Renewable Revolution

Environment => Climate Change => Topic started by: AGelbert on October 10, 2013, 01:42:35 am


Title: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 10, 2013, 01:42:35 am
"ARGO floats have allowed accurate measurement of ocean heat gain since 2005. Earth is gaining energy at a rate 0.6 W/m2, which is 20 times greater than the rate of human energy use.

That energy is equivalent to exploding 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day, 365 days per year."

September 2012: A New Age of Risk: Presentation given at Columbia University on Sep. 22.

Dr. James E. Hansen
Title: Climate Change, A $10 Trillion Opportunity… Here And Now
Post by: AGelbert on October 16, 2013, 07:33:21 pm
By Douglas Elbinger, Energy Policy Analyst, GreenLancer.com

Many of us who have been on the ground floor of the renewable energy business are secretly experiencing the warm fuzzy feelings that precede explosive global growth. Economic opportunity of this scale happens very rarely. Recent history tells us that nothing changes on this scale ‘peacefully’ until the economics are in alignment with necessity and invention. This is a true test of a new energy reality, where climate change hits head on with abundant and cheap renewable energy. This collision translates into a $10 trillion industry that will transform the current geo-political narrative (energy, water, climate, etc…) as we know it, and offer unprecedented opportunity for those who are on board when this train leaves the station. So, how, you ask, is this going happen… and how can I get on the train?

First, allow me introduce you to Mr. Jigar Shah, who will guide you on the path in his just released book, Creating Climate Wealth. He offers his reader a clear, engaging, easy-to-understand conversation about seizing this moment to make climate change a huge business opportunity — whether you work at the top or in the trenches — anywhere on the planet.

Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/16/climate-change-10-trillion-opportunity-now/#9IsAZmMR0o3qldAe.99

If you don’t know Jigar, I recommend you get to know a little about him. He revolutionized the solar industry by deploying the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) solar-as-service business model. This business model used 30-year old solar technology to be the catalyst for a multi-billion dollar solar industry.  

Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/16/climate-change-10-trillion-opportunity-now/#9IsAZmMR0o3qldAe.99

So, does this mean this climate change crises represents an opportunity as well as a danger? Well, grasshopper, That DEPENDS on how we handle it... (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/129fs238648.gif)

Quote
Chinese philologist Victor H. Mair of the University of Pennsylvania states the popular interpretation of wēijī—to mean "danger" and "opportunity"—is a "widespread public misperception" in the English-speaking world.  :o [8]

While wēi (危) roughly translates to mean: "danger, dangerous; endanger, jeopardize; perilous; precipitous, precarious; high; fear, afraid"(as in wēixiăn 危险, "dangerous"), the polysemous jī (机) does not necessarily mean "opportunity". The compound noun jīhuì (机会) means "opportunity".

But jī only acquires this connotation when used in conjunction with another morpheme (in this case hui to form jīhuì). As a Chinese character, jī has numerous meanings when conjoined with other morphemes; these can form words such as "machine, mechanical; airplane; suitable occasion; crucial point; pivot; incipient moment; opportune, opportunity; chance; key link; secret; cunning".

As jī in wēijī, this translates roughly as "crucial/critical point" not "opportunity".(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__smokelots.gif)[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_word_for_%22crisis%22

We are at the Crucial/Critical Point at which the Danger(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-051.gif), only if handled correctly, becomes an  Opportunity.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/121.gif)
Title: How Action To Stop Global Warming Must Come About
Post by: AGelbert on October 18, 2013, 03:47:28 pm
(http://i1.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2013/10/earth-globe.jpg)

How Change Manifests, How Action To Stop Global Warming Must Come About

(http://www.fourwinds10.net/resources/uploads/images/dissolving%20the%20planet%20for%20oil.jpg)
It’s obvious. Global efforts to combat climate change have failed. International summits are full of hot air and greenhouse gas.


Pollution continues to rise. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/05/09/400-ppm-carbon-dioxide-in-the-atmosphere-reaches-prehistoric-levels/

If a


Country bails on a climate commitment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_and_the_Kyoto_Protocol,

they pay a price of, well, zero.


Turns out that’s okay, at least according to game theory analyses by researchers at the University of Lisbon. Their models suggest that punishment by global institutions has no effect. They also say that global summits actually

impede cooperation ( Risk of collective failure provides an escape from the tragedy of the commons http://www.pnas.org/content/108/26/10421).


Now, in a new report, the researchers suggest that if punishment starts getting handed out at the local level, say

city governments (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cities-as-solutions-to-climate-change),


what emerges is a much more cooperative global regime for combating climate change.


Interestingly, though, the local actors must be stimulated by an understanding that global warming means catastrophe… big time. Thus, the remarkable bottom line to change is essentially an old bumper sticker tagline (link added):


Nevertheless, the math of how people play games suggests that successfully curbing carbon pollution will rely on the old adage: think globally…

act locally (Seattle to Create Nation’s First Public Food Forest http://ecolocalizer.com/2012/02/25/seattle-to-create-nations-first-public-food-forest/),

The journal Nature Climate Change (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n9/full/nclimate1927.html?WT.ec_id=NCLIMATE-201309) describes how that proverbial pond inspires change with many ripples from within — it is the rippling of change:

We show that a bottom-up approach, in which parties create local institutions that punish free-riders, promotes the emergence of widespread cooperation, mostly when risk perception is low, as it is at present3, 7. On the contrary, global institutions provide, at best, marginal improvements regarding overall cooperation. Our results clearly suggest that a polycentric approach involving multiple institutions is more effective than that associated with a single, global one, indicating that such a bottom-up, self-organization approach, set up at a local scale, provides a better ground on which to attempt a solution for such a

complex and global dilemma (U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Down 11 Percent Since 2007 http://sustainablog.org/2013/10/co2-emissions-us/).

