Popular Post sdanielmcev Posted February 10, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 10, 2014 Ah, yes. The arrogance of mankind. Can mankind, or its' wastes affect the weather? Go back thousands of years, instead of hundreds. What will you see? There's that big yellow thing you see in the sky called the sun. Nothing to do with mankind, this global warming, or cooling, or whatever is in vogue at the moment. Anyone can make statistics show whatever they want. Mother Earth can take whatever puny little men throw at her and keep spinning away. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExpatOilWorker Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 There seem to be a few sceptics in this thread so it would be interesting to hear from them why they think this disturbing phenomena is occurring. In Siberia an area of permafrost spanning a million square kilometres— the size of France and Germany combined— has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age. Western Siberia is heating up faster than anywhere else in the world, having experienced a rise of some 3C in the past 40 years.It could take as little as a 1.5 degree rise in global temperature to thaw Siberia permanently, potentially releasing catastrophic levels of cartbon dioxide and methane from the soil. http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-brief/69684-melting-siberian-permafrost-threatens-major-methane-release Scientists are concerned about this permafrost because as it thaws, it reveals bare ground which then warms up more quickly than ice and snow. This leads to a vicious cycle because it accelerates the rate at which the permafrost thaws. Projections of the release of methane is to effectively double atmospheric levels of the gas, leading to a 10% to 25% increase in global warming Come on, that is a stupid statement. How can it melt for the first time since the END of the ice age. Sure it have to melt for the first time since the BEGINING of the last ice age, which is obivisly more than 11,000 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ah, yes. The arrogance of mankind. Can mankind, or its' wastes affect the weather? Go back thousands of years, instead of hundreds. What will you see? There's that big yellow thing you see in the sky called the sun. Nothing to do with mankind, this global warming, or cooling, or whatever is in vogue at the moment. Anyone can make statistics show whatever they want. Mother Earth can take whatever puny little men throw at her and keep spinning away.Yes the sun is very influential on climate and a lot more. However, people can also make profound impacts. There's the Pacific Trash Vortex (google it), and innumerable places which are too toxic to support life other than toxin-tolerant slime. As for climate, the gross amounts of CO2, CFC's, carbon monoxide, and other chemicals pumped in to the air are having an effect. Perhaps the effect appears small now, but it can and probably will accellarate. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 There seem to be a few sceptics in this thread so it would be interesting to hear from them why they think this disturbing phenomena is occurring. In Siberia an area of permafrost spanning a million square kilometres the size of France and Germany combined has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age. Western Siberia is heating up faster than anywhere else in the world, having experienced a rise of some 3C in the past 40 years.It could take as little as a 1.5 degree rise in global temperature to thaw Siberia permanently, potentially releasing catastrophic levels of cartbon dioxide and methane from the soil. http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-brief/69684-melting-siberian-permafrost-threatens-major-methane-release Scientists are concerned about this permafrost because as it thaws, it reveals bare ground which then warms up more quickly than ice and snow. This leads to a vicious cycle because it accelerates the rate at which the permafrost thaws. Projections of the release of methane is to effectively double atmospheric levels of the gas, leading to a 10% to 25% increase in global warming Come on, that is a stupid statement. How can it melt for the first time since the END of the ice age. Sure it have to melt for the first time since the BEGINING of the last ice age, which is obivisly more than 11,000 years ago. Here's how: During the most recent ice age, there were vast ice sheets. The ice sheets then melted somewhat. What was left, essentially stayed for the ensuing 11,000 years, mostly at the poles. What is melting now are some of that residual ice which hasn't melted since the last ice age. Some ice is very old. Ice melting is one of the most evident proofs of GW (particularly when that ice is not being replaced). Deniers will jump through hoops trying to either deny it's happening or twist the data to make it sound unimportant - but it's happening. When the NW Passage is clear year-round (which will be soon), deniers will twist words to show that's insignificant and unrelated to warming trends. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 How about last time the NW passage was clear? was that man's doing too. How did we close it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attrayant Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ah, yes. The arrogance of mankind. Can mankind, or its' wastes affect the weather? That's right, man's release of greenhouse gasses into the the atmosphere can't be contributing to climate change, because that would be arrogant! Somehow. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isawasnake Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 One of the things I have often thought of, which doesn't seem to get brought up too much.... if we do assume climate change, isn't it necessarily making things "better" for some, while worse for others. While the "worse" part will be more immediately felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdanielmcev Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun Jean Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 i prefer warmer as colder would mean the end of western civilization as we know it. Meanwhile everyone accepted the new taxes to counter global warming. Carbon tax, how about methane tax, or wait for it, the worst greenhouse gas, water vapor. Yeah that should be taxed too, that will end global warming much quicker. Meanwhile one of the most important substances for maintaining live on earth (co2) must be eliminated, especially the whole 0.00001% that is human made. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Sata Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Maybe Yingluck and Chalerm can make a start by stopping the burning of rice stubble fields. Chalerm has a reputation for sorting problems in a stroke..so maybe it's just a weekend task? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canman Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 The ocean ate my global warming! http://joannenova.com.au/2013/09/ipcc-in-denial-just-so-excuses-use-mystery-ocean-heat-to-hide-their-failure/ Now that the plateau in air temperatures has lasted for 15 years, everyone, even IPCC lead authors, can see the “90% certain” models were 98% wrong. So the IPCC now claims the heat went into the deep abyss, which they didn’t predict, can’t measure accurately, and, even by the best estimates we have, has not been anywhere near large enough to explain the missing energy. The IPCC are trying to explain the lack of ocean surface temperature rise by rewriting the laws of thermodynamics and are currently saying that the warm water is sinking thus hiding the predicted ocen warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post boomerangutang Posted February 12, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 12, 2014 One of the things I have often thought of, which doesn't seem to get brought up too much.... if we do assume climate change, isn't it necessarily making things "better" for some, while worse for others. While the "worse" part will be more immediately felt.Yes, some things better in some places. Overall though; worse. 2 examples: better for tropical diseases and fire ants, worse for polar bears and coastal cities. "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael ChrichtonI respectfully disagree with fellow-author Chrichton. Granted, we can't destroy the planet as a sphere of rock, and certainly life will go on a lot longer after our one species become extinct. However, we are destroying much of what was once good about our planet. Plant and animal species are going extinct at alarming rates due to human activities. Toxification and habitat destruction is also happening at a manic pace, 24/7, on land and sea, and atmosphere. If you put rats in a closed room and threw in a loaf of bread and some water each day, you'd get an idea of what our one species is doing to the planet. Rapanui is another example of what happens when people are confined to a finite space with ever-dwindling resources. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as “oil industry shill “ spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ExpatOilWorker Posted February 12, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 12, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiftyTwo Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work. Without the oil industry most people would be dead. Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post canman Posted February 12, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 12, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work. Without the oil industry most people would be dead. Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it. One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest (over half) is used to make things like: Solvents Diesel fuel Motor Oil Bearing Grease Ink Floor Wax Ballpoint Pens Football Cleats Upholstery Sweaters Boats Insecticides Bicycle Tires Sports Car Bodies Nail Polish Fishing lures Dresses Tires Golf Bags Perfumes Cassettes Dishwasher parts Tool Boxes Shoe Polish Motorcycle Helmet Caulking Petroleum Jelly Transparent Tape CD Player Faucet Washers Antiseptics Clothesline Curtains Food Preservatives Basketballs Soap Vitamin Capsules Antihistamines Purses Shoes Dashboards Cortisone Deodorant Footballs Putty Dyes Panty Hose Refrigerant Percolators Life Jackets Rubbing Alcohol Linings Skis TV Cabinets Shag Rugs Electrician's Tape Tool Racks Car Battery Cases Epoxy Paint Mops Slacks Insect Repellent Oil Filters Umbrellas Yarn Fertilizers Hair Coloring Roofing Toilet Seats Fishing Rods Lipstick Denture Adhesive Linoleum Ice Cube Trays Synthetic Rubber Speakers Plastic Wood Electric Blankets Glycerin Tennis Rackets Rubber Cement Fishing Boots Dice Nylon Rope Candles Trash Bags House Paint Water Pipes Hand Lotion Roller Skates Surf Boards Shampoo Wheels Paint Rollers Shower Curtains Guitar Strings Luggage Aspirin Safety Glasses Antifreeze Football Helmets Awnings Eyeglasses Clothes Toothbrushes Ice Chests Footballs Combs CD's & DVD's Paint Brushes Detergents Vaporizers Balloons Sun Glasses Tents Heart Valves Crayons Parachutes Telephones Enamel Pillows Dishes Cameras Anesthetics Artificial Turf Artificial limbs Bandages Dentures Model Cars Folding Doors Hair Curlers Cold cream Movie film Soft Contact lenses Drinking Cups Fan Belts Car Enamel Shaving Cream Ammonia Refrigerators Golf Balls Toothpaste Gasoline Just a small sample of the products you would have to do without if the evil oil industry stopped supplying oil 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiftyTwo Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Just a small sample of the products you would have to do without if the evil oil industry stopped supplying oil Most of that list can be made from Whale oil, lets get rid of the oil industry and start commercial Whale farming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Please stay on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asiantravel Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 "let's be clear. The planet is not in jeopardy. We are in jeopardy. We haven't got the power to destroy the planet- or save it. But we might have the power to save ourselves." Michael Chrichton Honestly, how can anyone take anything this guy says seriously? A person who is now described as oil industry shill spouting his propaganda and lies for