Now I know why not everyone on the east coast is a snow bird! LOL!
But I will say, we have some super great people here on the forums who live in Florida which just goes to show there are good folks everywhere.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
rr, I have to admit it would not be my first choice to live in FLA but then neither would half the other states in the union so don't feel bad. And beside, you have armadillos! How cool is that!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
rr, I have to admit it would not be my first choice to live in FLA but then neither would half the other states in the union so don't feel bad. And beside, you have armadillos! How cool is that!
Of all the cool creatures in my state you pick the armadillo????haha . Gators,Water Mocassins,20' man eating pythons,Bull sharks,Komodo dragons,Panthers,Crocs,etc none of them do it for Ya huh.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
rr, I have to admit it would not be my first choice to live in FLA but then neither would half the other states in the union so don't feel bad. And beside, you have armadillos! How cool is that!
Of all the cool creatures in my state you pick the armadillo????haha . Gators,Water Mocassins,20' man eating pythons,Bull sharks,Komodo dragons,Panthers,Crocs,etc none of them do it for Ya huh.
Armadillos rock! When I lived in western New York State, I knew a guy who was so crazy about armadillos that (he claimed anyway) he went down to to FLA with some brass armadillos he made and barge cemented them to roads to get even with people who run them over. I'm fairly sure that was a tall tale but, man, that guy loved armadillos!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I find it interesting that global temperatures haven't risen in 18 straight years now....
the great pause, the antartic ice mass is at record mass, and the artic is thriving, with ice sheets at record thickness.....yet this information doesn't achieve the next environmental research grant....
it seems to me that in a time when carbon emissions have never ever been higher than they are now, the great temperature explosion hasn't at all materialised.
They were talking of an ice age coming in the 70's, then ice free polar regions by 2013.....3 degree per century rises, which are presently somewhere around the 0.1% levels if that.
Sub sea level temperatures are at a record low - which seems to dispel the current theory that deals with the 'great temperature pause' in that the ocean is soaking up the carbon raising sea temperatures and accentuating the rise in glacial melting......
Something doesn't seem right in all this, Im no 'warmist' but im also no 'denier'. Im purely someone who likes to look at these things with an open mind and not the sensationalism of the mass media and world powers......
We have a very good idea the world has been warmer than it is now, that cycles are part and parcel of what we have on earth, and that the Vikings called Greenland exactly that when they discovered. why? well it certainly wasn't frozen over.....
natural disasters, floods, tornados etc have actually increased - in fact they have decreased......and all in all, is this a huge overstated con? ive no idea but I find it fascinating to watch it unfold.
Alot pf those records you mention are baloney! Global temps havnt risen in 18 years...false Antarctic ice at record mass...false Artic ice at record mass...false Sea-sea level temps at record low...what does that even mean? That would suggest land temps but you tie it to the oceans??? Which are not at record low,temps by any means.
Alot pf those records you mention are baloney! Global temps havnt risen in 18 years...false Antarctic ice at record mass...false Artic ice at record mass...false Sea-sea level temps at record low...what does that even mean? That would suggest land temps but you tie it to the oceans??? Which are not at record low,temps by any means.
I guess that depends on what we read and what is presented, and how that information is presented, is there an agenda and is there a slant applied?
for example, this could all be bollocks, but still:
Im sure someone else can paint a very different picture. The way in which land mass surface temperatures are infilled is interesting to say the least, especially when there are often massive distances between stations.....
contrasts with a NASA report on deep ocean temperatures from the time when they could monitor this (maybe not at a low but not risen in the ten years of the so called pause - so where is all that carbon going?)
Despite fears that global warming is harming the Arctic region faster than the rest of the world, Greenland is defying climate scientists and currently growing at its fastest rate in four years.
The Danish Meteorological Institute reports that Greenland’s ice sheet has seen more growth so far this year than in the last four years. Greenland’s growth in 2015 is also higher than the mean growth for 1990 to 2011.
Greenland has been a curious case in the global warming debate. On the one hand, scientists and environmentalists have pointed to it as a prime example of a country being impacted by global temperature rises. Greenland is home to the world’s second-largest ice sheet and scientists say it’s melting at an accelerated rate.