Another international climate conference is coming up, this one being held in Poland. There isn’t much optimism regarding what is to come out of this, and it seems there’s no reason for optimism.  

What is needed is a stronger focus on creating action on the local level. What is needed is an emphasis on communicating the great risks and costs that come with global warming, while showing people local solutions that they can implement in their cities.

People are starting to realize this, but the message needs to get out to more and more of us, especially the ones who are motivated (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/170fs799081.gif) and assertive enough (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif)    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/3ztzsjm.gif) to push for meaningful change.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/129fs238648.gif)    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/Laie_28.gif)    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

                                 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2mo5pow.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)


                                     (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)


http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/18/change-manifests-action-stop-global-warming-must-come/#MySgXcjALSyW7Kkv.99

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS REPRESENTS? --->  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)  <--- THAT is BIG OIL laughing at WE-THE-PEOPLE!

Are you going to sit there and TAKE THAT???   >:(


I'm not!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)
(http://stock-image.mediafocus.com/images/previews/word-homework-on-keyboard-rs112054374.jpg) =          (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/maniac.gif)




Title: Case Study: 24 Hours of REALITY
Post by: AGelbert on October 18, 2013, 09:04:47 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvRhiKA7g0c&feature=player_embedded
Title: REALITY
Post by: AGelbert on October 20, 2013, 02:17:25 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY2sBLKU2x8&feature=player_embedded
Our situation explained succinctly by Al Gore. He makes a few choice put downs of Global Warming Denial BS along the way with some IRREFUTABLE HARD DATA (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)

For example, WE put out a LOT more Carbon dioxide than ALL THE VOLCANOES IN THE WORLD PUT TOGETHER!  :o
Title: The consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
Post by: AGelbert on October 21, 2013, 07:43:57 pm
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)


Abstract


We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.

We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors' self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.


http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024
Title: Hanging In The Balance: The Future Of A Forest
Post by: AGelbert on October 26, 2013, 11:06:52 pm
Enjoy the spectacular footage of flying over the Amazon. (http://yoursmiles.org/psmile/pilot/p0502.gif)

There IS a LOT more work to do to preserve the Amazon. BUT, you will enjoy this video of the GREATEST REDUCTION IN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN MODERN HISTORY!    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/8.gif)


Ever hear of REDD+? Thanks to that program, the indigenous Brazilian tribes OWN a Columbia sized amount of land and monitor it through satellite imagery to report offenders.

Living with Dignity and Preserving Nature IS possible. One of the WORSE former deforestation offending areas in Brazil is now the model for all the others because it completely stopped ALL deforestation in less than 5 years and is REFORESTING now.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/balloons.gif)

Quote
Combined Efforts To Control Deforestation   

 This video spotlights some of the extraordinary efforts being undertaken by social entrepreneurs, government agencies, private enterprise, and other organizations working on behalf of the Amazon rainforest.

 These combined efforts have made a considerable difference to reducing deforestation.
 Over the last 5 years, Brazil has managed to reduce the rate of deforestation by 80%, however, new regulations threaten to reverse this trend.

 --Bibi Farber

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_yn5-YxkxI&feature=player_embedded

- See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/environment/hanging-in-the-balance-the-future-of-a-forest.html#sthash.hfBbK9H7.dpuf

Title: Vermont's First Frost in a World of Global Warming
Post by: AGelbert on October 28, 2013, 06:58:56 pm
(http://jillsbooks.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/first-frost2.jpg)

First Frost in Colchester, Vermont was 23 days late last year (average first frost is September 15) and 20 days late in 2011. We are having our first frost tonight (expected low is 26 F) so this year it's A FULL 43 days late! :o

 

Global Warming is HERE. It's time to make the fossil fuel polluting one percenters PAY THEIR SHARE (80%) of the transition to a 100% Renewable Energy Powered World.

 

Details HERE: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/one-percents-planetary-assets-equals-80-responsibility-for-funding-a-100-renewable-energy-world

 

 
Title: Last Hours
Post by: AGelbert on November 01, 2013, 01:55:38 am
https://youtu.be/2bRrg96UtMc
Last Hours  (http://images.zaazu.com/img/Incredible-Hulk-animated-animation-male-smiley-emoticon-000342-large.gif)
 
Title: How to communicate the Urgency of Required Action to Mitigate Climate Change
Post by: AGelbert on November 01, 2013, 02:50:39 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MstRTnDSjz0&feature=player_embedded
How to communicate the Urgency of Required Global Joint Action to Mitigate the Deadly Deleterious effects of Global Climate Change  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)

NOTE: NONE of the above will work when attempting to reason with a propagandist defending (overtly or covertly) the fossil fuel dirty energy status quo.

WHY? Because. not only are these sell outs being paid to prevaricate, twist facts, push duplicity and seed people with fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD), they are part of a group that watches EACH OTHER. These people KNOW that the INSTANT they question the crap they are paid to push, their careers are  TOAST. So-o-o they REFUSE to think, period. Only catastrophic climate disaster in these people's back yard will bring them around to reason.

WHY? Because their security is based on money. When the fossil fuel industry no longer can provide that security blanket because, e.g. the insurance won't cover the destruction of their house or they lose a loved one to pollution related cancer, THEN they wake up and smell the coffee. 

