Best way to fight climate change is to stop talking about it

brianlux

Jeanwah wrote:

So, maybe we should talk about CO2 levels?

http://researchmatters.noaa.gov/news/Pa ... 00ppm.aspx

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sci ... 6126.story

...For the previous 800,000 years, CO2 levels never exceeded 300 ppm, and there is no known geologic period in which rates of increase have been so sharp. The level was about 280 ppm at the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, when the burning of fossil fuels began to soar.

"I wish it weren't true, but it looks like the world is going to blow through the 400-ppm level without losing a beat," said Scripps geochemist Ralph Keeling, who has taken over the Keeling curve measurement from his late father. "At this pace we'll hit 450 ppm within a few decades."

The saw-tooth pattern of the incline reflects small seasonal variations within the long-term upward trend. Generally, the micro-peak in the curve comes in May.

"The 400-ppm threshold is a sobering milestone and should serve as a wake-up call for all of us to support clean-energy technology and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases before it's too late for our children and grandchildren," said Tim Lueker, an oceanographer and carbon cycle researcher who is a longtime member of the Scripps CO2 Group.

I just received a message yesterday from 350.org about co2 levels hitting 400 ppm and was too depressed about it to say anything, but I'm glad you did, Jeanwah. It's something we need to face... and hopefully start doing something about. Please, everybody, we're all part of the cause but we can all help be part of the solution.

STAYSEA

Jeanwah wrote:

So, maybe we should talk about CO2 levels?

http://researchmatters.noaa.gov/news/Pa ... 00ppm.aspx

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sci ... 6126.story

...For the previous 800,000 years, CO2 levels never exceeded 300 ppm, and there is no known geologic period in which rates of increase have been so sharp. The level was about 280 ppm at the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, when the burning of fossil fuels began to soar.

"I wish it weren't true, but it looks like the world is going to blow through the 400-ppm level without losing a beat," said Scripps geochemist Ralph Keeling, who has taken over the Keeling curve measurement from his late father. "At this pace we'll hit 450 ppm within a few decades."

The saw-tooth pattern of the incline reflects small seasonal variations within the long-term upward trend. Generally, the micro-peak in the curve comes in May.

"The 400-ppm threshold is a sobering milestone and should serve as a wake-up call for all of us to support clean-energy technology and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases before it's too late for our children and grandchildren," said Tim Lueker, an oceanographer and carbon cycle researcher who is a longtime member of the Scripps CO2 Group.

WE? I did Jeanwah? page 1...

No one read it, I suppose.


http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/show ... p?t=920726

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-205_162-4651448.html




http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

No one reads graphs anymore. sigh.

Jeanwah

brianlux wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

So, maybe we should talk about CO2 levels?

http://researchmatters.noaa.gov/news/Pa ... 00ppm.aspx

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sci ... 6126.story

...For the previous 800,000 years, CO2 levels never exceeded 300 ppm, and there is no known geologic period in which rates of increase have been so sharp. The level was about 280 ppm at the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, when the burning of fossil fuels began to soar.

"I wish it weren't true, but it looks like the world is going to blow through the 400-ppm level without losing a beat," said Scripps geochemist Ralph Keeling, who has taken over the Keeling curve measurement from his late father. "At this pace we'll hit 450 ppm within a few decades."

The saw-tooth pattern of the incline reflects small seasonal variations within the long-term upward trend. Generally, the micro-peak in the curve comes in May.

"The 400-ppm threshold is a sobering milestone and should serve as a wake-up call for all of us to support clean-energy technology and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases before it's too late for our children and grandchildren," said Tim Lueker, an oceanographer and carbon cycle researcher who is a longtime member of the Scripps CO2 Group.

I just received a message yesterday from 350.org about co2 levels hitting 400 ppm and was too depressed about it to say anything, but I'm glad you did, Jeanwah. It's something we need to face... and hopefully start doing something about. Please, everybody, we're all part of the cause but we can all help be part of the solution.

Don't be upset Brian. Although as individuals we can make positive impact, without global leadership participation... Sigh.

I see that Fox News has not reported this scientific story...

Jeanwah

STAYSEA wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

So, maybe we should talk about CO2 levels?

http://researchmatters.noaa.gov/news/Pa ... 00ppm.aspx

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sci ... 6126.story

...For the previous 800,000 years, CO2 levels never exceeded 300 ppm, and there is no known geologic period in which rates of increase have been so sharp. The level was about 280 ppm at the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century, when the burning of fossil fuels began to soar.

"I wish it weren't true, but it looks like the world is going to blow through the 400-ppm level without losing a beat," said Scripps geochemist Ralph Keeling, who has taken over the Keeling curve measurement from his late father. "At this pace we'll hit 450 ppm within a few decades."

The saw-tooth pattern of the incline reflects small seasonal variations within the long-term upward trend. Generally, the micro-peak in the curve comes in May.

"The 400-ppm threshold is a sobering milestone and should serve as a wake-up call for all of us to support clean-energy technology and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases before it's too late for our children and grandchildren," said Tim Lueker, an oceanographer and carbon cycle researcher who is a longtime member of the Scripps CO2 Group.

WE? I did Jeanwah? page 1...

No one read it, I suppose.


http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/show ... p?t=920726

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-205_162-4651448.html




http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

No one reads graphs anymore. sigh.