But a paper from earlier this year found that only about half the warming impacting Greenland is due to global warming, the other half is due to natural oceanic cycles originating in the tropical Pacific.
“The pattern of the changes in the tropical Pacific that are responsible for remarkable atmospheric circulation changes and warming in Greenland and the Canadian Arctic are consistent with what we would call natural variability,”said David Battisti, co-author of the study and a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington.
On the other hand, Greenlanders themselves have benefited from a shrinking ice sheet as it’s allowed them to access natural resources and lands previously unattainable under heavy ice coverage.
“We simply refuse to go under as a culture because of climate change,” Prime Minister Aleqa Hammond told Reuters in January 2014. “We have to adapt because the ice is disappearing and hunting is no longer the main source of income.”
“But climate change gives us a new chance to survive because our minerals become accessible so we’ll adapt,” Hammond said. “We are one of the very few countries around the world where climate change is giving us benefits.”
Greenland removed a ban on exporting uranium last year, against the wishes of Denmark, as foreign companies become more interested in pulling minerals out of the ground as more areas open up.
But it shouldn’t be too surprising that Greenland has defied dire predictions. The Arctic region as a whole has been more or less stable in recent years, stumping scientists who said it would be ice-free by now.
“The Antarctic is actually growing and all the evidence in the last few months suggests many assumptions about the poles was wrong,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told the U.K. Express.
“Global sea ice is at a record high, another key indicator that something is working in the opposite direction of what was predicted,” Peiser said. “Most people think the poles are melting… they’re not. This is a huge inconvenience that reality is now catching up with climate alarmists, who were predicting that the poles would be melting fairly soon.”
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
I'll read that right now, thanks.
Im not on either side of the fence, but I have a colleague who is a staunch 'denier' and get peppered with these snippets of news and updates and analysis daily from him from a variety of sources he often reads.......I like to engage purely for interesting debate purposes as a 'warmist' as he calls it, to keep the exchange interesting.
to be honest I don't know what to think, but I do know that whatever I do is immaterial when China continue as they are. Obama hailed the recent summit a huge moment when the United states agreed to reduce their footprint substantially by 2030 and in return China agreed to stop increasing their carbon output by the same time. So they can pour out as much as they want for the next 15 years as long as thereafter they stabilise. That is laughable.
I also know that one side of the argument suggests the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for scientists and researchers and not to mention government, and the other side suggests the deniers are funded by the fossil fuels industry.....
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
I'll read that right now, thanks.
Im not on either side of the fence, but I have a colleague who is a staunch 'denier' and get peppered with these snippets of news and updates and analysis daily from him from a variety of sources he often reads.......I like to engage purely for interesting debate purposes as a 'warmist' as he calls it, to keep the exchange interesting.
to be honest I don't know what to think, but I do know that whatever I do is immaterial when China continue as they are. Obama hailed the recent summit a huge moment when the United states agreed to reduce their footprint substantially by 2030 and in return China agreed to stop increasing their carbon output by the same time. So they can pour out as much as they want for the next 15 years as long as thereafter they stabilise. That is laughable.
I also know that one side of the argument suggests the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for scientists and researchers and not to mention government, and the other side suggests the deniers are funded by the fossil fuels industry.....
pd, It's totally understandable that it's difficult to know what to think about climate science when we are bombarded with conflicting reports. To me, the key is to look at where the reports come from. For example, if I want to learn about Native American culture, I could read some books written (with all best intentions I might add) by white guys (and there are a lot of them) or watch a movie like "Dances With Wolves" or I could read some books by American Indians who both know their history as well as what current Native culture is all about- people like Paul Chaat Smith, Vine Deloria or Linda Hogan and check out films like "Smoke Signals" based on (Coeur d'Alene Native American) Sherman Alexie's novel. If I do the later, I'll get a much clearer picture of what that culture is really all about. Same thing with climate which is why I recommend realclimate.org and Union of Concerned Scientists or NRDC.org.
And I have to say, I sincerely wish these people were wrong. Little would make me happier than to be shown undeniable proof that anthropogenic warming is a hoax or that we humans are not irreversibly altering the planet in ways that will make it difficult for my grand nieces and nephews and all kids decades younger than me to get by in this changing world.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
I'll read that right now, thanks.
