Author Topic: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️ (Read 118766 times)

AGelbert · « **Reply #495 on:** March 23, 2016, 07:20:37 pm »

Global Warming’s Terrifying New Chemistry

Our leaders thought fracking would save our climate. They were wrong. Very wrong.
By Bill McKibben

SNIPPET:

Quote

Howarth and Ingraffea began producing a series of papers claiming that if even a small percentage of the methane leaked—maybe as little as 3 percent—then fracked gas would do more climate damage than coal. And their preliminary data showed that leak rates could be at least that high: that somewhere between 3.6 and 7.9 percent of methane gas from shale-drilling operations actually escapes into the atmosphere.

To say that no one in power wanted to hear this would be an understatement . The two scientists were roundly attacked by the industry; one trade group called their study the “Ivory Tower’s latest fact-free assault on shale gas exploration.” Most of the energy establishment joined in. An MIT team, for instance, had just finished an industry-funded report that found “the environmental impacts of shale development are challenging but manageable” ; one of its lead authors, the ur-establishment energy expert Henry Jacoby , described the Cornell research as “very weak.” One of its other authors, Ernest Moniz , would soon become the US secretary of energy; in his nomination hearings in 2013, he lauded the “stunning increase” in natural gas as a “revolution” and pledged to increase its use domestically.

The trouble for the fracking establishment was that new research kept backing up Howarth and Ingraffea. In January 2013, for instance, aerial overflights of fracking basins in Utah found leak rates as high as 9 percent. “We were expecting to see high methane levels, but I don’t think anybody really comprehended the true magnitude of what we would see,” said the study’s director. But such work was always piecemeal, one area at a time, while other studies—often conducted with industry-supplied data—came up with lower numbers.

* * *

That’s why last month’s Harvard study came as such a shock. It used satellite data from across the country over a span of more than a decade to demonstrate that US methane emissions had spiked 30 percent since 2002.

The EPA had been insisting throughout that period that methane emissions were actually falling, but it was clearly wrong—on a massive scale. In fact, emissions “are substantially higher than we’ve understood,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy admitted in early March.

The Harvard study wasn’t designed to show why US methane emissions were growing—in other parts of the world, as new research makes clear, cattle and wetlands seem to be causing emissions to accelerate. But the spike that the satellites recorded coincided almost perfectly with the era when fracking went big-time.

To make matters worse, during the same decade, experts had become steadily more worried about the effects of methane in any quantity on the atmosphere.

Everyone agrees that, molecule for molecule, methane traps far more heat than CO2—but exactly how much wasn’t clear. One reason the EPA estimates of America’s greenhouse-gas emissions showed such improvement was because the agency, following standard procedures, was assigning a low value to methane and measuring its impact over a 100-year period. But a methane molecule lasts only a couple of decades in the air, compared with centuries for CO2. That’s good news, in that methane’s effects are transient—and very bad news because that transient but intense effect happens right now, when we’re breaking the back of the planet’s climate.

The EPA’s old chemistry and 100-year time frame assigned methane a heating value of 28 to 36 times that of carbon dioxide; a more accurate figure, says Howarth, is between 86 and 105 times the potency of CO2 over the next decade or two.

If you combine Howarth’s estimates of leakage rates and the new standard values for the heat-trapping potential of methane, then the picture of America’s total greenhouse-gas emissions over the last 15 years looks very different: Instead of peaking in 2007 and then trending downward, as the EPA has maintained, our combined emissions of methane and carbon dioxide have gone steadily and sharply up during the Obama years, Howarth says.

We closed coal plants and opened methane leaks, and the result is that things have gotten worse.

Full article with irrefutable hard scientific data (that the liars and crooks working for the fossil fuel industry will, of course, rush to try to deny with mendacious propaganda

).

http://www.thenation.com/article/global-warming-terrifying-new-chemistry/

Please pass this on . These dirty stinking fossil fuel industry crooks, their front men in government, their bought and paid for scientists and their propagandist scum need to be held accountable for degrading our biosphere AND our democracy.

AGelbert · « **Reply #496 on:** March 23, 2016, 09:08:19 pm »

Whistling by the graveyard of climate change

Mar. 22, 2016, 6:55 pm by Dan Jones

Editor’s note: This commentary is by Dan Jones, who is a managing partner in Net Zero Vermont and a former chair of the Montpelier Energy Advisory Committee.

A friend of mine says a lot of Vermonters are about to get a rude awakening over the next couple of weeks as the traditional sugaring season disappoints. Maybe you and your friends are sugar makers. Does the bare ground bush you are tapping look anything like a normal March? More like mid April, I’d say. How soon before the bud gets into the sap? Regular winters like this could ruin the maple sugar industry. Other friends wonder how the businesses people who depend on winter tourism could survive another snow-bare winter. By mid-December, only eight of Vermont’s 20 alpine downhill skiing resorts and two of its 30 nordic cross-country resorts had opened. On Christmas Eve, the temperature in Montpelier was 68 degrees.

I hear activists and climate scientists ringing the warning bells, but who else is doing so? Everywhere I turn, there are people who don’t want to think about our changing climate. Some people whistle by the graveyard proclaiming that this warm winter is simply a one-time event created by a strong El Nino. They seem to have not noticed that the warmest ever winter we’ve just witnessed was simply following a growing trend of warmest-ever summers, springs and fall seasons.

If I try to talk about rational responses to our challenging future these folks perform the psychic equivalent of covering their ears because they don’t want to be “bummed out by my negative thinking.” They aren’t prepared to face the overwhelming challenges of rapid climate change, which will include increased storm wreckage of our fragile infrastructure and pervasive economic disruption.

It’s time to start making painful choices if we want to develop a Vermont that is going to allow our children, and theirs, to survive and prosper in a globally warmed world.