Perhaps you should read up on the latest scientific info about CO2...

brianlux

Here are some good articles that fairly well sums up the situation. At this point, the evidence shows that we have a major problem on our hands that needs to be dealt with and that this problem is human caused. This is incontrovertible. Yes, I'll say that again: this is incontrovertible. The evidence is overwhelming and the vast majority of published scientists world wide agree.

Let's get busy and start doing something. Everybody can help. I will reduce my driving this week by cancelling a book scouting trip- bad for business, good for the planet. Every little bit helps!

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/10/us/climat ... index.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... hange.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/scien ... d=all&_r=0

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/d ... -1.1341281

STAYSEA

Jeanwah wrote:

Perhaps you should read up on the latest scientific info about CO2...

I don't need to Jeanwah. I don't have a crystal ball but I know what's happening.

In 2001 or 2002 I did a road trip. I flew from Houston, Texas to Reno, Nevada. I drove all around the Grand Canyon and then all the way to the west coast.

I drove up the Wine Valley, and admired the ocean coastline.

We stopped at some tree place?

Redwood National & State Parks (RNSP) in Humboldt County, CA, home of the world's tallest trees.

Nearly half of the remaining old growth redwoods are in this park system, including giants five stories taller than the Statue of Liberty. They can live to be 2000 years old and grow to over 360 feet tall.

Redwood National and State Parks is located in northern Humboldt County and throughout the coast of neighboring Del Norte County. Hwy 101 takes you to all the parks in this area (Jedediah Smith Redwoods is just a few miles east on Highway 199). The central region of the parks near Prairie Creek Redwoods is only 45 minutes north of Eureka.

Then I saw the Seqouias...

The Giant Forest of Sequoia National Park is hub and home for Sequoiadendron giganteum – giant sequoia trees.

"Named in 1875 by John Muir, The Giant Forest is a stand of more than 8,000 colossal sequoia specimens – many still standing as Muir found them. The largest of them all, the General Sherman Tree, is around 2,100 years old and weighs approximately 2.7 million pounds. It stands almost 275 feet tall and has a trunk more than 100 feet wide King of the forest, General Sherman is considered not only the largest living tree in the world, but the largest living organism on the planet by volume. "

We had planned to spend an afternoon, and we ended up spending two full days. Those Trees are still the best thing I have ever experienced. I have never been able to breathe that easy. I was high off of the oxygen they produced. It was so intoxicating. No one wanted to leave.

It's the most beautiful example of a CO2 cycle I can explain. I ended up in Redding in the end. that was a nightmare.

I bought a tree to plant when I made it back home. I knew it wouldn't live in my climate. I tried anyway.
Those trees, I visited, have more wisdom and are older than anything I know. I didn't know peace until I was in that park. Those Trees will be alive long after I'm gone... Sucking all the carbon dioxide they can, and giving the sweetest air in return. It's sad they can't live everywhere.

It's Evolution?

STAYSEA

brianlux wrote:

Here are some good articles that fairly well sums up the situation. At this point, the evidence shows that we have a major problem on our hands that needs to be dealt with and that this problem is human caused. This is incontrovertible. Yes, I'll say that again: this is incontrovertible. The evidence is overwhelming and the vast majority of published scientists world wide agree.

Let's get busy and start doing something. Everybody can help. I will reduce my driving this week by cancelling a book scouting trip- bad for business, good for the planet. Every little bit helps!

I'll stop making Whip Cream at my job. We use co2 chargers.... nope. I'll get fired and customers need whip cream on beverages. The world needs BOOKS. I'll sacrifice and carpool if that will cancel out your book scout trip. Don't stop scouting the Books... that's when stupid breeds. DRIVE!!!

Jeanwah

STAYSEA wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Perhaps you should read up on the latest scientific info about CO2...

I don't need to Jeanwah. I don't have a crystal ball but I know what's happening.

Uh-huh. Seriously, the links I posted as well as the links Brian posted...

Byrnzie

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... ans-causes


Climate research nearly unanimous on human causes, survey finds

Of more than 4,000 academic papers published over 20 years, 97.1% agreed that climate change is anthropogenic


Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 May 2013


A survey of thousands of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals has found 97.1% agreed that climate change is caused by human activity.

Authors of the survey, published on Thursday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, said the finding of near unanimity provided a powerful rebuttal to climate contrarians who insist the science of climate change remains unsettled.

The survey considered the work of some 29,000 scientists published in 11,994 academic papers. Of the 4,000-plus papers that took a position on the causes of climate change only 0.7% or 83 of those thousands of academic articles, disputed the scientific consensus that climate change is the result of human activity, with the view of the remaining 2.2% unclear.

The study described the dissent as a "vanishingly small proportion" of published research.

"Our findings prove that there is a strong scientific agreement about the cause of climate change, despite public perceptions to the contrary," said John Cook of the University of Queensland, who led the survey.

Public opinion continues to lag behind the science. Though a majority of Americans accept the climate is changing, just 42% believed human activity was the main driver, in a poll conducted by the Pew Research Centre last October.

"There is a gaping chasm between the actual consensus and the public perception," Cook said in a statement.

The study blamed strenuous lobbying efforts by industry to undermine the science behind climate change for the gap in perception. The resulting confusion has blocked efforts to act on climate change...'