So these people can be reached ONLY after the fossil fuel industry throws them under the economic bus. IOW, EXPERIENCE (BAD experiences), not words of logic or scientific facts will get these people to understand the threat to human civilization of global climate change. I am certain there are quite a few people in New Jersey that have started smelling the coffee.

However, people without an agenda CAN be convinced by logic and scientific facts. Most people are in that camp. That is why millions of fossil fuel, dirty energy, profit dollars are funneled to propagandists to instill FUD in us; Any REAL, HONEST exposure to what is going on out there will make us oppose the burning of fossil fuels.

Now you can see why the Koch Brothers, a big part of the Big Oil Propaganda machine, has spent over 65 million dollars in the last decade to invent fake grass roots organizations (astro-turf ;) ) to give people the idea that the common person BENEFITS from the burning of fossil fuels and it is just silly to get "hysterical" about "uinproven science" or pollution causing cancer "scare tactics" along with crocodile tears about how "your loved ones will suffer and millions will die of hunger" (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/tissue.gif)   if the burning of fossil fuels is banned.(http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg)

The best way to deal with propagandists is to undermine their lies by exposing their methods.

A failed propagandist (Big Oil stops funding them because they aren't getting "results") is a potential convert to fact based scientific reasoning and data. Any propagandist that switches to defending the biosphere instead of Big Oil provides more hope for humanity. Pass it on.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)

Title: Gambling with our future
Post by: AGelbert on November 05, 2013, 12:15:49 am
Oct. 30, 2013: Oped in Salt Lake Deseret News
(http://www.jeffzischke.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/gambling-dogs.jpg)
Gambling with our future

By DAVID FOLLAND

For a state without a lottery, horse betting or slot machines, it’s surprising that the majority of our state and federal representatives are gambling with our future. They’re gambling that fossil fuels, especially tar sands, will be the fuel of the future and that the continued use of them will not harm us. We buckle up our children in sturdy car seats. Yet, with our children’s future, it’s as if we’re tossing them in the back of a pickup with no restraints.

The insurance industry is not taking such risks. They realize that human-caused climate change has led to increased frequency and severity of extreme and damaging weather. This has created new odds, and insurers are factoring them into their insurance premiums. To ignore what science has demonstrated would be folly in their business.

And the recently released Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report’s “Summary for Policymakers” is not reassuring regarding our risks. This report is very conservative by its structure. Thousands of scientists throughout the world compile and summarize the findings of peer-reviewed literature. The results must be acceptable to the participating countries.

So now the IPCC reports with virtual certainty that the documented warming is human-caused. And they conclude that if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, the earth will warm to an additional 4 degrees Centigrade (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) and oceans will rise an average of 0.75 meters (29.5 inches) by 2100. They also emphasize that “most aspects of climate change will persist for many centuries, even if emissions of CO2 are stopped.”

How can we move quickly to clean energy and avoid the most severe climate effects predicted by the IPCC? A few weeks ago, conservative Republican and former Congressman Bob Inglis came to Utah to seek support for a conservative solution that would drive the transition to clean energy, a solution that is also sought by the nonpartisan Citizens Climate Lobby. Inglis proposed a revenue-neutral tax swap. A tax would be levied on carbon at the source (mine well, or port of entry), and the proceeds would be returned to households or used to reduce other taxes. Such a tax would price the external cost we pay for fossil fuels.

For instance, we now pay for the health costs of carbon pollution-induced heart attacks, strokes and other diseases. The fossil fuel companies are socializing these costs and privatizing profits. These health and other costs of carbon pollution would be priced into the fuel, so we would pay at the meter or the pump.

Imagine a scenario where the science was ignored, yet we still moved our society on to clean energy through a carbon tax. We would stimulate innovation in the free market that would create new jobs, strengthen our national security, while cleaning our air and improving our health. What if we don’t act on the science that is now so solid? The IPCC has made it abundantly clear that the price of adaptation to unchecked greenhouse gas emission is enormous.

In fact, a panel of scientists that introduced the report gave a “carbon budget” for humanity. Burning more than one-sixth of the known fossil fuels would raise the global temperature more than 2 degrees Centigrade (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), a level beyond which catastrophic and irreversible changes would occur.

Public policies have reduced our risk of injury and death from all sorts of hazards, from terrorists on airplanes to fires in buildings. Wouldn’t it be prudent to stop spinning the roulette wheel on our future  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif) and reduce the risks that the 5th IPCC has demonstrated so clearly?

David Folland, M.D., a retired pediatrician, is a volunteer with the nonpartisan Citizens Climate Lobby.

WEB LINK: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865589417/Gambling-with-our-future.html



Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: Surly1 on November 05, 2013, 05:04:36 am
Insurers live in the reality-based community.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 05, 2013, 10:09:22 pm
Yep. They know that River in Egypt will drown them if they don't.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)
Title: Wacky jet stream to blame for wild North American weather
Post by: AGelbert on November 05, 2013, 10:27:03 pm
Wacky jet stream to blame for wild North American weather (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2gwb921.gif) :P

By John Upton

A lot of wild weather has afflicted North America this year: deluges in Colorado and Alberta, a heatwave in Alaska, and bitter cold in Florida. But there’s a high-altitude link between each of these unusual events which itself might be tied to climate change: erratic behavior by the polar jet stream.