the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david/michael-crichton-the-oil-_b_15430.html Hey, be nice to the oil industry or you can sit in the dark, take cold showers and start to walk to work. yes , but when things go wrong , (as they often seem to do ) the COREXIT they use that gets into the food chain upsets my stomach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickBradford Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it. That seems to be what the government of Ontario, partnering with an uber-wealthy multinational organization known as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), seems to be trying to move towards. "Protecting the Environment One Sweater at a Time", declares its press release, telling citizens that they can “play an important role in fighting climate change” by “putting on a sweater and turning down the thermostat.” At a time when Canada has just seen record low temperatures, and the temperature is down around -20C to -30C in many places, I would imagine that plenty of Canadians would find this lofty advice insulting and patronising in the extreme. I hope that Google Earth will be showing the record low -38.8C recently recorded in Thunder Bay, Ontario. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 My winter veg had a bumper crop this year, beetroots swelled perfectly and broccoli heads were like the imported ones you can buy in Rimping. If this warming continues I may consider growing English strawberries next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Just a small sample of the products you would have to do without if the evil oil industry stopped supplying oilNot quite. Many of those products can be made without fossil fuels. Plus, why is it that individual Americans consistently use more power than individuals in nearly every other country? I know some reasons why. Biggest reason: waste. 2nd biggest reason: doing things with electricity which are either not necessary (heating large homes with just one or two residents, and 1,000 other wasteful habits), or could be just as well done without electricity (electric leaf blowers and 1,000 other devices). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExpatOilWorker Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Just a small sample of the products you would have to do without if the evil oil industry stopped supplying oilNot quite. Many of those products can be made without fossil fuels. Plus, why is it that individual Americans consistently use more power than individuals in nearly every other country? I know some reasons why. Biggest reason: waste. 2nd biggest reason: doing things with electricity which are either not necessary (heating large homes with just one or two residents, and 1,000 other wasteful habits), or could be just as well done without electricity (electric leaf blowers and 1,000 other devices). I hope you know that China is burning more fossil fuels than USA, but only produce half the GDP and certainly dumps a lot more pollutants in the air and waterways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Just a small sample of the products you would have to do without if the evil oil industry stopped supplying oilNot quite. Many of those products can be made without fossil fuels. Plus, why is it that individual Americans consistently use more power than individuals in nearly every other country? I know some reasons why. Biggest reason: waste. 2nd biggest reason: doing things with electricity which are either not necessary (heating large homes with just one or two residents, and 1,000 other wasteful habits), or could be just as well done without electricity (electric leaf blowers and 1,000 other devices). I hope you know that China is burning more fossil fuels than USA, but only produce half the GDP and certainly dumps a lot more pollutants in the air and waterways.I know that China is the biggest polluter in the world. But my prior post used the word 'individually' twice. In other words: per capita. Per-person pollution, Americans are at the top. I'm American and am troubled by that. I've been to thousands of homes in the USA (I was a chimney sweep and a carpenter) and seen how wasteful those folks can be - without even knowing they're being wasteful of resources. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canman Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Imagine trying to survive winter in N. America or N. Europe without oil and the electricity that comes from it. That seems to be what the government of Ontario, partnering with an uber-wealthy multinational organization known as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), seems to be trying to move towards. "Protecting the Environment One Sweater at a Time", declares its press release, telling citizens that they can “play an important role in fighting climate change” by “putting on a sweater and turning down the thermostat.” At a time when Canada has just seen record low temperatures, and the temperature is down around -20C to -30C in many places, I would imagine that plenty of Canadians would find this lofty advice insulting and patronising in the extreme. I hope that Google Earth will be showing the record low -38.8C recently recorded in Thunder Bay, Ontario. One day recently it was colder in Saskatchawan then it was on the surface of Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teatree Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) Google Earth: how much has global warming raised temperatures near you? The University of East Anglia has released an interactive Google Earth layer with local temperature data Dana Nuccitelli Tuesday 4 February 2014 13.00 GMT theguardian.com If you've ever wondered how much global warming has raised local temperatures in your area or elsewhere on the globe, the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (UEA CRU) has just released a new interactive Google Earth layer that will let you answer this question with ease. UEA CRU is one of the scientific organizations that compile temperature data from around the world. Their temperature dataset over land is called CRUTEM4, and is one of the most widely used records of the climate system. The new Google Earth format allows users to scroll around the world, zoom in on 6,000 weather stations, and view monthly, seasonal and annual temperature data more easily than ever before. Users can drill down to see some 20,000 graphs some of which show temperature records dating back to 1850. Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/feb/04/global-warming-google-earth-uea -- The Guardian 2014-02-04 Thanks for the info. Please stop using the term "global warming". "climate change" is the term most suitable. As soon as there is unseasonaly cold weather the nae sayers say "so much for global warming"Sent from my KFTT using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Lets not call it global warming nor climate change.Lets call it WEATHER. Edited February 13, 2014 by teatree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Lets not call it global warming nor climate change. Lets call it WEATHER. If a volcano erupts, instead of calling it an eruption, we can call it 'heat' or 'pressure release'. Semantics. Everyone knows weather is mutable. One prime issue is trends - which may cause significant changes on the surface of the planet. Changes in habitat, which effect species' survival, which can also affect people in big ways. A trend which forces tens of millions of people to flee from coastal cities and/or desert regions - is significant. They've got to go someplace, so it has impacts - on the environment, and other people. It's already happening to a relatively small degree: Large fence between ever-flooding Bangladesh and NE India. Compounded misery in S.Sudan and other Saharan places where desertification is spreading each day. Increasing tons of dust blowing on to Beijing from the spreading Gobi desert. If an observer chooses to pay it no mind, that's his/her choice. If a person chooses to deny or explain-away the global trend of rising temps and seas, that's also that person's choice. It's easy to live in a selfish cocoon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post canman Posted February 13, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 13, 2014 Google Earth: how much has global warming raised temperatures near you? The University of East Anglia has released an interactive Google Earth layer with local temperature data Dana Nuccitelli Tuesday 4 February 2014 13.00 GMT theguardian.com If you've ever wondered how much global warming has raised local temperatures in your area or elsewhere on the globe, the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (UEA CRU) has just released a new interactive Google Earth layer that will let you answer this question with ease. UEA CRU is one of the scientific organizations that compile temperature data from around the world. Their temperature dataset over land is called CRUTEM4, and is one of the most widely used records of the climate system. The new Google Earth format allows users to scroll around the world, zoom in on 6,000 weather stations, and view monthly, seasonal and annual temperature data more easily than ever before. Users can drill down to see some 20,000 graphs some of which show temperature records dating back to 1850. Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/feb/04/global-warming-google-earth-uea -- The Guardian 2014-02-04 Thanks for the info. Please stop using the term "global warming". "climate change" is the term most suitable. As soon as there is unseasonaly cold weather the nae sayers say "so much for global warming"Sent from my KFTT using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Lets not call it global warming nor climate change.Lets call it WEATHER. You cant make money or impose new taxes if you just called it weather; come on man get with the program! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teatree Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Lets not call it global warming nor climate change. Lets call it WEATHER.If a volcano erupts, instead of calling it an eruption, we can call it 'heat' or 'pressure release'. Semantics.Everyone knows weather is mutable. One prime issue is trends - which may cause significant changes on the surface of the planet. Changes in habitat, which effect species' survival, which can also affect people in big ways. A trend which forces tens of millions of people to flee from coastal cities and/or desert regions - is significant. They've got to go someplace, so it has impacts - on the environment, and other people. It's already happening to a relatively small degree: Large fence between ever-flooding Bangladesh and NE India. Compounded misery in S.Sudan and other Saharan places where desertification is spreading each day. Increasing tons of dust blowing on to Beijing from the spreading Gobi desert. If an observer chooses to pay it no mind, that's his/her choice. If a person chooses to deny or explain-away the global trend of rising temps and seas, that's also that person's choice. It's easy to live in a selfish cocoon. There is nothing unusual about what is happening with the weather. It has been hotter in the past and cooler. There has been more CO2 and less CO2. Etc..etc..etc. People have always been affected by weather and always will. The difference is that now the global warming propaganda machine has whipped people up into such a frenzy that they are fooled into believing that ANY weather event is caused by AGW. It get warmer in the coming years...it could get cooler (as quite a few scientists are now starting to predict). A warmer world would kill a lot fewer people than one going into another ice age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickBradford Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) It's easy to live in a selfish cocoon. How true. One only has to look at all of those well-off Greens pushing futile policies which negatively impact the lives of those worse off than they are. Take EU climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard, for example, who is quite happy to see household electricity bills skyrocket even if "we were wrong, it was not about climate". Cocooned from the inconvenient truth that global temperature has not risen in 17 years, and selfish enough with her €240,000-a-year basic salary to ignore fuel poverty among the masses, this woman fits the bill perfectly. Edited February 13, 2014 by RickBradford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now