It turns out that there’s a psychological condition that explains this refusal to deal with the consequences any looming emergency such as global warming: it’s called “normalcy bias.” According to Wikipedia, normalcy bias is a mental state that people enter when facing a catastrophe: “It causes people to underestimate both the possibility of a disaster and its possible effects. This may result in situations where people fail to adequately prepare and, on a larger scale, the failure of governments to include the populace in its disaster preparations.” We think that because a disaster has never occurred, that it won’t; and when one does occur, we fail to react appropriately.

My wife is also curious about this bias. She is a writer who is currently collaborating on a book about stopping epidemics. A big question in the book is: Why can’t people and governments take measures to control the threats of a pandemic before it becomes a disaster? Medical science knows what to do with these challenges, but politicians refuse to act; just look at the painful history of the Reagan and Bush administrations’ criminal refusals to deal with the exploding national and international AIDS crisis.

I seriously believe we are facing a worse and more pervasive emergency in global warming

.

Vermont’s collective response to this crisis is going to require a lot more adaptation than we are comfortable accepting at the moment. Only a couple of years ago, I remember seeing a maps that showed how Vermont would have a climate like North Carolina by the end of this century. The winter we just passed winter in Vermont looked more like what’s normal in West Virginia. According to a new Australian study just published, we could find ourselves in a North Carolina climate by the end of this decade. A few more of such winters will wreak havoc on our state’s economics and pastoral lifestyle. Moreover, as the South and West get hotter and dryer, people will start to move north en masse. We don’t have the housing or infrastructure to support waves of climate refugees, and we don’t even want to discuss this possibility.

It’s time to overcome our normalcy bias and start looking ahead to a more challenging tomorrow. I find it unimaginable after all the climate change challenges of the past few years such as Irene, Sandy and this winter, we can’t understand that tomorrow will no longer look like yesterday. It’s time to start making painful choices if we want to develop a Vermont that is going to allow our children, and theirs, to survive and prosper in a globally warmed world.

If we were rational, we would immediately pass a carbon tax for both heating fuel and gas of about $100 per ton of CO2. We need this tax, and neither because instituting it would be a virtuous model for other states, nor would it help stop the warming. We need the money to immediately invest in our infrastructure and our efficiency so we will be prepared to meet momentous new demands looming in front of us. Along with that, our state and institutions must immediately shift away from investment in fossil fuel stocks because the more coal and oil we dig out of the ground, the more destruction we’ll sow and reap. As the damage becomes clearer, the return on these investments will plummet. Such fossil fuel disinvestment will allow us to preserve that capital as the real cost of carbon pollution becomes obvious to everyone.

Global warming is not happening in the future; it’s happening now, all around us. A couple of generations ago, Vermonters had no problem with sacrificing today to build a better tomorrow for their children. We need to remember those value of sacrifice and frugality, before our children curse our names because we failed to believe a crisis was upon us before it was too late.

http://vtdigger.org/2016/03/22/dan-jones-whistling-by-the-graveyard-of-climate-change/

AGelbert · « **Reply #497 on:** March 24, 2016, 03:21:30 pm »

03/23/2016 03:10 PM

Mass Protests In April, May in US and Around the World

SustainableBusiness.com News

This spring, huge rallies and protests are planned around the world against fossil fuels and to restore Democracy in the US.

On April 16-18, Democracy Awakening takes place in Washington DC.

We can't protect the environment without democracy, and environmental groups are joining with activists across the social spectrum to preserve our voice, such as labor, students and civil rights advocates.

"Corporate interests are holding our democracy hostage

. Voter suppression is running rampant

, fossil fuel money is warping our electoral process and now

, leaders in Congress are even blocking fair consideration of a Supreme Court nominee

," says Rachel Rye Butler of Greenpeace.

Democracy Awakening is about:

•Restoring Voting rights by stopping voter suppression.

This is the first presidential election where state voter suppression laws are in force, making it much harder for students, minorities and older people to vote.

In Texas, for example, a special state-issued ID is required to vote, a drivers license or a student ID won't work. In North Carolina and Wisconsin, university students can't vote if their families live elsewhere, and so many campus voting places have been eliminated that it can take hours to even find a place to vote.

•Getting Money Out of politics through campaign finance reform, transparency and overturning Citizens United

Without fossil fuel interests knocking on every Congressperson's door, a renewable energy economy is within our reach, for example.

They are calling for:

•Voting Rights Advancement Act: to restore and increase protection against voting discrimination.

•Voter Empowerment Act: to modernize voter registration and ensure equal access to voting for all.

•Democracy For All Amendment: would overturn Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United and limit influence of money in politics.

•Government By the People Act/Fair Elections Now Act: would amplify small contributions from everyday Americans.

May 4-15, Break Free From Fossil Fuels

People are mobilizing across the world to demand a rapid transition to renewable energy, and an end to taking fossil fuels out of the ground.

Globally coordinated mass actions are planned in the UK, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Israel, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines Nigeria, South Africa, Canada and across the US.

They plan to occupy major fossil fuel sites, such as the largest coal mine in South Wales, where another may be built next door.

In the US, there will be "mass trespass at fracking sites", blockades at oil refineries and trains carrying oil.

The goal is to disrupt the power of the fossil fuel industry through "a series of peaceful, escalating actions...targeting the world's most dangerous and unnecessary fossil fuel projects," says organizer 350.org.

"The fossil fuel industry faces an unprecedented crisis - from collapsing prices, a new global climate deal, and an ever-growing movement calling for change.

We have never had a better chance in history to break free from fossil fuels and build a just transition to clean and renewable energy," they say.

"There are no major economic or technical barriers to a future supported by renewable energy. Any new infrastructure built to support fossil fuel expansion, such as coal mines, power plants, oil rigs and export terminals will be a waste of money and further lock us into a path to irreversible climate change," states Arif Fiyanto, Coal Campaigner at Greenpeace Indonesia.

