A dire climate warning for the Arctic

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, ALLSEEINGEYE said:

If ignorance is bliss you must be ecstatic!!!

Yes, there has been several ice ages on this planet and each of them took tens of thousands of years to happen and tens of thousands of years to end.

The changes that are happening now are happening in less than 100 years!!!

 

Hmmmmm. if it's happening that fast, there is nothing any of us could do to reverse it. If it took the entire time from the industrial revolution to now to reach this point, how do you suggest it can be reversed in the few years we have left?

I'm still waiting for any sensible solutions that are acceptable to the world's population, the vast majority of which don't care about it, and carry on doing whatever they please.

[GarryP]

Can I just ask both sides of the global warming divide, even if GW is not true, what is the harm in using clean energy and properly controlling emissions, etc.? Surely, everyone would benefit from a cleaner environment. And if ultimately GW proves to be a natural phenomenon, at least the atmosphere would be cleaner (with all the benefits that come from that) for one and all.    

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, GarryP said:

Can I just ask both sides of the global warming divide, even if GW is not true, what is the harm in using clean energy and properly controlling emissions, etc.? Surely, everyone would benefit from a cleaner environment. And if ultimately GW proves to be a natural phenomenon, at least the atmosphere would be cleaner (with all the benefits that come from that) for one and all.    

I'm pretty sure that NO ONE on here is asking for dirtier air and polluted water. The argument is entirely as to the validity of the theory that mankind is responsible for heating the planet to the point of extinction of humans, or if it is a naturally occurring cycle.

I don't think anything can reverse it, whatever the cause, but I do everything I can to live in an environmentally acceptable manner, within reason.

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm pretty sure that NO ONE on here is asking for dirtier air and polluted water. The argument is entirely as to the validity of the theory that mankind is responsible for heating the planet to the point of extinction of humans, or if it is a naturally occurring cycle.

I don't think anything can reverse it, whatever the cause, but I do everything I can to live in an environmentally acceptable manner, within reason.

So Trump's support of increased use of coal is somehow not asking for dirtier air and water. Well, maybe it's not asking but if the result is dirtier air and water, then it's a distinction without a meaningful difference in the result.

[ilostmypassword]

24 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hmmmmm. if it's happening that fast, there is nothing any of us could do to reverse it. If it took the entire time from the industrial revolution to now to reach this point, how do you suggest it can be reversed in the few years we have left?

I'm still waiting for any sensible solutions that are acceptable to the world's population, the vast majority of which don't care about it, and carry on doing whatever they please.

It may have taken that long but it's all about rates.. The acceleration in industrial development and consumption in the latter part of the last century is where most of the problem comes from. And do you think maybe if instead of cutting taxes by 5.5 trillion (at the least) over the next decade, Trump devoted that to slashing consumption of fossil fuels throughout the world, that might make a difference?

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

So Trump's support of increased use of coal is somehow not asking for dirtier air and water. Well, maybe it's not asking but if the result is dirtier air and water, then it's a distinction without a meaningful difference in the result.

Existing technology has made coal clean when burnt. One volcano probably produces more pollution than all current coal fired stations in the US put together.

Such questions should be addressed to China.

[Get Real]

4 hours ago, Pimay1 said:

 

Global average temperatures over land have plummeted by more than 1C since the middle of this year – their biggest and steepest fall on record.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3974846/Stunning-new-data-indicates-El-Nino-drove-record-highs-global-temperatures-suggesting-rise-not-man-emissions.html

 

Oki doki! Let´s say that it´s right. 1C since the middle of this year. I wonder if you read how much it has gone up during the last 10 years?
I think I will put my trust in the 10 year report, than you can do in a slight and probably temporary fall. That´s probably also why it became such a newsworthy information,
so they had to sign "biggest" and "steepest". Whaddaya Think?

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It may have taken that long but it's all about rates.. The acceleration in industrial development and consumption in the latter part of the last century is where most of the problem comes from. And do you think maybe if instead of cutting taxes by 5.5 trillion (at the least) over the next decade, Trump devoted that to slashing consumption of fossil fuels throughout the world, that might make a difference?

My opinion, for what it is worth, is that it would make no difference whatsoever to G W, as I do not believe GW is caused by mankind.

However, I'd prefer the taxes to be used to help the millions of people in poverty in the US before cutting them. One more year isn't going to make much difference in the long run, and housing the destitute would be a good thing.

Taxes aside, measures to "persuade" companies to remain in the US could be brought in anyway.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, Get Real said:

Oki doki! Let´s say that it´s right. 1C since the middle of this year. I wonder if you read how much it has gone up during the last 10 years?
I think I will put my trust in the 10 year report, than you can do in a slight and probably temporary fall. That´s probably also why it became such a newsworthy information,
so they had to sign "biggest" and "steepest". Whaddaya Think?

They keep saying on news reports that the storm is "the worst in 30 years" or the floods are "the worst in 40 years". NB more than 10 years. Things have changed little, and 10 years is insignificant in statistical terms.

