mspohr
Well-Known Member
/r/Québec.txt : metaquebec
I must say that I am shocked, shocked that the oil industry would lie about emissions. /s
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion
- Thread starter Raffy.Roma
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
mspohr
Well-Known Member
In a Warming World, Evidence of a Human ‘Fingerprint’ on Drought
Human activity was changing the Earth's drought and rainfall patterns as far back as the early 20th century, new research shows.
Drying in many regions, the researchers suggested, will get worse, with sobering implications for feeding the planet’s billions of people.
The new paper tracks long-term patterns of moisture levels in soil across regions of the world, including North America, Central America, Eurasia and the Mediterranean. The researchers found a “fingerprint” of human effects from producing greenhouse gases, as distinct from natural variability, as far back as 1900.
Human activity was changing the Earth's drought and rainfall patterns as far back as the early 20th century, new research shows.
Drying in many regions, the researchers suggested, will get worse, with sobering implications for feeding the planet’s billions of people.
The new paper tracks long-term patterns of moisture levels in soil across regions of the world, including North America, Central America, Eurasia and the Mediterranean. The researchers found a “fingerprint” of human effects from producing greenhouse gases, as distinct from natural variability, as far back as 1900.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Anew landmark United Nations report on biodiversity set for release on Monday will say that a perilous and miserable future awaits the natural world and human civilization unless we rapidly bring an end to humanity’s destructive “business as usual” approach to the economy, food production, and energy usage
Landmark UN Report to Show We Are in a Human-Induced Extinction Crisis
IPBES Global Assessment Preview | IPBES
Landmark UN Report to Show We Are in a Human-Induced Extinction Crisis
IPBES Global Assessment Preview | IPBES
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
That just represents the current state of the art. As the models improve the effect of humans will be pushed back to 3000 years, to coincide with humanity's group effort at deforestation.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Loss of biodiversity is just as catastrophic as climate change
Loss of biodiversity is just as catastrophic as climate change | Robert Watson
These instances, on opposite sides of the world, are two faces of the same problem; the relentless pressure we are putting on biodiversity and the contributions that nature makes to our wellbeing, and the way we humans are changing the Earth’s climate.
The rich variety of nature provides us with the food we eat, the water we drink and the air we breathe, and countless moments of personal inspiration spent in forests and mountains, exploring beaches and rivers, or even listening to a simple birdsong in a quiet moment.
Loss of biodiversity is just as catastrophic as climate change | Robert Watson
These instances, on opposite sides of the world, are two faces of the same problem; the relentless pressure we are putting on biodiversity and the contributions that nature makes to our wellbeing, and the way we humans are changing the Earth’s climate.
The rich variety of nature provides us with the food we eat, the water we drink and the air we breathe, and countless moments of personal inspiration spent in forests and mountains, exploring beaches and rivers, or even listening to a simple birdsong in a quiet moment.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
How global warming has made the rich richer
He argues that cold countries have reaped "warming benefits" from rising mercury, while hot countries have been given a "warming penalty" by being pushed further away from their optimum temperature.
According to the study, between 1961 and 2010 all of the 18 countries whose total historical emissions are less than 10 tons of CO2 per capita (nine tonnes) have suffered a negative impact from global warming - with a median reduction of 27% in their GDP per capita compared to the scenario without rising temperatures.
By contrast, 14 of the 19 countries whose cumulative emissions exceed 300 tons of CO2 per capita (272 tonnes) have benefitted from global warming, with a median contribution to GDP per capita of 13%.
He argues that cold countries have reaped "warming benefits" from rising mercury, while hot countries have been given a "warming penalty" by being pushed further away from their optimum temperature.
According to the study, between 1961 and 2010 all of the 18 countries whose total historical emissions are less than 10 tons of CO2 per capita (nine tonnes) have suffered a negative impact from global warming - with a median reduction of 27% in their GDP per capita compared to the scenario without rising temperatures.
By contrast, 14 of the 19 countries whose cumulative emissions exceed 300 tons of CO2 per capita (272 tonnes) have benefitted from global warming, with a median contribution to GDP per capita of 13%.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
US is hotbed of climate change denial, major global survey finds
US is hotbed of climate change denial, major global survey finds
Scientists overwhelmingly agree that people are causing climate change through the exponential increase of greenhouse gas emissions over the years. Global emissions are still rising, and the last four years have been the hottest since records began.But wider denial of climate science is down to a concerted campaign of misinformation by fossil fuel interests and aspects of American character, according to Margaret Klein Salamon, a clinical psychologist who founded the advocacy group Climate Mobilization.
“The Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry have put billions of dollars into lying to the American public, even sending literature to science teachers in schools,” Salamon said. “They are so well organised and have managed to turn climate change into a controversial subject that gets shut down. It’s clearly working.