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26586

Agelbert NOTE: Yes, the goons for the fossil fuel industry in the USA and abroad will be waiting for the protesters defending democracy and demanding the end of profit over planet. Yes, the "authorities", the media and the police will ensure the responsible citizens of this world present will be demonized, brutalized, tased, shot at and, when they aren't arrested, even murdered.

AND THAT VIOLENCE will spell the final doom of the fossil fuel fascist pigs EVERYWHERE. Of course the bought and paid for media will do their damnedest to prevent those who died from being given martyr status. They will fail.

And for those of you clever bastards working for the fossil fuel industry that think your fascist intimidation tactics will work (as usual), let me remind you that the people you have hired to do your murder and mayhem will overreach in their violence. If you think you can "damage control" the fallout from the violence your goons love to dish out, you are going to be very disappointed. All those thousands of fossil fuel industry employees just fired and police with families experiencing the health downsides of petroleum pollution are not going to remain "loyal" to the profit over planet "business model".

Everyday people will WELCOME severe energy disruption and rolling black outs just to see the end of subsidy swag and the pollution buck passing from the fossil fuel fascists jumping on the Chapter 11 "bankruptcy" wagon.

The people finally KNOW that the fossil fuel industry Modus Operandi has NEVER been abut providing low priced energy and has ALWAYS been about competitor destruction through government corruption based monopoly price control.

The fossil fuel industry has lost the support of the people. When that happens to any industry or government, no matter how effective its police state tactics are, it FALLS. The quislings in government, Wall Street and Main Street will rush to the support of the fossil fuel profit over planet "business model", but they will not be able to prevent the FALL of the fossil fuel industry/GOVERNMENT.

TWO historical examples of what is about to happen:

Truman wasn't the only president that pushed the use of nuclear weapons. Eisenhower wanted to nuke North Korea in the 1950s and Nixon wanted to nuke North Korea in 1969 as a "scare the commies" tactic to end the Viet Nam War. Eisenhower telegraphed his intent with a nukes=bullets speech that caused such an uproar he had to hastily shelve his "nuke bullets" (as you can see he, really did not believe the bomb was such an "awful thing" as he claimed). Nixon was convinced by the MASSES of people around the White House and across the country demanding an end to the Viet Nam War that he would be run out of office if he executed his nuke barbarity (I will provide documented evidence of what I just said to anyone interested. ).

The fossil fuel industry, a business that became powerful and influential through corruption and violence, with a stranglehold on governments all over the world, is about to learn a lesson (see: French Revolution times 1000).

AGelbert · « **Reply #498 on:** March 27, 2016, 04:51:26 pm »

The challenges of an observant scientist in a happy talk propagandized world.

James Hansen: Dangerous Sea Level Rise Will Occur in Decades, Not Centuries

Lauren McCauley, Common Dreams | March 23, 2016 11:02 am

Dr. James Hansen, the former NASA scientist who is widely credited with being one of the first to raise concerns about human-caused global warming, is a co-author of a new report predicting that the world will undergo devastating sea level rise within mere decades—not centuries, as previously thought.

The report, published Tuesday in the open-access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, paints an even bleaker picture of the planet’s future, positing that continued high fossil fuel emissions will “increase powerful storms” and drive sea-level rise of “several meters over a timescale of 50 to 150 years.”

Hansen, who now serves as the director of the Climate Science Awareness and Solutions program at Columbia University Earth Institute, published the findings along with an international team of 18 researchers and academics.

As the abstract states, the predictions “differ fundamentally from existing climate change assessments.” For example, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2013 predicted three feet of sea level rise by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated.

A draft version of Hansen’s paper released last year provoked wide debate among climate scientists.
Nonetheless, Michael Mann, a renowned climate scientist with the University of Pennsylvania, who is among those questioning some of the report’s “extraordinary” claims, told the New York Times, “I think we ignore James Hansen at our peril.”

The peer-edited report examines growing ice melt from Antarctica and Greenland and studies how that melting has historically amplified “feedbacks that increase subsurface ocean warming and ice shelf melting.” Taking into consideration “rapid, large, human-made climate forcing,” the study predicts a much more accelerated rate of sea level rise of several meters, beyond that which humanity is capable of adapting to.

Or, as Hansen put it,

Quote

“We’re in danger of handing young people a situation that’s out of their control.”

These staggering claims come as climate scientists continue to reel from the frightening speed at which the Earth is warming. On Monday, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO, issued a report warning that climate change is occurring at an “alarming rate” and that world leaders must act to curb greenhouse gases now, “before we pass the point of no return.”

In a video released alongside the new report, Hansen, who left his position at NASA in 2013 so that he could fully commit himself to fighting climate change, says that the paper explores the consequences of continued greenhouse gas emissions. These include “superstorms stronger than any seen in modern times,” sea level rise that will erase “all coastal cities,” and, finally, “how soon we will pass points of no return.”

Watch here:

http://ecowatch.com/2016/03/23/james-hansen-sea-level-rise/

AGelbert · « **Reply #499 on:** March 28, 2016, 02:32:45 pm »

Quote from: Surly1 on March 28, 2016, 06:21:03 am

Quote from: agelbert on March 28, 2016, 02:34:46 am
Bernie Sanders Giving The Establishment A Headache

Cenk in rare form:"We're not knuckleheads, we're not low-information voters who got fed out talking points from your corporate media..."

Love me a good Cenk rant.

Cenk gets it. The Bernays style hired persuaders don't. When the consent of the governed can no longer be engineered, good things happen for we-the-people.

The following is an example of the failure of hired persuaders (i.e. consent engineers

) to successfully bullshit some people.