Im not on either side of the fence, but I have a colleague who is a staunch 'denier' and get peppered with these snippets of news and updates and analysis daily from him from a variety of sources he often reads.......I like to engage purely for interesting debate purposes as a 'warmist' as he calls it, to keep the exchange interesting.
to be honest I don't know what to think, but I do know that whatever I do is immaterial when China continue as they are. Obama hailed the recent summit a huge moment when the United states agreed to reduce their footprint substantially by 2030 and in return China agreed to stop increasing their carbon output by the same time. So they can pour out as much as they want for the next 15 years as long as thereafter they stabilise. That is laughable.
I also know that one side of the argument suggests the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for scientists and researchers and not to mention government, and the other side suggests the deniers are funded by the fossil fuels industry.....
pd, It's totally understandable that it's difficult to know what to think about climate science when we are bombarded with conflicting reports. To me, the key is to look at where the reports come from. For example, if I want to learn about Native American culture, I could read some books written (with all best intentions I might add) by white guys (and there are a lot of them) or watch a movie like "Dances With Wolves" or I could read some books by American Indians who both know their history as well as what current Native culture is all about- people like Paul Chaat Smith, Vine Deloria or Linda Hogan and check out films like "Smoke Signals" based on (Coeur d'Alene Native American) Sherman Alexie's novel. If I do the later, I'll get a much clearer picture of what that culture is really all about. Same thing with climate which is why I recommend realclimate.org and Union of Concerned Scientists or NRDC.org.
And I have to say, I sincerely wish these people were wrong. Little would make me happier than to be shown undeniable proof that anthropogenic warming is a hoax or that we humans are not irreversibly altering the planet in ways that will make it difficult for my grand nieces and nephews and all kids decades younger than me to get by in this changing world.
Brian, Im interested in learning more from you on this. The one thing that clouds my mind is the fact we know the world was warmer in periods before, perhaps through solar activity (who knows), or perhaps through differences in the oscillations of the planet as it circles the sun.......Im guessing of course, however before the mass industrialisation started and the carbon pollution started on a grand scale why was the earth going through warming and cooling periods that are any different to what we are experiencing now? is it just that this is become faster or more dramatic?
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
I'll read that right now, thanks.
Im not on either side of the fence, but I have a colleague who is a staunch 'denier' and get peppered with these snippets of news and updates and analysis daily from him from a variety of sources he often reads.......I like to engage purely for interesting debate purposes as a 'warmist' as he calls it, to keep the exchange interesting.
to be honest I don't know what to think, but I do know that whatever I do is immaterial when China continue as they are. Obama hailed the recent summit a huge moment when the United states agreed to reduce their footprint substantially by 2030 and in return China agreed to stop increasing their carbon output by the same time. So they can pour out as much as they want for the next 15 years as long as thereafter they stabilise. That is laughable.
I also know that one side of the argument suggests the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for scientists and researchers and not to mention government, and the other side suggests the deniers are funded by the fossil fuels industry.....
pd, It's totally understandable that it's difficult to know what to think about climate science when we are bombarded with conflicting reports. To me, the key is to look at where the reports come from. For example, if I want to learn about Native American culture, I could read some books written (with all best intentions I might add) by white guys (and there are a lot of them) or watch a movie like "Dances With Wolves" or I could read some books by American Indians who both know their history as well as what current Native culture is all about- people like Paul Chaat Smith, Vine Deloria or Linda Hogan and check out films like "Smoke Signals" based on (Coeur d'Alene Native American) Sherman Alexie's novel. If I do the later, I'll get a much clearer picture of what that culture is really all about. Same thing with climate which is why I recommend realclimate.org and Union of Concerned Scientists or NRDC.org.
And I have to say, I sincerely wish these people were wrong. Little would make me happier than to be shown undeniable proof that anthropogenic warming is a hoax or that we humans are not irreversibly altering the planet in ways that will make it difficult for my grand nieces and nephews and all kids decades younger than me to get by in this changing world.
