no evidence to back up their assertions.  The fact is that even early models made in the 70's, when computing power was minuscule compared to today, successfully formulated algorithms that are still valid today for predicting global warming. And the human contribution to the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is now 1/3 of the total. Maybe to you a 50% increase is small and  signifies no important role  And that says nothing about the increase of methane and other greenhouse gasses generated by human activity.

Very well written, but unfortunately based on "follow the ""science"". There is no evidence that CO2 causes warming, on the contrary it seems that increases in CO2 happen as a result of warming, which is a part of the natural cycle of warming and cooling that the planet has been going through since its formation. If we cut carbon emissions to zero tomorrow (get rid of all those pesky plants that produce CO2, get rid of the ruminants, amongst other things) I very much doubt that we would see a drop in temperatures inside of a few thousand years. You guys aren't worried about the planet, you're confusing global change with your own fears of death. I have children, I know that they will adapt and survive. 

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, cooked said:

Very well written, but unfortunately based on "follow the ""science"". There is no evidence that CO2 causes warming, on the contrary it seems that increases in CO2 happen as a result of warming, which is a part of the natural cycle of warming and cooling that the planet has been going through since its formation. If we cut carbon emissions to zero tomorrow (get rid of all those pesky plants that produce CO2, get rid of the ruminants, amongst other things) I very much doubt that we would see a drop in temperatures inside of a few thousand years. You guys aren't worried about the planet, you're confusing global change with your own fears of death. I have children, I know that they will adapt and survive. 

 

What I liked most about your post was the wealth of evidence linked to credible sources that you provided. Because if you had just provided unbacked assertions that would just be pointless and...oh wait a minute

 

Anyway, FYI, the extraordinary power of greenhouse gasses has been known since the 19th century thanks to the work of Eunice Foote and especially John Tindall, the great Irish physicist. 

 

"It was 150 years ago that John Tyndall, external, one of history's truly great physicists, published a scientific paper with the far-from-snappy title On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapours, and on the Physical Connexion of Radiation, Absorption, and Conduction.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15093234

 

Part of his experimentation included the construction of the first ratio spectrophotometer, which he used to measure the absorptive powers of gases such as water vapor, "carbonic acid" (now known as carbon dioxide), ozone, and hydrocarbons. Among his most important discoveries were the vast differences in the abilities of "perfectly colorless and invisible gases and vapors" to absorb and transmit radiant heat. He noted that oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen are almost transparent to radiant heat while other gases are quite opaque.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Tyndall

 

And the fact is that most algorithm, created in the 1970's  by scientists,  that have been proven to be astonishingly accurate.

https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-theyre-remarkably-good.html#:~:text=After years of hearing critics,indistinguishable from what actually occurred."

 

That even goes for research of scientists working for Exxon

In “Assessing ExxonMobil’s Global Warming Projections,” researchers from Harvard and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research show for the first time the accuracy of previously unreported forecasts created by company scientists from 1977 through 2003. The Harvard team discovered that Exxon researchers created a series of remarkably reliable models and analyses projecting global warming from carbon dioxide emissions over the coming decades. Specifically, Exxon projected that fossil fuel emissions would lead to 0.20 degrees Celsius of global warming per decade, with a margin of error of 0.04 degrees — a trend that has been proven largely accurate.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysis-finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/#:~:text=Specifically%2C Exxon projected that fossil,has been proven largely accurate.

Not surprisingly EXXON suppressed it.

 

The problem with the explanation that CO2 levels are only the result of natural processes and not the cause is that there was a sharp spike in CO2 levels starting in the 1970s. This was accompanied by a sharp spike in temperatures which is continuing. That spike was generated by human activity.

 

 

[cooked]

On 8/15/2024 at 10:46 AM, placeholder said:

 

What I liked most about your post was the wealth of evidence linked to credible sources that you provided. Because if you had just provided unbacked assertions that would just be pointless and...oh wait a minute

 

Anyway, FYI, the extraordinary power of greenhouse gasses has been known since the 19th century thanks to the work of Eunice Foote and especially John Tindall, the great Irish physicist. 

 

"It was 150 years ago that John Tyndall, external, one of history's truly great physicists, published a scientific paper with the far-from-snappy title On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapours, and on the Physical Connexion of Radiation, Absorption, and Conduction.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15093234

 

Part of his experimentation included the construction of the first ratio spectrophotometer, which he used to measure the absorptive powers of gases such as water vapor, "carbonic acid" (now known as carbon dioxide), ozone, and hydrocarbons. Among his most important discoveries were the vast differences in the abilities of "perfectly colorless and invisible gases and vapors" to absorb and transmit radiant heat. He noted that oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen are almost transparent to radiant heat while other gases are quite opaque.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Tyndall

 

And the fact is that most algorithm, created in the 1970's  by scientists,  that have been proven to be astonishingly accurate.

https://phys.org/news/2019-12-climate-theyre-remarkably-good.html#:~:text=After years of hearing critics,indistinguishable from what actually occurred."

 

That even goes for research of scientists working for Exxon

In “Assessing ExxonMobil’s Global Warming Projections,” researchers from Harvard and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research show for the first time the accuracy of previously unreported forecasts created by company scientists from 1977 through 2003. The Harvard team discovered that Exxon researchers created a series of remarkably reliable models and analyses projecting global warming from carbon dioxide emissions over the coming decades. Specifically, Exxon projected that fossil fuel emissions would lead to 0.20 degrees Celsius of global warming per decade, with a margin of error of 0.04 degrees — a trend that has been proven largely accurate.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysis-finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/#:~:text=Specifically%2C Exxon projected that fossil,has been proven largely accurate.

Not surprisingly EXXON suppressed it.

 

The problem with the explanation that CO2 levels are only the result of natural processes and not the cause is that there was a sharp spike in CO2 levels starting in the 1970s. This was accompanied by a sharp spike in temperatures which is continuing. That spike was generated by human activity.

 

 

You miss the points: 1. We CAN'T do anything significant about it. 2. It's happened before 3. How are you going to convince 'certain countries' to go along with zero carbon? They'll just watch and grin. 

The "missing evidence" that I didn't quote, since you seem to still trust scientists, is all over the place if you care to look. I am Swiss and am just as sad about the retreat of the glaciers as anyone, but it's happened before .. many millions will die if you deny them the right to heat their homes and cook in an affordable manner, but I suppose that's OK with you.