Exxon Mobil must give shareholders climate vote, regulator rules

24/03/2016

Quote

US oil major, alleged to have lied about the risks of global warming, has been ordered to consider shareholder resolution at next AGM

SNIPPET:

As SEC Mandates Climate-Risk Vote for Exxon Shareholders: Exxon Mobil must allow its shareholders to vote on whether the oil giant should fully disclose risks from climate change, according to a decision from the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Exxon had argued that its existing climate-related information was sufficient, but the SEC determined that those reports are not enough to inform shareholders and protect their interests.

Exxon shareholders have never approved a climate change-related proposal before, but environmentalists cheered the decision as an important step towards acknowledging investors' growing concerns about climate risk.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/03/24/exxon-mobil-must-give-shareholders-climate-vote-regulator-rules/

AGelbert · « **Reply #500 on:** March 31, 2016, 11:22:46 pm »

A 1981 EXXON Graph:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/23/what-did-exxonmobil-know-and-when-did-they-know-it-part-deux-same-as-it-ever-was/

03/30/2016 12:41 PM

20 States Join to Prosecute Fossil Fuel Industry on Climate Change

SustainableBusiness.com News

The" Exxon Knew" campaign launched by NY State Attorney General Schneiderman last year, is turning into in the first serious attempt to bring those responsible for climate change to justice.

Attorney Generals from 20 states have joined to prosecute ExxonMobil and the fossil industry. Given the size and power of the industry, states have to work together to bring them to justice.

The coalition currently consists of: California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont

, Washington state, and US Virgin Islands.

Many of these states are also working together to transition away from fossil fuels.
"Fossil fuel companies that deceived investors and the public about the dangers of climate change should be, must be held accountable," says Maura Healey, Massachusetts Attorney General (AG).

"It is troubling that, as the polar caps melt, there are companies that are looking at that as an opportunity to go and drill, to go and get more oil. How selfish can you be?," asks Earl Walker, US Virgin Islands AG. "Your product is destroying this Earth, and you want to do what? Destroy the planet further?"

It's About Time

We've been asking ourselves this question for decades. Over that time, we have witnessed the hundreds of millions of dollars pour in to confuse the public and to keep legislators on the side of misinformation.

It started in November, when NY State AG Eric Schneiderman began investigating Exxon when reports showed it was well aware of the danger of climate change in the late 1970s. Exxon not only hid the information from lawmakers and the public, it spent at least $100 million to confuse society on the subject to keep its profits flowing.

"Climate change is a hoax." "The climate is always changing." "Temperatures haven't risen in 15 years." "Scientists aren't certain about climate change"[/size] are among the many misinformed statements that have been repeated so often by politicians that the public still ranks climate low on their list of concerns.

And all this happens while Arctic ice is at its lowest level ever; we're losing the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets; the ocean is acidifying, killing marine life and coral reefs; and animals and plants are moving north as fast as possible. Then there's the intensifying droughts, floods, wildfires - none of this bothers anyone?

That's what the power of misinformation has accomplished thanks to the fossil fuel industry, which includes Exxon and peers, trade associations, and the Koch Brothers' vast network.

"Big Polluters have done everything in their power to deny climate change, it is time for our justice system to take back the climate debate," says Annie Leonard, Executive Director of Greenpeace USA.

AGs are using the tobacco trials from the 1990s as a guide. It was attorney general investigations that resulted in high profile lawsuits that stopped Big Tobacco's lies about the dangers of their products. AGs were able to shut down their front groups and force the industry to pay billons of dollars for their deception.

As the world's second biggest polluter, Exxon alone is responsible for 3.1% of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

A parallel effort is underway in the Philippines, and teenagers are taking states and the feds to court for their lack of urgent action on climate.

California Law Would Help

In California, the Climate Science Truth & Accountability Act has been introduced by Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica).

If passed, the law would make it much easier to prosecute climate crimes. It extends the statute of limitations under California's Unfair Competition Law from four to 30 years, allowing prosecutors to file civil charges for fossil company activities going back decades, explains InsideClimate News.

Read our article, Corporations Step Up For Climate, As Exxon is Exposed

Check out this website:

Website: http://exxonknew.org/

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26589

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/23/what-did-exxonmobil-know-and-when-did-they-know-it-part-deux-same-as-it-ever-was/

AGelbert · « **Reply #501 on:** April 01, 2016, 08:12:19 pm »

2016 Runaway Climate Change * Leading Scientist * Economy Collapse * Troubling

Published on Mar 4, 2016

Quote

The latest on the huge temp jumps in 2015 and in the last few months. From looking at the data,we are past 1.5C average global temp ,getting close to a 2C temp. Exponential function is running the show now.

Leading scientist lays out for you the connections. The only truth teller, Professor Guy McPherson.

Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction
Gerardo Ceballos, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anthony D. Barnosky, Andrés García, Robert M. Pringle and Todd M. Palmer + Author Affiliations

Science Advances 19 Jun 2015: Vol. 1, no. 5, e1400253 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400253
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253

About Gerardo Ceballos:

Professor Ceballos work has been diverse, and its impact clear. He started the Long Term Ecological Research Network Chapter in Mexico, and has the longest (22 years) population and community ecology study of small mammals in the Neotropics.

He proposed, for the first time, that prairie dogs were keystone species, which now is a well accepted fact and is being used as one of the main arguments for the conservation of prairie dogs and associated species in North America.

He has carried out the longest and more complete study on jaguars, and recently he finished the first jaguar census at a National scale, showing that there are roughly 4200 jaguars in Mexico. This pioneering work is leading to implement conservation actions to save this species from extinction.

Research Articles ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Agelbert NOTE: So, what exactly, is causing the unacceptably high rate of extinctions?

Some think the factory style meat operations are more of a factor than CO2 pollution from fossil fuels. Of course Big meat and Big Ag are contributing factors in a fragmentation of human agency goosing extinctions. But there is simply no equivalence.

Here are the facts:

Extinctions ABOVE the background rate, are caused overwhelmingly as a result of habitat loss.
Habitat destruction is an important cause of known extinctions. As deforestation proceeds in tropical forests, this promises to become THE cause of mass extinctions caused by human activity.