Brian, Im interested in learning more from you on this. The one thing that clouds my mind is the fact we know the world was warmer in periods before, perhaps through solar activity (who knows), or perhaps through differences in the oscillations of the planet as it circles the sun.......Im guessing of course, however before the mass industrialisation started and the carbon pollution started on a grand scale why was the earth going through warming and cooling periods that are any different to what we are experiencing now? is it just that this is become faster or more dramatic?
Yes, pd, the earth does go through natural cycles of warming and cooling and those cycles are called Milankovitch cycles. The last warm high point occurred about 8,000 to 10,000 years ago at the peak of the Holocen and the earth has been cooling slightly since then. Also, within those major cycles are minor cycles but the trend overall should be slight cooling. What concerns climate scientists is that due to human emissions of co2 (a result of industrialization, modern farming, automobiles, etc) into the atmosphere (which is also creating what are called "climate feedbacks" that ramp up the warming even more), we are creating an unnatural and accelerated warming and despite a current minor fluctuation that has slowed the warming, we are, overall warming and when the minor fluctuation finishes going through its cycle in a relatively short period of time things are really going to warm up- probably before the end of this century. The situation is likely to get desperate in the next generation or two, maybe earlier. That's why climate scientists are stressing the need to cut our carbon emissions. We're basically cutting our time here short not only from anthropogenic (human caused) climate change but also from resource depletion. Humans consume as much as the earth has to give by some time in August of each year. During the rest of the year we are consuming resources that would otherwise be available to the next generation. Imagine how kids in a generation or two are going to feel about how we are living today. Not good!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I am glad I found a post about the subject right away... haven't been here since long, but in earlier times the subject Climate Change was the one that let me post here most often ... anyway it is also great to see some familiar names still around
so, I spent many years with collecting data about and strengthening my focus on "Global Warming due to Co2 Emissions" and another couple of years with writing my own book about the theme. However, I never found the final link to answer the question how mankind -globally and for now spoken- will find a way out of this tricky dead end road .... But finally I got it - an even better: I got so many more answers to so many various questions! - uhhh: what a book, what a reading!!!
so my very new question is: Has anyone read the new book by Naomi Klein so far - Capitalism vs the Climate? And if so, what do you think about it? It just came out in Germany, so it is discussed in the media here and what is reported is interesting as well! And now I am curious about your opinions...
... to me, this book means alot, almost more then to imagine: after all these years of watching just the happenings and noting them but feeling always too helpless to make a big difference, I hope again! that This changes everything, indeed!
... so happy sunny sunday I wish!
Post edited by breakmarysfall on
there is no way to peace, peace is the way!
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
I am glad I found a post about the subject right away... haven't been here since long, but in earlier times the subject Climate Change was the one that let me post here most often ... anyway it is also great to see some familiar names still around
so, I spent many years with collecting data about and strengthening my focus on "Global Warming due to Co2 Emissions" and another couple of years with writing my own book about the theme. However, I never found the final link to answer the question how mankind -globally and for now spoken- will find a way out of this tricky dead end road .... But finally I got it - an even better: I got so many more answers to so many various questions! - uhhh: what a book, what a reading!!!
so my very new question is: Has anyone read the new book by Naomi Klein so far - Capitalism vs the Climate? And if so, what do you think about it? It just came out in Germany, so it is discussed in the media here and what is reported is interesting as well! And now I am curious about your opinions...
... to me, this book means alot, almost more then to imagine: after all these years of watching just the happenings and noting them but feeling always too helpless to make a big difference, I hope again! that This changes everything, indeed!
... so happy sunny sunday I wish!
I'll definitely give the Kline a read, breakmarysfall. She is brilliant and no doubt has some excellent insights. I've read some reviews and they mostly sound very positive. It sounds similar in ways to Bill McKibbens book, Deep Economy which calls for a change in scaling back economy to a more localized, environmentally friendly way.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Naomi Kline has insight and is smart, but the thing about many books written about the problems we face, is they offer no solution. I've found that those books do nothing for me but bring me down and verify what we are facing. Does her new book offer solutions?
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
Naomi Kline has insight and is smart, but the thing about many books written about the problems we face, is they offer no solution. I've found that those books do nothing for me but bring me down and verify what we are facing. Does her new book offer solutions?