[Grubster]

2 hours ago, i claudius said:

Britain is in the grip of the coldest winter since 1993 so we are being told , so now i suppose they will come up with "global cooling" and tax that , on another note i hear that crop circles are definatly made by Aliens ,who visit the planet from light years away , make the circles and then fly home .

Take a poll and I bet you would find that most UFO believers, do not believe in climate change.     And what percentage of the earth does the UK represent?

[Grubster]

I guess one good thing is that the new sea lane opening up in the arctic circle will be good for shipping.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, Grubster said:

Take a poll and I bet you would find that most UFO believers, do not believe in climate change.     And what percentage of the earth does the UK represent?

I'd really like warmer temperatures back home. GW would be a good thing for me.

[Grubster]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

And the oceans rise and submerge much of the various continents.

The world has a huge overabundance of food. It will take many decades to get up to 50% renewables, creating millions of jobs, which every country needs. I can't think of a reason to not use renewable energy. I think cleaning up the oceans would be a good thing too.

[OMGImInPattaya]

37 minutes ago, GarryP said:

Can I just ask both sides of the global warming divide, even if GW is not true, what is the harm in using clean energy and properly controlling emissions, etc.? Surely, everyone would benefit from a cleaner environment. And if ultimately GW proves to be a natural phenomenon, at least the atmosphere would be cleaner (with all the benefits that come from that) for one and all.    

When and where it makes economic sense to do so, I don't think anyone has any objection to "clean and green" energy sources. It's over-reaching government officials and their regulatory  over-reach that's the problem.

 

As to Arctic ice and polor bears, I don't really care about them...the earth's terrain and its plants and animals have always been in a constant state of flux...something about "Gaia."

[Grubster]

1 minute ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

When and where it makes economic sense to do so, I don't think anyone has any objection to "clean and green" energy sources. It's over-reaching government officials and their regulatory  over-reach that's the problem.

 

As to Arctic ice and polor bears, I don't really care about them...the earth's terrain and its plants and animals have always been in a constant state of flux...something about "Gaia."

I can only think of one government project creating millions of jobs that would not make sense but yet we sure seem to be proficient at it and thats War. 

[kingalfred]

And the official policy of the USA now is, there's no such thing as Climate Change caused by man! The crazies of the USA really need to be isolated


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[thaibeachlovers]

17 minutes ago, Grubster said:

The world has a huge overabundance of food. It will take many decades to get up to 50% renewables, creating millions of jobs, which every country needs. I can't think of a reason to not use renewable energy. I think cleaning up the oceans would be a good thing too.

Stop using anything made of plastic then. The major man made pollution in the ocean is plastic particles.

Edited November 29, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[Chicog]

Let's face it, you're never going to win over the deniers. As seen in just this thread, they believe in a mixture of pseudoscience and bizarre logic to justify their beliefs.

Science never enters into it, and when it does, it's so bastardised or taken out of context as to be meaningless.

It's a battle of science versus propaganda, and unfortunately a whole lot of people swallow the propaganda - mainly because the issued has been politicised (when it reality it's all about the $$$$'s for the people who foment this nonsense).

 

Most of the science is indisputable. They just don't want to see it.

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by Chicog

[Get Real]

43 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

They keep saying on news reports that the storm is "the worst in 30 years" or the floods are "the worst in 40 years". NB more than 10 years. Things have changed little, and 10 years is insignificant in statistical terms.

Opps! Sorry for my mistake according to you. Have to do better in the future. Just for you I will explain myself a little bit better. I was just trying to make sense out of, what must be for you gigantically insignificant, the difference between a couple of month and 10 year. Just for you I will change it to 40 year so even you can get a fair grip of what I meant. 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm pretty sure that NO ONE on here is asking for dirtier air and polluted water. The argument is entirely as to the validity of the theory that mankind is responsible for heating the planet to the point of extinction of humans, or if it is a naturally occurring cycle.

I don't think anything can reverse it, whatever the cause, but I do everything I can to live in an environmentally acceptable manner, within reason.

And there really should be no argument about that. The science community to one man agrees that there is manmade global warming. The only ones disputing that are the people involved in traditional energy and people on forums like this.

Neither of these carries much value to me, nor should they to any other well thinking human being.

Edited November 29, 2016 by stevenl

[balo]

Send Donald Trump up there so he can tell the world it's all fake. 

 

[Grubster]

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Stop using anything made of plastic then. The major man made pollution in the ocean is plastic particles.

I agree 100% , you will never see much done there against the oil lobby. There is plenty of renewable paper trees in the world for bags.  other plastic items could have deposits on them. Also many anti littering laws could be enacted and enforced. Recycling works pretty good too. We can only try but we aren't are we?