What causes habitat loss?

The above reference specifically FIRST mentions the food and habit needs.

Quote

"All species have specific food and habitat needs."

Then it goes on to point out, how the activity, as a result of the increasing human population's needs, destroys wildlife habitat.

Quote

"The more specific these needs and localized the habitat, the greater the vulnerability of species to loss of habitat to agricultural land, livestock, roads and cities."

Yes, we humans have been going to town on wildlife with hunting, fishing and agricultural land, livestock, roads and cities for centuries. But it wasn't just the population that increased rapidly after 1800.

Quote

Atmospheric CO2 - Increase Since 1800
Mauna Loa Observatory | NOAA-ESRL Data
As of Sept. 13 - 19, 2015 + 120.61 ppm

http://co2now.org/Current-CO2/CO2-Now/weekly-data-atmospheric-co2.html

Although this study is limited to birds, and the study clearly states that they are not projecting the numbers to all species, I present it to you so you can see the difference between PRE-1800 extinction rates and POST-1800 extinction rates.

The number of known extinctions before 1800 is increasing as taxonomists describe new species from skeletal remains. (ii) One should calculate extinction rates over the years since taxonomists described the species. Most bird species were described only after 1850. (iii) Some species are probably extinct; there is reluctance to declare them so prematurely.

Thus corrected, recent extinction rates are ≈100 E/MSY.
In the last decades, the rate is <50 E/MSY, but would be 150 E/MSY were it not for conservation efforts.

Increasing numbers of extinctions are on continents, whereas previously most were on islands.

We predict a 21st century rate of ≈1,000 E/MSY.

Extinction threatens 12% of bird species; another 12% have small geographical ranges and live where human actions rapidly destroy their habitats.

If present forest losses continue, extinction rates will reach 1,500 E/MSY by the century’s end. Invasive species, expanding human technologies, and global change will harm additional species.

Human impacts on the rates of recent, present, and future bird extinctions

The CO2 pollution alone (never mind the plethora of other industrial pollutants being spewed 24/7 by coal burning power plants, chemical manufacturers, mining operations, drilling operations, fracking and heavy industry) has been proven to overheat the atmosphere, threatening land animals, increase the acidity of the oceans and also overheat them.

Unless the species in this 4C plus planet, that CO2 pollution GUARANTEES us, do not have specific needs that are localized, like the extremophiles, they are far more habitat loss threatened, (see: ALL vertebrates) by CO2 caused deforestation, desertification, acidification and degradation of arable land than from loss of habitat due to agricultural land and livestock. Ocean dead zones form fertilizer runoff are a drop in the bucket compared with the effect of acidification on mollusk shells.

Yes, if we cleaned up our CO2 polluting act, a rather tall order considering the technological difficulty of trying to lower the parts per million (PPM) count in the global atmosphere (The U.S. Navy does it on their submarines - and they DON'T have the technology to keep it lower than 7,000-8,000 PPM! - Image the cost of doing that in the entire atmosphere to get down to 280-290PPM. The technology Has not been invented.), humans would still be causing wildlife extinctions due to our agricultural and animal husbandry caused habitat destruction.

But without the CO2 pollution, the extinction rate drops well below the present Permian extinction rate.

AGelbert · « **Reply #502 on:** April 01, 2016, 08:17:54 pm »

Dr. Michael Mann - Are We In Runaway Climate Change?

Dr. Michael Mann, Earth System Science Center-Penn State University/Dire Predictions: Understanding Climate Change (2nd edition) joins Thom. We had all better hope these scientists are wrong about the planet’s future. Scientists now say that ice melt in Greenland and Antarctica could speed up faster than we previously thought. But that's not just going to raise sea levels - it could drive storms stronger than anything humans have ever seen.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/dr-michael-mann-are-we-runaway-climate-change

AGelbert · « **Reply #503 on:** April 01, 2016, 09:40:45 pm »

Quote from: AGelbert on April 01, 2016, 08:12:19 pm

2016 Runaway Climate Change * Leading Scientist * Economy Collapse * Troubling

Published on Mar 4, 2016
Leading scientist lays out for you the connections. The only truth teller, Professor Guy McPherson.

Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction
Gerardo Ceballos, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anthony D. Barnosky, Andrés García, Robert M. Pringle and Todd M. Palmer + Author Affiliations

Science Advances 19 Jun 2015: Vol. 1, no. 5, e1400253 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400253
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253

About Gerardo Ceballos:

Professor Ceballos work has been diverse, and its impact clear. He started the Long Term Ecological Research Network Chapter in Mexico, and has the longest (22 years) population and community ecology study of small mammals in the Neotropics.

He proposed, for the first time, that prairie dogs were keystone species, which now is a well accepted fact and is being used as one of the main arguments for the conservation of prairie dogs and associated species in North America.

He has carried out the longest and more complete study on jaguars, and recently he finished the first jaguar census at a National scale, showing that there are roughly 4200 jaguars in Mexico. This pioneering work is leading to implement conservation actions to save this species from extinction.

Research Articles ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Agelbert NOTE: So, what exactly, is causing the unacceptably high rate of extinctions?

Some think the factory style meat operations are more of a factor than CO2 pollution from fossil fuels. Of course Big meat and Big Ag are contributing factors in a fragmentation of human agency goosing extinctions. But there is simply no equivalence.

Here are the facts:

Extinctions ABOVE the background rate, are caused overwhelmingly as a result of habitat loss.
Habitat destruction is an important cause of known extinctions. As deforestation proceeds in tropical forests, this promises to become THE cause of mass extinctions caused by human activity.

What causes habitat loss?

The above reference specifically FIRST mentions the food and habit needs.