Good question and I hope it does. (Do you find that so, breakmarysfall?) That's one of the reasons I like McKibben's work. His first book was The End of Nature and though in many ways it was ground breaking, it provided little in the form of solutions. As his work has progressed, he has become much more solution oriented even in spite of the conditions he talks about having grown worse. I completely agree with the notion that without finding ways to move forward, information on environmental degradation is just so much much depression inducing fodder.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
thank you for your replies and questions... that is great! I haven't finished the book yet, but almost - reading the last part 3 now -
But already now I am able to answer your question, dear brianlux: yes, she does offer solutions - that is why I am so excited about it
And she does it very smart: it is not a "To Do list" with an "I know better" attitude but kind of short mentioned recommendations in a global related view on things... The first chapter "Bad Timing" explains how we got to the point we are now... 25 years of knowing about the dangers of Global Warming but no emissions cut back or changes in our economic system... She gives a detailed overview about our past since the industrialization and funnily she also draws the line to the happenings in Germany 1989, and the end of cold war... before the fall of the Berlin wall took place the subject of Climate Change was on the priority list of Western nations and lead to the Kyoto protocol. However, due to the breaking apart of the Soviet Union the focus of our politicians became globally and the new markets were too much of an opportunity so the arising problems of climate change were put aside and further ignored... The first chapter also explains the huge power of oil, coal and gas industries grown especially during the free market rules and trading contracts also made in the 80ies by Thatcher and Reagan and draws the line also to all the efforts made by Media and politics since the 90ies to manipulate the thinking of the public regarding this subject. Here she offers already solutions how to get valid Information and how to get out of the way of "manipulated Information transfer" ... Also in the first part she gives real advices how we could manage to gain the goal of only a 2 degree of warming up, like for example: de-centralizing energy supply based on alternative energy forms; non privatization of public goods like water supply ect.; agro ecology as the new way of farming; concentration of our knowledge on widen out the alternative energy supply that is already existing and working just well instead of searching for new, fancy ways - like dimming the sun by geo-engineering or building a community on Mars!
In the second part - Magical thinking - she draws the lines to our culture: thinking humankind is obliged to force down and explore "mother" earth because we are God alike and, hence, we have all the rights to do so... it is our culture belief since approximately 2000-3000 years!!! She recommends to think about ourselves again as being just a part of the huge living system instead of acting like the master of it all! - History has proven that our intellect and the way we treat earth is not always smart and helpful but we still think we are infallible so there is a shift of belief needed, by all of us ... we first need to learn to feel connected with earth and all living again and show respect to our own and only living ground.
the last chapter - starting anyway - then offers an insight about the ongoing Blockadia attitude in many regions of the world, like in Greece due to the Skouries mining, in the US and Canada due to Keystone XL project, and so on... so she draws the line that in many regions the population and inhabitants are already against further exploitation and risky oil/ gas Drilling methods and they go on the streets and demonstrate ... so there is some sort of Evolution already on the way...
and the rest I need to read - and as I read it in English it takes a bit longer than usual... but I will keep you updated about the last chapter and in case there are further questions, please feel free to ask them here
However Above all, she ask for a re-design of the Capitalist Mantra: ongoing growth as the salvation for all of us... steady growth is NOT possible if the resources are limited!!! It is just a matter of logic
and on a side note: Naomi Klein often draws the attention to Germany and the "Energiewende". And as I live here, I can confirm that all she has written about this Country is true!!! Just a few weeks ago I've attended a public reading in which officials explained, that already by NOW we could manage energy supply by 100 % through wind and sun and biogas during the summer months (June till August) and it is only a few years ahead (2025) till we could deliver 60%-80% of our yearly energy need by alternative sources. However, also in Germany the coal and car Lobby is very big and has a huge influence on politicians so we deny these numbers and built new coal mines instead - especially due to the SPD party on duty as their main voters are industrial workers and further more: coal miners!!! So at the end of the day we could change things if we change a bit our political and economic System - not like communism - no no no, that is NOT the Intention, but focusing on the subject as our biggest problem of these times, and hence, get rid of the huge lobby influence, the free market rules and the intense oil power. Instead there is the need to make at least some sort of regulation for Co2 emissions for real through taxes, detailed numbers on allowed emissions, a real trade System for Co2 emissions, a sharing of the knowledge of solar and wind endergy to poor/ 3rd world countries - out of market rules - not selling these Technologies for the best price but sharing them to solve the global problem...