But despite these views, the great majority of US citizens do accept the science of climate change, with nearly four in 10 saying human activity was at least partly responsible, potentially with other factors, and a further third taking the stronger view that human activity is the dominant cause.
US is hotbed of climate change denial, major global survey finds
Scientists overwhelmingly agree that people are causing climate change through the exponential increase of greenhouse gas emissions over the years. Global emissions are still rising, and the last four years have been the hottest since records began.But wider denial of climate science is down to a concerted campaign of misinformation by fossil fuel interests and aspects of American character, according to Margaret Klein Salamon, a clinical psychologist who founded the advocacy group Climate Mobilization.
“The Koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry have put billions of dollars into lying to the American public, even sending literature to science teachers in schools,” Salamon said. “They are so well organised and have managed to turn climate change into a controversial subject that gets shut down. It’s clearly working.
But despite these views, the great majority of US citizens do accept the science of climate change, with nearly four in 10 saying human activity was at least partly responsible, potentially with other factors, and a further third taking the stronger view that human activity is the dominant cause.
LOL - she's just great at predicting future climate catastrophes:
Soon, environmental activists and reporters began to ask whether “drought”—a temporary weather pattern—was really the right term for what was happening in the state, or whether “desertification” was more appropriate. “We’re on our fourth year of drought,” Katharine Hayhoe, director of the climate science center at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, told the industry magazine Meatingplace. “In order to replenish depleted reservoirs and soil moisture, we don’t need just a normal year or just a single rainfall. We need an unusually wet year to get back to normal conditions.” But the early months of 2015 have seen less than 1.4 inches of total precipitation—not even a third of what is considered normal rainfall, much less enough to replenish surface water and groundwater resources.
In fact, hydrologists estimate that even with improved rainfall, it could take thousands of years to replenish the groundwater already drawn from the South Plains. If sustained rains don’t come soon, the tiny cattle towns of the Panhandle and across North Texas, already in decline for decades, may be pushed out of existence.
More On The Katharine Hayhoe Permanent Drought | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
Meanwhile here in Texas are being ravaged by heavy rain an flooding, including the aforementioned South Plains a few weeks ago at the Texas Tech campus:
Flooding in Lubbock impacts driving, walking for students, locals
So yes, it would appear that her Climate Science degree confers great climate predictive powers, as I watch my trash cart float down my flooded Texas street.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
OMG! It's raining! Must disprove the climate crisis!LOL - she's just great at predicting future climate catastrophes:
Soon, environmental activists and reporters began to ask whether “drought”—a temporary weather pattern—was really the right term for what was happening in the state, or whether “desertification” was more appropriate. “We’re on our fourth year of drought,” Katharine Hayhoe, director of the climate science center at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, told the industry magazine Meatingplace. “In order to replenish depleted reservoirs and soil moisture, we don’t need just a normal year or just a single rainfall. We need an unusually wet year to get back to normal conditions.” But the early months of 2015 have seen less than 1.4 inches of total precipitation—not even a third of what is considered normal rainfall, much less enough to replenish surface water and groundwater resources.
In fact, hydrologists estimate that even with improved rainfall, it could take thousands of years to replenish the groundwater already drawn from the South Plains. If sustained rains don’t come soon, the tiny cattle towns of the Panhandle and across North Texas, already in decline for decades, may be pushed out of existence.
More On The Katharine Hayhoe Permanent Drought | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
Meanwhile here in Texas are being ravaged by heavy rain an flooding, including the aforementioned South Plains a few weeks ago at the Texas Tech campus:
Flooding in Lubbock impacts driving, walking for students, locals
So yes, it would appear that her Climate Science degree confers great climate predictive powers, as I watch my trash cart float down my flooded Texas street.
Ummm yeah, it has been raining A LOT here in Texas the last few years after she and other alarmist "scientists" predicted prolonged drought. Add this to the list of laughably wrong predictions "climate scientists" have made in recent years but I know you AGW kool-aid drinkers don't care to deal with that.
Here’s how it’s dealt with:Ummm yeah, it has been raining A LOT here in Texas the last few years after she and other alarmist "scientists" predicted prolonged drought. Add this to the list of laughably wrong predictions "climate scientists" have made in recent years but I know you AGW kool-aid drinkers don't care to deal with that.
- Weather != Climate
- Weather = small snapshot in time, of small region
- Climate = weather in an area over long period of time
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
LOL - she's just great at predicting future climate catastrophes:
Soon, environmental activists and reporters began to ask whether “drought”—a temporary weather pattern—was really the right term for what was happening in the state, or whether “desertification” was more appropriate. “We’re on our fourth year of drought,” Katharine Hayhoe, director of the climate science center at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, told the industry magazine Meatingplace. “In order to replenish depleted reservoirs and soil moisture, we don’t need just a normal year or just a single rainfall. We need an unusually wet year to get back to normal conditions.” But the early months of 2015 have seen less than 1.4 inches of total precipitation—not even a third of what is considered normal rainfall, much less enough to replenish surface water and groundwater resources.