Then it goes on to point out, how the activity, as a result of the increasing human population's needs, destroys wildlife habitat.
Yes, we humans have been going to town on wildlife with hunting, fishing and agricultural land, livestock, roads and cities for centuries. But it wasn't just the population that increased rapidly after 1800.

http://co2now.org/Current-CO2/CO2-Now/weekly-data-atmospheric-co2.html

Although this study is limited to birds, and the study clearly states that they are not projecting the numbers to all species, I present it to you so you can see the difference between PRE-1800 extinction rates and POST-1800 extinction rates.

The number of known extinctions before 1800 is increasing as taxonomists describe new species from skeletal remains. (ii) One should calculate extinction rates over the years since taxonomists described the species. Most bird species were described only after 1850. (iii) Some species are probably extinct; there is reluctance to declare them so prematurely.

Thus corrected, recent extinction rates are ≈100 E/MSY.
In the last decades, the rate is <50 E/MSY, but would be 150 E/MSY were it not for conservation efforts.

Increasing numbers of extinctions are on continents, whereas previously most were on islands.

We predict a 21st century rate of ≈1,000 E/MSY.

Extinction threatens 12% of bird species; another 12% have small geographical ranges and live where human actions rapidly destroy their habitats.

If present forest losses continue, extinction rates will reach 1,500 E/MSY by the century’s end. Invasive species, expanding human technologies, and global change will harm additional species.

Human impacts on the rates of recent, present, and future bird extinctions

The CO2 pollution alone (never mind the plethora of other industrial pollutants being spewed 24/7 by coal burning power plants, chemical manufacturers, mining operations, drilling operations, fracking and heavy industry) has been proven to overheat the atmosphere, threatening land animals, increase the acidity of the oceans and also overheat them.

Unless the species in this 4C plus planet, that CO2 pollution GUARANTEES us, do not have specific needs that are localized, like the extremophiles, they are far more habitat loss threatened, (see: ALL vertebrates) by CO2 caused deforestation, desertification, acidification and degradation of arable land than from loss of habitat due to agricultural land and livestock. Ocean dead zones form fertilizer runoff are a drop in the bucket compared with the effect of acidification on mollusk shells.

Yes, if we cleaned up our CO2 polluting act, a rather tall order considering the technological difficulty of trying to lower the parts per million (PPM) count in the global atmosphere (The U.S. Navy does it on their submarines - and they DON'T have the technology to keep it lower than 7,000-8,000 PPM! - Image the cost of doing that in the entire atmosphere to get down to 280-290PPM. The technology Has not been invented.), humans would still be causing wildlife extinctions due to our agricultural and animal husbandry caused habitat destruction.

But without the CO2 pollution, the extinction rate drops well below the present Permian extinction rate.

Quote from: JRM on April 01, 2016, 08:37:36 pm

I caution all about the reliability of the views of Guy McPherson. McPherson is way, way out on an edge -- well out beyond the views of most climatologists and other climate scientists. I personally don't find him all that credible. I do, however, think the climate crisis is very real and that we should all be taking giant strides, quickly, to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

Guy banned me from his forum years ago because I'm too much of a hopium person for him.

But I have a lot of college level science knowledge about the biosphere and all the interactions required to keep it viable. McPherson is extrapolating along a cause and effect horizon devoid of innovation or interruption of the present profit over planet wanton degradation of our biosphere. I understand, on a very technical and detailed level, that he is not making stuff up even though I, unlike him, DO have some hope for the future. Actually, I welcome his posts and videos because he scares the S H I T out of people.

JRM, people NEED to have the S H I T scared out of them NOW. I know you think Guy is crackpot. I read your back and forth with K-Dog. K=Dog is an engineer and he fact checked Guy six ways from Sunday. I have fact checked the studies he references in his lectures too. I'm not a despairing F U C K like many of Guy's followers but he is not talking hysterical bullshit, as you believe.

When you listen to him, just consider it a thought exercise. Forget his conclusions and carefully look at each and every positive (biosphere damage reinforcing) feedback mechanism he claims is being goosed into runaway mode. Everything he posted on that video is accurate, except of course, what he ASSUMES will happen in the future.

I assume we will get out of this somehow. But we must continue to weigh the evidence as long as it is peer reviewed and documented. Yes. Guy collects and collates the data with a bias towards futility and nihilism. That PISSES you off. Sorry, you do not understand human nature if you think he is going to get some huge following of suicidal crazies that will off themselves because they, like their leader, believe there is no hope.

JRM, the DANGEROUS people out there are the fossil fuel propagandists saying everything is hunky dory and we are just in a "bump" in the energy road now. Because of Corporate Fossil Fuel Industry Corrupted Government, our TRAJECTORY is F U C K E D UP.

THIS is what our government is mostly about even WITHOUT considering the profit over planet MO the elites worship:

We are a banker constructed Imperialist nation, ruled by a consortium of global psychopaths, hell bent on destroying the very planet itself in their selfish quest for money, power and the control of all of us. At this rate the human race may not even be here for the 22nd century.

We need a RADICAL rediscovery of what it means to be a RESPONSIBLE being in harmony with the other beings in the biosphere that we need in order to survive and thrive. We are not there yet. The mindset of most of the people in power lacks this sine qua non requirement for the perpetuation of the human species.

I think there is hope. But it is not a sure thing. That's why I rant and rave for people to do the RIGHT thing.

AGelbert · « **Reply #504 on:** April 01, 2016, 09:51:26 pm »

Naomi Klein on Why Climate Change is ‘Incredibly Threatening To Our Elites’

Agelbert NOTE: Naomi thinks the elite IDIOTS actually smell the climate catastrophe coffee. Unfortunately for the rest of us, all evidence shows that they are trying to PR happy talk the masses into ignoring the in-your-face pollution that keeps the elites rich while it degrades the biosphere.