- to sum up: we already have the means and the technology to make a shift possible. With our current knowledge and technoglogy we could gain the goal that was set in Copenhagen. But is there also the will to do so? - and this book tries to wake up this WILL! uhhh it is really a great book, so well written and really helpful to see the Problem in a new light and as a big Chance for an evolution towards a more peaceful world!!!
so I hope I could answer your questions properly ... even with my lack of proper English skills
Post edited by breakmarysfall on
there is no way to peace, peace is the way!
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
Thanks for the nicely detailed reply, breakmarysfall. I have to run but will read thoroughly later today.
bsL, as for choosing a McKibben, I'd have a hard time choosing between Deep Economy and Eaarth, but if I were to suggest only one, probably the latter. After reading a book, I write a mini reviews on an index card and at the top of the Eaarth card I wrote "Essential!"
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Comments
But I will say, we have some super great people here on the forums who live in Florida which just goes to show there are good folks everywhere.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Gators,Water Mocassins,20' man eating pythons,Bull sharks,Komodo dragons,Panthers,Crocs,etc none of them do it for Ya huh.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
the great pause, the antartic ice mass is at record mass, and the artic is thriving, with ice sheets at record thickness.....yet this information doesn't achieve the next environmental research grant....
it seems to me that in a time when carbon emissions have never ever been higher than they are now, the great temperature explosion hasn't at all materialised.
They were talking of an ice age coming in the 70's, then ice free polar regions by 2013.....3 degree per century rises, which are presently somewhere around the 0.1% levels if that.
Sub sea level temperatures are at a record low - which seems to dispel the current theory that deals with the 'great temperature pause' in that the ocean is soaking up the carbon raising sea temperatures and accentuating the rise in glacial melting......
Something doesn't seem right in all this, Im no 'warmist' but im also no 'denier'. Im purely someone who likes to look at these things with an open mind and not the sensationalism of the mass media and world powers......
We have a very good idea the world has been warmer than it is now, that cycles are part and parcel of what we have on earth, and that the Vikings called Greenland exactly that when they discovered. why? well it certainly wasn't frozen over.....
natural disasters, floods, tornados etc have actually increased - in fact they have decreased......and all in all, is this a huge overstated con? ive no idea but I find it fascinating to watch it unfold.
Global temps havnt risen in 18 years...false
Antarctic ice at record mass...false
Artic ice at record mass...false
Sea-sea level temps at record low...what does that even mean? That would suggest land temps but you tie it to the oceans??? Which are not at record low,temps by any means.
for example, this could all be bollocks, but still:
http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/01/03/the-great-pause-lengthens-again-global-temperature-update-the-pause-is-now-18-years-3-months/
Im sure someone else can paint a very different picture. The way in which land mass surface temperatures are infilled is interesting to say the least, especially when there are often massive distances between stations.....
contrasts with a NASA report on deep ocean temperatures from the time when they could monitor this (maybe not at a low but not risen in the ten years of the so called pause - so where is all that carbon going?)
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/10/nasa-the-deep-ocean-hasnt-warmed-since-2005/
Date: 16/01/15
Michael Bastasch, The Daily Caller
Despite fears that global warming is harming the Arctic region faster
than the rest of the world, Greenland is defying climate scientists
and currently growing at its fastest rate in four years.
The Danish Meteorological Institute reports that Greenland’s ice sheet
has seen more growth so far this year than in the last four years.
Greenland’s growth in 2015 is also higher than the mean growth for
1990 to 2011.
Greenland has been a curious case in the global warming debate. On the
one hand, scientists and environmentalists have pointed to it as a
prime example of a country being impacted by global temperature rises.
Greenland is home to the world’s second-largest ice sheet and
scientists say it’s melting at an accelerated rate.
But a paper from earlier this year found that only about half the
warming impacting Greenland is due to global warming, the other half
is due to natural oceanic cycles originating in the tropical Pacific.