[RPCVguy]

Arctic Sea Ice plotted by date for the 80s, 90's, 00's 2016 and the 3 prior record low years... updated daily. The USA solution to data showing shifts in climate, and reduction of ice is a plan to stop funding the science that gathers such data, whether from satellite measurements, oceanic buoys, or similar. One story of the problem from last April "The Arctic is melting – and scientists just lost a key tool to observe it"

That was one satellite. there are others at risk. Policy under Trump: "

Donald Trump is poised to eliminate all climate change research conducted by Nasa as part of a crackdown on “politicized science”, his senior adviser on issues relating to the space agency has said.

Nasa’s Earth science division is set to be stripped of funding in favor of exploration of deep space, with the president-elect having set a goal during the campaign to explore the entire solar system by the end of the century.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/22/nasa-earth-donald-trump-eliminate-climate-change-research

There DOES APPEAR to be a pattern of less and less Arctic Ice Daily updates of Arctic and Antarctic Ice Extent
In the news today Did Föhn Winds Just Melt Two Miles of East Antarctic Surface Ice in One Day?

[jcsmith]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

Did you actually read the bit of the OP that says:

Unless the world stops burning fossil fuels ?

Does anyone on the side of the "we must do something about global warming" mob actually comprehend the result of that?

It would result in mass starvation as enough food could no longer be grown or transported to feed the billions on planet earth.

Soooooo, the choice is clear- stop using fossil fuel NOW ( later will be too late to make a difference ) and see millions or even billions starve to death, or keep using fossil fuels and ( if the models are correct ) see the Arctic ice melt and the polar bears die off.

 

Up to you.

 

Come now, who is saying that? 

 

How about option C: Start enforcing a transition to cleaner forms of energy. I don't think anyone has ever said stop using energy now to save the environment. But what should be happening is that solar roof panels should be mandatory for new structures. Do not allow new coal factories to be created. And then begin shutting them down after you have built sufficient clean energy sources. 

[anotheruser]

9 hours ago, daveAustin said:

You again. Folk that argue that what we're doing is ok because the Earth naturally warms and cools anyway, or worse still that it has no consequences, need their head read. You should apply for a position with Trump. He's a bit lost on this issue too.

 

Man made, naturally caused, a myth... either way if we stop using fossil fuels it is the end of modern society regardless. We all know there is 0% chance of this happening in any meaningful way. Every country in the world wants economic growth. It is going to take more than driving a Prius.

 

Some countries like Thailand the pollution, haze and destruction is becoming bad enough to see the writing on the wall. Can't even imagine China, well I can I have seen the pictures and videos.

 

I am afraid things will have to get a lot worse before they get better. As the ice melts it will gain momentum and begin to accelerate.  If the integrity of the ice shields are compromised there is very little hope to save them now. It is sort of like somebody took the ice out of the freezer and left it in the sun. Now it is softened we can put the ice into the shade but it isn't going to bring it back.

 

haha Sorry to be grim but there isn't much that inspires hope out there at this point. You see studies where we may be able to reduce emissions some trivial amount by 2035 it isn't promising.

Edited November 29, 2016 by anotheruser

[soc]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

My year would be when Lake Lyndon in the New Zealand southern alps stopped freezing in the early 1970s. That was long before the term "global warming" was ever heard. From 1971 the snow level rose significantly. As I haven't been there since the 80s, I can't say as to the snow level since.

 

BTW, back then, the scientists were forecasting lower temperatures, so they were wrong then, and who is to say they are right now?

l have some old National Geographic magazines at home(from the 70s)& in one of them, Scientists are predicting the coming ICE AGE.

Change their minds quickly, don't they?

The earth goes through cycles of warming & cooling.

The retreating ice in Greenland is uncovering farms that the Vikings had there in the 11th century when the climate was WARMER than it is now.

l would agree that mankind is probably contributing to climate change(a minuscule amount), but not causing it.

[chiang mai]

10 hours ago, Ahab said:

You do not have to have a PhD in climate science to be able to spot a scam as big as the AGW lie. The fear mongering is based on model predictions that do not adequately account for a number of complex factors. The amount of warming that could be caused by CO2 emissions (all manmade CO2 emissions) is tiny compared to other factors such as cloud cover.

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/22/the-needle-in-the-haystack-pat-franks-devastating-expose-of-climate-model-error/

 

In fact it's essential to not have a Phd or indeed any form of education, in order to be taken in by yet another blog by some aspiring millennial seeking fame and fortune and his name in lights, how can it all not be true! A scam, of course it must be, the polar bears all agree I'm certain!

[chilli42]

13 hours ago, Thechook said:

Ah these global warming nut jobs again.  There was an ice age and it melted and had nothing to do with man.  The days are actually colder than years gone by.

 ??????

[GuiseppeD]

Really bad situation and polar bears dying daily.  Save Peter the Polar Bear.

[chilli42]

It seems difficult to argue against the fact that the earth is getting warmer, that glaciers and ice caps are melting and air quality is bad to worse .... well except those that don't deal in facts.  Now whether any of this is caused by man or by Mother Nature we all still have to live on this planet as do generations to come.  Doing nothing about it under the banner of "it's not mankind's fault" is insane.  There is a problem and it needs direct action.