(http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/jetstream2.jpg?w=250&h=143)
jetstream2NOAA

This famous current of air zips eastward at high altitudes from the continent’s West, normally passing over North America somewhere near Seattle. It is one of two jet streams in the Northern Hemisphere — the other being the subtropical jet stream. Together, these powerful currents have long held weather patterns in their normal places, one year after another. But something weird is going on up there.
Storm cloudsVagabond ShutterbugStorm clouds over Denver, Colo., Sept. 14.

The normally direct polar jet stream has been swinging wildly this summer, dipping north and south like the line graph on a U.S. jobs report. At times it splits in two. From Popular Mechanics:

The jet stream is a year-round feature of our atmosphere, but the double jet stream phenomenon is more common in winter. When it shows up in the summer, watch out.

“Usually at this time of year the jet stream is a single band around the Northern Hemisphere,” [Texas A&M University atmospheric science professor John] Nielsen-Gammon says. “But in the last month what we’ve seen is a smaller jet stream over the Arctic Ocean, and another jet stream in the midlatitudes.”

That article was published in June after more than 100,000 people were forced from their homes by flooding in Calgary. Media and scientific interest in the jet stream’s newfound vagaries rose again after the recent flood-inducing rainfall in Colorado. From NPR:

During the summer, the double jet stream produced a very strange temperature pattern along the Pacific coast, Nielsen-Gammon says. Down in Southern California it was unusually hot — in Death Valley the temperature reached 129 degrees. Meanwhile, up in British Columbia, it remained unseasonably cold.

Even farther north, in Anchorage, Alaska, residents experienced a relative heat wave, with a record number of 70-degree days. But even farther up in the Arctic, temperatures were relatively cold again.

The double jet stream also played a big role in the Colorado flooding this month, [Rutgers University researcher Jennifer] Francis says. High up in the atmosphere, one stream was carrying moist air from the Pacific to the Rockies. Then, lower down, an unusual eddy was pulling in more moist air from the Gulf of Mexico. Finally, an unusual bulge in the jet stream was causing all this weather to stall near Boulder.

There’s no scientific agreement right now on what role, if any, climate change is playing in the polar jet stream’s erratic behavior. But Francis points out that it is the product of vast temperature differences between the equator and the North Pole. As the globe warms, the Arctic heats at a disproportionately fast rate, and that chips away at the temperature gradient. If that turns out to be what sent the jet stream into a weird spin cycle, then the Northern Hemisphere has a lot more extreme weather coming its way.

“It could be drought.It could be heat waves. It could be flooding due to prolonged rainfall,” Francis told NPR. “All of those kinds of patterns should be becoming more likely.”  :P


(http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/jetstream3.jpg?w=470&h=188)
jetstream3NOAA

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.



http://grist.org/news/wacky-jet-stream-to-blame-for-wild-north-american-weather/
Title: No techno fix will work unless we STOP ALL FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES IMMEDIATELY
Post by: AGelbert on November 09, 2013, 01:48:21 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pKZLHNYPbM&feature=player_embedded
All the panel members agree that STEP 1 is to STOP ALL FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES IMMEDIATELY.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)

NOTE: At the 22 minute mark some interesting scientific data about Mercury and Venus sheds light on OUR Climate Energy balance and WHY and HOW  CO2 "does what it does".   (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)
Title: Global average temperature SEPTEMBER 2013 (latest available)
Post by: AGelbert on November 10, 2013, 01:58:36 am
Global average temperature SEPTEMBER 2013

Global Highlights

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for September 2013 tied with 2003 as the fourth highest for September on record, at 0.64°C (1.15°F) above the 20th century average of 15.0°C (59.0°F).

•The global land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F), marking the sixth warmest September on record. For the ocean, the September global sea surface temperature was 0.54°C (0.97°F) above the 20th century average of 16.2°C (61.1°F), tying with 2006 as the fourth highest for September on record.

The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–September period (year-to-date) was 0.60°C (1.08°F) above the 20th century average of 14.1°C (57.5°F), tying with 2003 as the sixth warmest such period on record.  


Temperatures  

In the atmosphere, 500-millibar height pressure anomalies correlate well with temperatures at the Earth's surface. The average position of the upper-level ridges of high pressure and troughs of low pressure—depicted by positive and negative 500-millibar height anomalies on the September 2013 height and anomaly map September 2013 map—is generally reflected by areas of positive and negative temperature anomalies at the surface, respectively.


(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-percentile-mntp/201309.gif)
The above is planet earth, September 2013. As you know, when it's summer in the Northern Hemisphere, it's WINTER in the Southern Hemisphere. So, uh, don't you think there SHOULDN'T BE so many high temperature anomalies in the Southern Hemisphere in September ??? That is the end of WINTER THERE! But just look at the few and far between cold temperature anomalies versus the MASSIVE areas of high temperature anomalies.

Of course the Koch brothers may see, hear and speak (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fam/fam12.gif) about all the above with a rather crude oily bit of monkey behavior. (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg)

More info at the NOAA web site. Pick a year and a month! They give you the full no spin scoop using the only perspective that MATTERS when a GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE is in progress; I.E. GLOBAL average temperatures and anomalies above or below average.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

What about September 2012?


(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-percentile-mntp/201209.gif)
As you can see, a lot of heat records were set (don't get fooled by the bright red - look at the 2013 legend for a different record heat temperature  ;)). BUT, 2013 was right up there with high anomalous temperatures. It did NOT have to match all the 2012 heat RECORDS to have a higher average temperature.