In fact, hydrologists estimate that even with improved rainfall, it could take thousands of years to replenish the groundwater already drawn from the South Plains. If sustained rains don’t come soon, the tiny cattle towns of the Panhandle and across North Texas, already in decline for decades, may be pushed out of existence.
More On The Katharine Hayhoe Permanent Drought | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
Meanwhile here in Texas are being ravaged by heavy rain an flooding, including the aforementioned South Plains a few weeks ago at the Texas Tech campus:
Flooding in Lubbock impacts driving, walking for students, locals
So yes, it would appear that her Climate Science degree confers great climate predictive powers, as I watch my trash cart float down my flooded Texas street.
CO2 makes the atmosphere warmer. Do you accept that fact?
Warmer air can hold more moisture. Do you accept that fact?
Air that can hold more moisture makes floods and droughts more intense. Do you accept that fact?
Droughts happen and Floods happen. AGW will make both worse because physics.
Due to the fact that negative feedbacks and natural forcings overwhelm the relatively tiny effect of anthropogenic CO2 (1/10,000th of the atmosphere) that you guys are so obsessed with you are making some huge leaps of faith with your unfounded drought/flood predictions. Even the IPCC says as much:
Some aspects of climate appear not to have changed and, for
some, data inadequacies mean that it cannot be determined if they
have changed. Antarctic sea ice extent shows inter-annual variability
and localised changes but no statistically significant average
multi-decadal trend, consistent with the lack of rise in near-surface
atmospheric temperatures averaged across the continent. There is
insufficient evidence to determine whether trends exist in some other
variables, for example the meridional overturning circulation (MOC)
of the global ocean or small-scale phenomena such as tornadoes,
hail, lightning and dust storms. There is no clear trend in the annual
numbers of tropical cyclones.
So I predict your prediction will be wrong just as hayhoe was wrong with her fearmongering catastrophic Texas drought predictions. I can list a few hundred other failed AGW alarmist predictions if you would like.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
??? What negative feedback? There have not been ANY negative feedbacks studied that even come close to offsetting the positive forcing effect of CO2.
Let's try your reading comprehension again.....
- CO2 makes the atmosphere warmer. Do you accept that fact?
- Warmer air can hold more moisture. Do you accept that fact?
- Air that can hold more moisture makes floods and droughts more intense. Do you accept that fact?
If you reject those facts exactly how are they false? How would CO2 NOT increase global heat content? How would warmer air NOT carry more moisture? How would air capable of carrying more moisture NOT result in more intense floods and droughts? It's simple physics.... precipitation is getting more extreme on both ends.
Why are sea levels rising? Why are the oceans warming?
Last edited:
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Yep.... debating AGW deniers is somewhere between debating flat-earthers and people that think lizard people run everything. Just somewhat amusing to see how their cognitive dissonance rationalizes the reality that conflicts with their precious world-view.
In 'Behind the Curve' the flat-earthers actually did several experiments to test their flat-earth nonsense including spending ~$15k on a laser gyroscope. All of which indicated the Earth is a globe... none of them were convinced. Sadly once someone is committed to nonsense it's almost impossible to use facts, evidence or reason to alter their view. You can't use reason to get someone out of a position that reason didn't get them into.....
I think we need to have a bizarro world rating for posts. Not sure what the emoji would look like.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard: ‘Denying climate change is evil’
In his bridge-club cords and grandpa shoes, 80-year-old Yvon Chouinard doesn’t look the rock-star entrepreneur.
And, when he speaks, he doesn’t sound much like one either. The founder of US outdoor apparel brand Patagonia believes stock market valuations are “absurd”, investing in shares is “buying blue sky” – and modern-day capitalism is destroying the planet.
“I’d like to see an end to public corporations because we’re not going to revolutionise them, we’re not going to change them,” the self-confessed reluctant businessman told the Guardian.
In his bridge-club cords and grandpa shoes, 80-year-old Yvon Chouinard doesn’t look the rock-star entrepreneur.
And, when he speaks, he doesn’t sound much like one either. The founder of US outdoor apparel brand Patagonia believes stock market valuations are “absurd”, investing in shares is “buying blue sky” – and modern-day capitalism is destroying the planet.
“I’d like to see an end to public corporations because we’re not going to revolutionise them, we’re not going to change them,” the self-confessed reluctant businessman told the Guardian.
Similar threads