Bill Gates Enjoys his morning Joe:

AGelbert · « **Reply #505 on:** April 03, 2016, 06:01:34 pm »

Quote from: AGelbert on April 01, 2016, 09:40:45 pm

Guy banned me from his forum years ago because I'm too much of a hopium person for him.

But I have a lot of college level science knowledge about the biosphere and all the interactions required to keep it viable. McPherson is extrapolating along a cause and effect horizon devoid of innovation or interruption of the present profit over planet wanton degradation of our biosphere. I understand, on a very technical and detailed level, that he is not making stuff up even though I, unlike him, DO have some hope for the future. Actually, I welcome his posts and videos because he scares the S H I T out of people.

JRM, people NEED to have the S H I T scared out of them NOW. I know you think Guy is crackpot. I read your back and forth with K-Dog. K=Dog is an engineer and he fact checked Guy six ways from Sunday. I have fact checked the studies he references in his lectures too. I'm not a despairing F U C K like many of Guy's followers but he is not talking hysterical bullshit, as you believe.

When you listen to him, just consider it a thought exercise. Forget his conclusions and carefully look at each and every positive (biosphere damage reinforcing) feedback mechanism he claims is being goosed into runaway mode. Everything he posted on that video is accurate, except of course, what he ASSUMES will happen in the future.

I assume we will get out of this somehow. But we must continue to weigh the evidence as long as it is peer reviewed and documented. Yes. Guy collects and collates the data with a bias towards futility and nihilism. That PISSES you off. Sorry, you do not understand human nature if you think he is going to get some huge following of suicidal crazies that will off themselves because they, like their leader, believe there is no hope.

JRM, the DANGEROUS people out there are the fossil fuel propagandists saying everything is hunky dory and we are just in a "bump" in the energy road now. Because of Corporate Fossil Fuel Industry Corrupted Government, our TRAJECTORY is F U C K E D UP.

THIS is what our government is mostly about even WITHOUT considering the profit over planet MO the elites worship:

We are a banker constructed Imperialist nation, ruled by a consortium of global psychopaths, hell bent on destroying the very planet itself in their selfish quest for money, power and the control of all of us. At this rate the human race may not even be here for the 22nd century.

We need a RADICAL rediscovery of what it means to be a RESPONSIBLE being in harmony with the other beings in the biosphere that we need in order to survive and thrive. We are not there yet. The mindset of most of the people in power lacks this sine qua non requirement for the perpetuation of the human species.

I think there is hope. But it is not a sure thing. That's why I rant and rave for people to do the RIGHT thing.

Quote from: azozeo on April 03, 2016, 04:53:39 pm

Guy's science is formulated from a gravity based Universe model.
This is why I don't waste my time chasing my tail around the dining room table.

A gravity based view :

A more nuanced view :

A less nuanced view (Guy McPherson) :

AGelbert · « **Reply #506 on:** April 03, 2016, 07:15:16 pm »

AGelbert · « **Reply #507 on:** April 06, 2016, 12:33:48 am »

Surgeon General’s Warning: We Must Act on Climate

Nadia Prupis, Common Dreams | April 5, 2016 9:43 am

Climate change is a serious threat to public health, particularly for pregnant women, children, communities of color and low-income people, a government report issued Monday has warned.

The report, The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment, finds that rising temperatures in the coming years will bring along with them the increased risk of:

death from heat stroke, particularly in the summer months;

chronic and acute respiratory issues;

vector-borne illnesses like the West Nile virus and Lyme disease, as well as the new emergence of new pathogens;

chemical toxins in the food chain;

and mental health consequences of being exposed to climate disasters—among a litany of other risks.

Quote

“Every American is vulnerable to the health impacts associated with climate change,” White House Science Adviser John Holdren said Monday. “Some are more vulnerable than others.”

In particular, the report finds, those facing the highest risk are pregnant women, children, communities of color, the elderly, people who work outdoors, those with disabilities or preexisting medical conditions, immigrants and low-income people.

“I don’t think we have seen something like this before where we have a force that has such a multitude of impacts,” said Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, comparing the effects to the polio epidemic. However, he said, polio was cured through a vaccine—which does not exist for climate change.

“There is not one single source we can target,” he said. “As far as history is concerned this is a new kind of threat that we are facing.”

The report was produced by eight government agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). It comes just ahead of the April 22 meeting between world leaders in New York, where they are expected to formally sign the landmark climate agreement finalized in Paris in December.

EPA director Gina McCarthy said the report aimed to show that climate change is

Quote

“not just about glaciers and polar bears—it’s about the health of families and our kids.”

“Climate change endangers our health by affecting our food and water sources, the air we breathe and the weather we experience,” McCarthy said. “It will exacerbate certain health effects that already exist and create new ones.”

The report also predicts that extreme heat could cause 11,000 more premature deaths a year by 2030 than previously predicted.

Bottom line, said Murthy, “If we want to safeguard the health of current and future generations, we have to address climate change.”

Avoiding all the risks outlined in the report will be impossible, said Holdren, as “climate change is already underway and no matter what we do it cannot be stopped overnight.

But there is a huge difference between the magnitude if we fail to act … and if we take the actions set out in the Climate Action Plan and the Paris climate agreement.”

Climate change “is a pervasive problem with many dimensions of impacts,” Holdren said, “which together I think make it the most serious threat we face.”

http://ecowatch.com/2016/04/05/impacts-of-climate-change/

Fossil fuel Industry Response to the scientifically obtained, irrefutable facts about the deleterious effects of Global Warming on Human Health:

AGelbert · « **Reply #508 on:** April 08, 2016, 08:28:00 pm »

Quote from: RE on April 08, 2016, 11:57:11 am

His Popeness did not invite Clinton or Trump or Cruz! This is as close to an endorsement as the Vicar of Christ on Earth can do. :icon_sunny:

A few pics of Bernie shaking hands with El Popo will definitely get him some votes from the devotees of the Holy Roman Catholic Church! :icon_sunny:

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/08/bernie-sanders-accepts-pope-franciss-invitation-to-travel-to-the-vatican/?_r=0

Bernie Sanders Accepts Pope Francis’s Invitation to Travel to the Vatican

Bernie Sanders spoke at the Pennsylvania A.F.L.-C.I.O. Convention in Philadelphia on Thursday.Credit Mark Makela for The New York Times

Updated, 11:18 a.m. | Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has accepted an invitation from the Vatican to attend a conference on social, economic and environmental issues.