HERE'S THE MONEY QUOTE: (please compare with the same money quote for September 2013 above  8) )•The average combined global land and ocean surface temperature for January–September 2012 was the eighth warmest such period on record, at 0.57°C (1.03°F) above the 20th century average.

It's getting hotter every year. Don't let the Mendacious Snow Men for the Koch brothers tell you any different.(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

I'll report on October as soon as the data is in. (http://yoursmiles.org/psmile/pilot/p0502.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 11, 2013, 03:02:22 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-111113145253.jpeg)
Weather Screenshot at 2:34 pm November 11, 2013

Look at the upper left corner. Such a well defined low pressure area (not quite as severe as a hurricane but a major bad weather maker just the same  :o) in NOVEMBER  is an example of what we are going to GET from Global Climate Change born of Global Warming.

WHY? Because earth's climate is a function of free energy in the atmosphere. The planetary internal heat provides some, the rotation provides more and the sun provides most. The more free energy in the atmosphere, the more severe weather, PERIOD. Burning fossil fuels is THE reason for Global Warming, period.

Only logic challenged morons or conscience free psychopaths in the pay of the fossil fuel industry continue to advocate for the fossil fuel burning, severe weather fueling, positive feedback free energy build up. Have a nice day. >:(

Quote
SHORT TERM...A DEEP AND VERTICALLY STACKED LOW CENTERED NEAR 45N 140W IS HELPING TO PUMP UP AN UPPER RIDGE OVER WASHINGTON TODAY.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/view/prodsByState.php?state=WA&prodtype=discussion

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 12, 2013, 02:55:39 pm
This is a preliminary post that I will modify with more details from the following report ASAP:


A Brief Overview of Long-Term Snow Climatology for Burlington, VT
By John Goff
NOAA/NWS Burlington, VT


Snowfall records in Burlington run from 1906 to present.

No attempt is made to correlate the trends with Global Warming. However, the correlation, which die hard deniers will insist is not causation, IS THERE.

Quote
First Measurable Snow
Discussion: Using simple linear regression the data shows wide variability though the first snowfall appears to occur approximately 6 days earlier than 100 years ago (from November 12th to the 6th).

November 12, 2013 we had our first "snow" in Colchester, which is just north of Burlington. It's 30F outside which is pretty normal for November. The roads are clear (no plows came out) and the leaves are mostly visible (so it's more of a light dusting) but "measurable" snow is 0.1 inch or more so it qualifies. ;D

The GW deniers will jump on the above to say, "SEE? it's snowing EARLIER so that PROVES there is NO Global Warming!". (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-026.gif)

But read on and get the FULL PICTURE (i.e. Days with measurable snow on the ground, amount of snow and last snow in Spring).




Quote
Last Measurable Snow
Discussion: Again the data shows considerable variability though a discrete trend of earlier last snowfalls from approximately April 18th to April 10th is noted.

This study was prior to the winters of 2010, 2011, and 2012 where the snow disappeared nearly a month early. However the long term trend was already present. Global Warming Science predicted a positive feedback would occur in earlier last snow (acceleration of the trend) well over a decade ago.




Quote
Frequency of Measureable Snow by Winter
(Number of days with snowfall greater than a trace)
Discussion: Wide variability, though with a steady upward trend in the period of record (44 to 58 days).

Global Warming Science predicted an increase in frequency of precipitation throughout the year in the New England area well over a decade ago.




Quote
Seasonal Snowfall by Winter
Discussion: Wide variability from year to year, though with a steady upward trend showing a 27 inch
increase in the period of record (from 60 to 87 inches).

Global Warming Science predicted an increase in amount of precipitation throughout the year in the New England area well over a decade ago.




Quote
Days with Measureable Snow on the Ground by Winter
Discussion: Significant variation, though data shows a slight decrease of approximately 5 days through the period of record (from 95 to 90 days).

Global Warming Science predicted an increase in average temperatures globally throughout the year well over a decade ago. Less snow remaining is a unction of MUCH higher temperatures when you take the increased frequency and amount of snow accumulation into consideration.

Also consider that this study was prior to the winters of 2010, 2011, and 2012 where all trends accelerated due to the slowing of the jet stream as the temperature gradient between the poles and the equator lessened. This is the giant oxbow loops that give us wild weather extremes.

Global Warming Science predicted the slowing of the jet stream well over a decade ago.
the.

The data is CLEAR. Global Warming, caused by the burning of fossil fuels is HERE. We stop burnig fossil fuels or we are history, PERIOD. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/129fs238648.gif)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 12, 2013, 07:26:43 pm
Big Oil (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) gets the  PROFITS  and  we-the-people get to PAY THE TRUE COST (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb050.gif)   of burning fossil fuels. (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH9jGI1mzSI&feature=player_embedded
Other than the meteor impacts, all the above is being caused by burning fossil fuels.


Sep 7, 2013 - Scientists say atmospheric pollution contributed to half of the extreme weather-related events of last year. (http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/9/7/scientists-link-2012extremeweathertomanmadeclimatechange.html)


Climate Change, Extreme Weather Link Becoming More Apparent (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/27/climate-change-extreme-weather_n_1709603.html)

And the lying, doubletalking mouthpieces for Big Oil are quick to respond with MORE lies to keep the fossil fuel pigs from having to pay the damages...  (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)


Don’t blame climate change for extreme weather   (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) (http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-13/opinions/42041225_1_extreme-weather-weather-events-climate-change)


 (http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)



Climate change alarmists running out of ways to scare people (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg)
(http://www.troymedia.com/2013/11/11/climate-change-alarmists-running-out-of-ways-to-scare-people/)


 (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)

Renewable Revolution (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/465/465823jzy0y15obs.gif)
(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php)
Title: Vast Majority of Americans Acknowledge The Existence of Climate Change
Post by: AGelbert on November 15, 2013, 09:47:24 pm
Vast Majority of Americans Want Action on Climate Change, Whitehouse Gives Weekly Speech
SustainableBusiness.com News
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has come out in favor of a carbon tax once again.