“The pattern of the changes in the tropical Pacific that are
responsible for remarkable atmospheric circulation changes and warming
in Greenland and the Canadian Arctic are consistent with what we would
call natural variability,”said David Battisti, co-author of the study
and a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of
Washington.
On the other hand, Greenlanders themselves have benefited from a
shrinking ice sheet as it’s allowed them to access natural resources
and lands previously unattainable under heavy ice coverage.
“We simply refuse to go under as a culture because of climate change,”
Prime Minister Aleqa Hammond told Reuters in January 2014. “We have
to adapt because the ice is disappearing and hunting is no longer the
main source of income.”
“But climate change gives us a new chance to survive because our
minerals become accessible so we’ll adapt,” Hammond said. “We are one
of the very few countries around the world where climate change is
giving us benefits.”
Greenland removed a ban on exporting uranium last year, against the
wishes of Denmark, as foreign companies become more interested in
pulling minerals out of the ground as more areas open up.
But it shouldn’t be too surprising that Greenland has defied dire
predictions. The Arctic region as a whole has been more or less stable
in recent years, stumping scientists who said it would be ice-free by
now.
“The Antarctic is actually growing and all the evidence in the last
few months suggests many assumptions about the poles was wrong,” Dr.
Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told the
U.K. Express.
“Global sea ice is at a record high, another key indicator that
something is working in the opposite direction of what was predicted,”
Peiser said. “Most people think the poles are melting… they’re not.
This is a huge inconvenience that reality is now catching up with
climate alarmists, who were predicting that the poles would be melting
fairly soon.”
http://www.thegwpf.com/antarctic-sea-ice-hits-new-record-high/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/08/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/climate-oscillations-and-the-global-warming-faux-pause/
It amazes me to what ends some skeptics go to attempt to deny global warming when the vast majority of scientists now know otherwise. Those "scientists" who say it is not happening... look at who is paying them and why.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
This looks pretty good.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/08/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/ I'll read that right now, thanks.
Im not on either side of the fence, but I have a colleague who is a staunch 'denier' and get peppered with these snippets of news and updates and analysis daily from him from a variety of sources he often reads.......I like to engage purely for interesting debate purposes as a 'warmist' as he calls it, to keep the exchange interesting.
to be honest I don't know what to think, but I do know that whatever I do is immaterial when China continue as they are. Obama hailed the recent summit a huge moment when the United states agreed to reduce their footprint substantially by 2030 and in return China agreed to stop increasing their carbon output by the same time. So they can pour out as much as they want for the next 15 years as long as thereafter they stabilise. That is laughable.
I also know that one side of the argument suggests the climate change movement is a huge money spinner for scientists and researchers and not to mention government, and the other side suggests the deniers are funded by the fossil fuels industry.....
And I have to say, I sincerely wish these people were wrong. Little would make me happier than to be shown undeniable proof that anthropogenic warming is a hoax or that we humans are not irreversibly altering the planet in ways that will make it difficult for my grand nieces and nephews and all kids decades younger than me to get by in this changing world.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
so, I spent many years with collecting data about and strengthening my focus on
"Global Warming due to Co2 Emissions" and another couple of years with writing my own book about the theme. However, I never found the final link to answer the question how mankind -globally and for now spoken- will find a way out of this tricky dead end road ....
But finally I got it
- uhhh: what a book, what a reading!!!
so my very new question is:
Has anyone read the new book by Naomi Klein so far - Capitalism vs the Climate? And if so, what do you think about it?
It just came out in Germany, so it is discussed in the media here and what is reported is interesting as well! And now I am curious about your opinions...
... to me, this book means alot, almost more then to imagine:
after all these years of watching just the happenings and noting them but feeling always too helpless to make a big difference, I hope again!
... so happy sunny sunday I wish!
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I haven't finished the book yet, but almost - reading the last part 3 now -
But already now I am able to answer your question, dear brianlux:
yes, she does offer solutions - that is why I am so excited about it
And she does it very smart: it is not a "To Do list" with an "I know better" attitude but kind of short mentioned recommendations in a global related view on things...
The first chapter "Bad Timing" explains how we got to the point we are now... 25 years of knowing about the dangers of Global Warming but no emissions cut back or changes in our economic system...