The Sanders campaign made the announcement on Friday as the senator made the rounds of the morning television news programs. Mr. Sanders will take a break from campaigning in New York, just days ahead of the April 19 primary there, to attend the conference hosted by the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Mr. Sanders, clarifying what he said earlier about a sit-down with Pope Francis, said he had not confirmed yet whether the two men would actually meet.

“I am delighted to have been invited by the Vatican to a meeting on restoring social justice and environmental sustainability to the world economy,” Mr. Sanders said in a statement. “Pope Francis has made clear that we must overcome ‘the globalization of indifference’ in order to reduce economic inequalities, stop financial corruption and protect the natural environment. That is our challenge in the United States and in the world.”

In an interview with The Times on Friday, Mr. Sanders stressed that Pope Francis has played a “profound role in raising consciousness throughout the world, not just within the Catholic community but within all communities.”

“To me, this a source of real pride and excitement that I have been invited to speak to a major conference at the Vatican on how we can create a world economy that is moral and how we address the massive levels of wealth and income inequality that exist around the world, how we deal with unemployment, how we deal with poverty and how we create an economy that works for all people rather than the few,” Mr. Sanders said.

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, Mr. Sanders explained that while he disagrees with Pope Francis on issues relating to women’s rights and gay rights, he admires the pope for speaking about income inequality and the need for people to help one another.

“He has played an unbelievable role, an unbelievable role of injecting a moral consequence into the economy,” said Mr. Sanders, who would become the first Jewish president in the United States if elected. “He is talking about the idolatry of money, the worship of money, the greed that’s out there, how our whole culture is based on: ‘I need more and more and more. And, I don’t have to worry about veterans sleeping out on the street or elderly people who can’t afford their prescriptions.’”

Mr. Sanders also addressed the back and forth between him and his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton during interviews on morning television. He said he is “trying to stay away from personal attacks” and hopes to stop bickering about their credentials to be president.

Mr. Sanders also appeared at a town-hall-style event on NBC’s “Today” show and took questions from voters about his stances on gun manufactures’ liability, breaking up commercial banks and how he would protect women’s rights.

The “Today” anchor Savannah Guthrie asked Mr. Sanders about his latest spat over qualifications with Mrs. Clinton.

“Did you overreact because you thought she said something more than she did?” Ms. Guthrie asked.

“Here’s the truth,” Mr. Sanders said. “I’ve known Hillary Clinton for 25 years. I respect Hillary Clinton. We were colleagues in the Senate, and on her worst day, she would be an infinitely better president than either of the Republican candidates.”

Ms. Guthrie asked, “She’s qualified?”

“Of course,” Mr. Sanders said. “But the point is I would hope we get away from these attacks, which by the way, the media likes very much, and start focusing — maybe we can do that today — on the real issues.”

Echoing his earlier comments, Mr. Sanders also said in his interview with The Times that he wanted to move past the squabbling with Mrs. Clinton but said he would also continue to fight back if he felt attacked again.

“My hope right now is that Secretary Clinton will stop the levels of negativity,” Mr. Sanders said. “I want to run an issue-orientated campaign.”

The senator said he planned to host a series of rallies throughout New York, which he called an important state to win.

Mr. Sanders also appeared on ABC’s “The View” later in the day.

Find out what you need to know about the 2016 presidential race today, and get politics news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the First Draft newsletter.

This is also evidence that Trump has managed to P I S S OFF the Pope!

Yes, Hillary

will probably try to claim the "Pope should not be involving himself in the U.S. political process"

. Yes, of course. The Pope should leave issues of inequality, morality, profit over planet (and so on - you get the idea

) to the spiritual realm and the hereafter

. What does he know about what's right and wrong for loyal Patriotic Americans? The Pope even believes that CO2 is a pollutant instead of excellent plant food provided free by our loyal servants from the fossil fuel ~~fascists~~ industry!

YEP! The climate deniers

and papal conspiracy theorists

(see Rense or Prison Planet hysterics) will howl and whine that Sanders AND the Pope are not "objective" about the (wait for it

) the "real world".

But it won't work. Senator Sanders from Vermont will be President Elect in November.

The Invitation by the Pope will, in fact, take care of any further alleged "Pinocchio award" defamation the Washington Post or other establishment bullshitters wish to continue slandering Senator Sanders with.

The Pope ain't perfect

. But it is rather difficult for the presstitutes to claim someone the pope invites to speak is not credible or sincere or truthful.

AGelbert · « **Reply #509 on:** April 11, 2016, 09:43:24 pm »

Quote

"Since 2003, Greenland has lost on average more than 600 trillion pounds of ice a year and that affects the way the Earth wobbles in a manner similar to a figure skater lifting one leg while spinning.

Think of it as a billion trucks each year dumping ice out of Greenland. On top of that, West Antarctica loses 275 trillion pounds of ice and East Antarctica gains about 165 trillion pounds of ice yearly." - NASA scientist Eirk Ivins

NASA: Global warming is now changing how Earth wobbles

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nasa-global-warming-is-now-changing-how-earth-wobbles/2016/04/08/e11ccdae-fdb4-11e5-813a-90ab563f0dde_story.html

Greenland ice melt

Renewable Revolution

User

Stats ezBlock

Author Topic: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️ (Read 118766 times)

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

AGelbert

Re: 🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️

Recent Topics