Out of the 103 ways it identifies to reduce the US deficit, the carbon tax comes out on top.

The US would raise slightly over $1 trillion over 10 years if it implements a carbon tax that starts at $25 per ton and increases 2% a year.

This is very close to climate legislation introduced in the Senate earlier this year - $20 per ton, rising 5.6% a year - which would generate even more revenue, says CBO.

It would raise prices at the gas pump by about 21 cents to a gallon if costs are passed to consumers, says Resources for the Future, and would not negatively impact total US employment.

While there's no chance it will pass in the near future given the current dynamics playing out in Congress, Democrats are laying the groundwork.

Weekly Push for Action on Climate
Once a week for the past 50 weeks, Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) takes the Senate floor to talk about climate change.

Week in and week out, he urges Congress to move on climate change.
"I am here for the 50th time, to urge my colleagues to wake up to what carbon pollution is doing to our atmosphere and our oceans," he says, but no one listens.

He runs through the data over and over again that demonstrates global temperature rise, concomitant increases in atmospheric carbon levels and the impact on our oceans.
"We are a great country, but not when we're lying and denying what's real," he says "The atmosphere is warming; ice is melting; seas are warming, rising, and acidifying. It is time for the misleading fantasies to end."

He calls for the carbon tax supported by CBO. Perhaps polluters will take a second look at this option, he says, when EPA's rules on carbon emissions from existing power plants go into effect.

Other senators have joined him from time to time - Senator Schumer (D-NY) spoke on climate change on the anniversary of Superstorm Sandy. Senators Schatz (D-HI) and Blumenthal (D-CT) connected the dots between climate change and ocean health, and Senator King (I-ME) talked about the impact of climate change on the fishing industry.

While hammering away at these facts has so far not changed the political discourse, at least this political leader is giving it air time. The fossil fuel industry and its paid-off politicians would prefer silence on the issue.

"It is time to wake up. It is time to turn back from the misleading propaganda of the polluters, the misguided extremism of the Tea Party, and the mistaken belief that we can ignore without consequence the harm our carbon pollution is causing. It is time to face facts, be adults, and meet our responsibilities."

Whitehouse remains optimistic, especially because there are signs that people are ready to fight climate deniers and boot them out of Congress.

When asked why he's doing this, Whitehouse says, "I very much want my grandchildren to know that I fought the good fight. But much more than that, I want to turn this around," he told columnist Ezra Klein.

Thank you, Senator Whitehouse, you are our voice.
Watch Whitehouse give his 50th speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJ4FACY2MA8&feature=player_embedded

Americans Agree
In 46 states surveyed, at least 75% of resident acknowledge the existence of climate change.

Surprisingly, percentages are the same in "blue" and "red" states: Massachusetts (88%); Rhode Island (87%); New York (84%); California (82%); Oklahoma (87%); Texas (84%); and South Dakota (83%).

At least 67% of people in those states want government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Again, percentages are the same regardless of the state: New Jersey (80%); Connecticut (80%); California (80%); Georgia (85%); Arkansas (85%); and Kentucky (79%).

After analyzing this public opinion data, Jon Krosnick, a professor at Stanford University, told the Guardian, "To me, the most striking finding is that we can't find a single state where climate scepticism is in the majority." (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)  

This disputes the widely-held belief that Republicans deny the existence of climate change. It is not US citizens that are calling climate change a "hoax" or preventing action on it, it is their so-called representatives on state levels and in Congress.  >:(  

Unfortunately for their residents, the reddest states are those that are most unprepared for climate-related disasters because their elected officials lag blue states on acknowledging the problem and are therefore not taking action.  >:(  

"Americans recognize we have a moral obligation to protect the environment and an economic opportunity to develop the clean energy technologies of the future. Americans are way ahead of Congress in listening to the scientists," says Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), who chairs the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change with Senator Whitehouse.

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25355?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SBGeneralNews+%28SustainableBusiness.com+General+News%29
Title: How Global Warming Deniers inerpret REALITY
Post by: AGelbert on November 16, 2013, 03:12:22 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-161113150709.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 16, 2013, 05:08:54 pm
Reposted from the Doomstead Diner where I am having a "debate" with Global Warming denier. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/3ztzsjm.gif)

I think these scientists from a document written in 1984 don't have an agenda. How about you, Snowleapard? Can you trust what these fellows say?

Solar Disinfection of Drinking Water and Oral Rehydration Solutions
 
Guidelines for Household Application in Developing Countries


Aftim Acra - Zeina Raffoul - Yester Karahagopian

Department of Environmental Health
 Faculty of Health Science - American University of Beirut
 Beirut, 1984

1.Foreword


2.Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) ◾The Revolution for Children
◾The Four Simple Technologies
◾Global Diarrhoeal Diseases Control Programs
◾Causes, Transmission, and Control of Childhood Diarrhoea



3.Oral Rehydration Solutions (ORS) ◾The Practical Issues
◾Domestic Formulations
◾Disinfection by Boiling



4.Solar Energy ◾Fundamental Considerations
From Sun to Earth(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)
◾World Distribution
◾A Competitor
◾Some Practical Hints



5.Solar Disinfection Studies ◾Drinking Water
◾Oral Rehydration Solutions



6.Appendix



Originally published by UNICEF
 Regional Office for the Middle East and North Africa
 P.O.Box 811721 - Amman, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
 1984


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Created by the Documentation Center at AUB in collaboration with Al Mashriq of Høgskolen i Østfold, Norway.
 