She gives a detailed overview about our past since the industrialization and funnily she also draws the line to the happenings in Germany 1989, and the end of cold war... before the fall of the Berlin wall took place the subject of Climate Change was on the priority list of Western nations and lead to the Kyoto protocol. However, due to the breaking apart of the Soviet Union the focus of our politicians became globally and the new markets were too much of an opportunity so the arising problems of climate change were put aside and further ignored...
The first chapter also explains the huge power of oil, coal and gas industries grown especially during the free market rules and trading contracts also made in the 80ies by Thatcher and Reagan and draws the line also to all the efforts made by Media and politics since the 90ies to manipulate the thinking of the public regarding this subject.
Here she offers already solutions how to get valid Information and how to get out of the way of "manipulated Information transfer" ...
Also in the first part she gives real advices how we could manage to gain the goal of only a 2 degree of warming up, like for example:
de-centralizing energy supply based on alternative energy forms; non privatization of public goods like water supply ect.; agro ecology as the new way of farming; concentration of our knowledge on widen out the alternative energy supply that is already existing and working just well instead of searching for new, fancy ways - like dimming the sun by geo-engineering or building a community on Mars!
In the second part - Magical thinking - she draws the lines to our culture: thinking humankind is obliged to force down and explore "mother" earth because we are God alike and, hence, we have all the rights to do so... it is our culture belief since approximately 2000-3000 years!!!
She recommends to think about ourselves again as being just a part of the huge living system instead of acting like the master of it all! - History has proven that our intellect and the way we treat earth is not always smart and helpful but we still think we are infallible
so there is a shift of belief needed, by all of us ... we first need to learn to feel connected with earth and all living again and show respect to our own and only living ground.
the last chapter - starting anyway - then offers an insight about the ongoing Blockadia attitude in many regions of the world, like in Greece due to the Skouries mining, in the US and Canada due to Keystone XL project, and so on...
so she draws the line that in many regions the population and inhabitants are already against further exploitation and risky oil/ gas Drilling methods and they go on the streets and demonstrate ... so there is some sort of Evolution already on the way...
and the rest I need to read - and as I read it in English it takes a bit longer than usual... but I will keep you updated about the last chapter and in case there are further questions, please feel free to ask them here
However
Above all, she ask for a re-design of the Capitalist Mantra: ongoing growth as the salvation for all of us... steady growth is NOT possible if the resources are limited!!! It is just a matter of logic
and on a side note: Naomi Klein often draws the attention to Germany and the "Energiewende". And as I live here, I can confirm that all she has written about this Country is true!!!
Just a few weeks ago I've attended a public reading in which officials explained, that already by NOW we could manage energy supply by 100 % through wind and sun and biogas during the summer months (June till August) and it is only a few years ahead (2025) till we could deliver 60%-80% of our yearly energy need by alternative sources.
However, also in Germany the coal and car Lobby is very big and has a huge influence on politicians so we deny these numbers and built new coal mines instead - especially due to the SPD party on duty as their main voters are industrial workers and further more: coal miners!!!
So at the end of the day we could change things if we change a bit our political and economic System - not like communism - no no no, that is NOT the Intention, but focusing on the subject as our biggest problem of these times, and hence, get rid of the huge lobby influence, the free market rules and the intense oil power. Instead there is the need to make at least some sort of regulation for Co2 emissions for real through taxes, detailed numbers on allowed emissions, a real trade System for Co2 emissions, a sharing of the knowledge of solar and wind endergy to poor/ 3rd world countries - out of market rules - not selling these Technologies for the best price but sharing them to solve the global problem...
- to sum up: we already have the means and the technology to make a shift possible. With our current knowledge and technoglogy we could gain the goal that was set in Copenhagen.
But is there also the will to do so? -
and this book tries to wake up this WILL! uhhh it is really a great book, so well written and really helpful to see the Problem in a new light and as a big Chance for an evolution towards a more peaceful world!!!
so I hope I could answer your questions properly ... even with my lack of proper English skills
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
bsL, as for choosing a McKibben, I'd have a hard time choosing between Deep Economy and Eaarth, but if I were to suggest only one, probably the latter. After reading a book, I write a mini reviews on an index card and at the top of the Eaarth card I wrote "Essential!"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"