970730/wa-bl/980215/bl - Email: almashriq@hiof.no




Solar Energy

From Sun to Earth

Outer Space

The enormous amount of energy continuously emitted by the sun is dispersed into outer space in all directions. Only a small fraction of this energy is intercepted by the earth and other solar planets.

The solar energy reaching the periphery of the earth's atmosphere is considered to be constant for all practical purposes, and is known as the solar constant. Because of the difficulty in achieving accurate measurements, the exact value of the solar constant is not known with certainty but is believed to be between 1,353 and 1,395 W/m2 (approximately 1.4 kW/m2, or 2.0 cal/cm2/min). The solar constant value is estimated on the basis of the solar radiation received on a unit area exposed perpendicularly to the rays of the sun at an average distance between the sun and the earth.

In passing through outer space, which is characterized by vacuum, the different types of solar energy remain intact and are not modified until the radiation reaches the top of the earth's atmosphere. In outer space, therefore, one would expect to encounter the types of radiation listed in Table 1, which are: gamma ray, X-ray, ultraviolet, and infrared radiations.


Atmospheric Effects

Not all of the solar radiation received at the periphery of the atmosphere reaches the surfaces of the earth. This is because the earth's atmosphere plays an important role in selectively controlling the passage towards the earth's surface of the various components of solar radiation.

A considerable portion of solar radiation is reflected back into outer space upon striking the uppermost layers of the atmosphere, and also from the tops of clouds. In the course of penetration through the atmosphere, some of the incoming radiation is either absorbed or scattered in all directions by atmospheric gases, vapours, and dust particles. In fact, there are two processes known to be involved in atmospheric scattering of solar radiation. These are termed selective scattering and non-selective scattering. These two processes are determined by the different sizes of particles in the atmosphere.

Selective scattering is so named because radiations with shorter wavelengths are selectively scattered much more extensively than those with longer wavelengths. It is caused by atmospheric gases or particles that are smaller in dimension than the wavelength of a particular radiation. Such scattering could be caused by gas molecules, smoke, fumes, and haze. Under clear atmospheric conditions, therefore, selective scattering would be much less severe than when the atmosphere is extensively polluted from anthropogenic sources.

Selective atmospheric scattering is, broadly speaking, inversely proportional to the wavelength of radiation and, therefore, decreases in the following order of magnitude: far UV > near UV > violet > blue > green > yellow > orange > red > infrared. Accordingly, the most severely scattered radiation is that which falls in the ultraviolet, violet, and blue bands of the spectrum. The scattering effect on radiation in these three bands is roughly ten times as great as on the red rays of sunlight.   8)

It is interesting to note that the selective scattering of violet and blue light by the atmosphere causes the blue colour of the sky. When the sun is directly overhead at around noon time, little selective scattering occurs and the sun appears white. This is because sunlight at this time passes through the minimum thickness of atmosphere. At sunrise and sunset, however, sunlight passes obliquely through a much thicker layer of atmosphere. This results in maximum atmospheric scattering of violet and blue light, with only a little effect on the red rays of sunlight. Hence, the sun appears to be red in colour at sunrise and sunset.   

Non-selective scattering occurring in the lower atmosphere is caused by dust, fog, and clouds with particle sizes more than ten times the wavelength of the components of solar radiation. Since the amount of scattering is equal for all wavelengths, clouds and fog appear white although their water particles are colourless.

Atmospheric gases also absorb solar energy at certain wavelength intervals called absorption bands, in contrast to the wavelength regions characterized by high transmittance of solar radiation called atmospheric transmission bands, or atmospheric windows.

The degree of absorption
of solar radiation passing through the outer atmosphere depends upon the component rays of sunlight and their wavelengths. The gamma rays, X-rays, and ultraviolet radiation less than 200 nm in wavelength are absorbed by oxygen and nitrogen. Most of the radiation with a range of wavelengths from 200 to 300 nm is absorbed by the ozone (O3) layer in the upper atmosphere. These absorption phenomena are essential for living things because prolonged exposure to radiation of wavelengths shorter than 300 nm destroys living tissue.

Solar radiation in the red and infrared regions of the spectrum at wavelengths greater than 700 nm is absorbed to some extent by carbon dioxide, ozone, and water present in the atmosphere in the form of vapour and condensed droplets (Table 1). In fact, the water droplets present in clouds not only absorb rays of long wavelengths, but also scatter some of the solar radiation of short wavelengths.


Ground Level

As a result of the atmospheric phenomena involving reflection, scattering, and absorption of radiation, the quantity of solar energy that ultimately reaches the earth's surface is much reduced in intensity as it traverses the atmosphere. The amount of reduction varies with the radiation wavelength, and depends on the length of the atmospheric path through which the solar radiation traverses. The intensity of the direct beams of sunlight thus depends on the altitude of the sun, and also varies with such factors as latitude, season, cloud coverage, and atmospheric pollutants.

The total solar radiation received at ground level includes both direct radiation and indirect (or diffuse) radiation. Diffuse radiation is the component of total radiation caused by atmospheric scattering and reflection of the incident radiation on the ground. Reflection from the ground is primarily visible light with a maximum radiation peak at a wavelength of 555 nm (green light). The relatively small amount of energy radiated from the earth at an average ambient temperature of 17°C at its surface consists of infrared radiation with a peak concentration at 970 nm. This invisible radiation is dominant at night.

During daylight hours, the amount of diffuse radiation may be as much as 10% of the total solar radiation at noon time even when the sky is clear. This value may rise to about 20% in the early morning and late afternoon.

In conclusion, therefore, it is evident that in cloudy weather the total radiation received at ground level is greatly reduced, the amount of reduction being dependent on cloud coverage and cloud thickness. Under extreme cloud conditions a significant proportion of the incident radiation would be in the form of scattered or diffuse light. In addition, lesser solar radiation is expected during the early and late hours of the day. These facts are of practical value for the proper utilization of solar radiation for such purposes as destruction of microorganisms.


http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/600/610/614/solar-water/unesco/21-23.html (http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/600/610/614/solar-water/unesco/21-23.html)

Agelbert NOTE: The conclusion " it is evident that in cloudy weather the total radiation received at ground level is greatly reduced..." DOES NOT mean, as the Global Warming deniers have tried to make us believe, that the ATMOSPHERE heats up less. It means that to disinfect water (kill the microrganisms) the radiation arriving on the SURFACE needs to have less cloud cover.

But as you read further up, inside the atmosphere (at cloud level well below the ozone layer) the absorption frequencies of gases can scatter the radiation throughout the atmosphere. The reflected light (visible spectrum) from clouds and surface DOES exit the planet. HOWEVER, the Earth CONSTATLY radiates in the IR band which CO2, water and methane trap quite handily because of their ABSORPTION FREQUENCIES. So all that increased albedo business that Global Warming deniers want to push on us, while it will increase VISIBLE light reflection, won't do BEANS to stop the ONLY HEAT that is radiated by this planet (IR).

BOTTOM LINE: Absorption frequencies are the KEY to understanding how the atmosphere heats or cools. The particulate scattering plays a role but the absorption frequencies are the 800 pound gorilla.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Breakdown_of_the_incoming_solar_energy.svg)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy)

Now lets get back to sun spots for a bit of humor. Question: What percentage of the suns TOTAL OUTPUT IN ENERGY reaches top levels of the atmosphere BEFORE it is further selectively reduced by the atmosphere?  

I'll save you the math:  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)
Quote
The Earth intercepts only about one-half of one-billionth of the Sun's total energy output. :o

http://cybele.bu.edu/courses/gg312fall02/documents/lab01.pdf (http://cybele.bu.edu/courses/gg312fall02/documents/lab01.pdf)

Do you now understand why all that BS about sunspot lessened activity and a "weakening" sun doesn't mean JACK **** to us on this planet. The "weakening" of the sun has to be hundreds of thousands of time greater than the piddling amount observed to amount to a hill of temperature BEANs on Earth.

That's why I have told Snowleapard that what he is pushing is baseless, but CLEVER, pro-fossil fuel, context free, IRRELEVANT propaganda. (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg) 

Snowleapard. I CHALLENGE YOU to doubt the three sources I just gave as to accuracy and TRUTH. If you do, you are bought or  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/p8.gif).

Renewable Revolution (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/465/465823jzy0y15obs.gif)
(http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 16, 2013, 05:43:43 pm
Hey Snowleopard, how about these folks from Oklahoma? Are they trustworthy? I think so! Does that mean YOU DON'T? (full explanation for this type of behavior, when it isn't a conscious decision, here (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/who-can-you-trust/mechanisms-of-prejudice-hidden-and-not-hidden/msg348/#msg348))

Oklahoma Climatological Survey  

Earth's Energy Budget

Part 2
 
Principle
 
Absorption and re-emission of radiation at the earth's surface is only one part of an intricate web of heat transfer in the earth's planetary domain. Equally important are selective absorption and emission of radiation from molecules in the atmosphere. If the earth did not have an atmosphere, surface temperatures would be too cold to sustain life.  

If too many gases which absorb and emit infrared radiation were present in the atmosphere, surface temperatures would be too hot to sustain life.
 
 

http://okfirst.mesonet.org/train/meteorology/EnergyBudget2.html



Title: Global Warming Since 1997 Underestimated by Half
Post by: AGelbert on November 17, 2013, 04:13:51 pm
Global Warming Since 1997 Underestimated by Half

Filed under: Climate Science
 Instrumental Record
 — stefan @ 13 November 2013


A new study by British and Canadian researchers shows that the global temperature rise of the past 15 years has been greatly underestimated. The reason is the data gaps in the weather station network, especially in the Arctic. If you fill these data gaps using satellite measurements, the warming trend is more than doubled in the widely used HadCRUT4 data, and the much-discussed “warming pause” has virtually disappeared.

Obtaining the globally averaged temperature from weather station data has a well-known problem: there are some gaps in the data, especially in the polar regions and in parts of Africa. As long as the regions not covered warm up like the rest of the world, that does not change the global temperature curve.

But errors in global temperature trends arise if these areas evolve differently from the global mean. That’s been the case over the last 15 years in the Arctic, which has warmed exceptionally fast, as shown by satellite and reanalysis data and by the massive sea ice loss there. This problem was analysed for the first time by Rasmus in 2008 at RealClimate, and it was later confirmed by other authors in the scientific literature.

The “Arctic hole” is the main reason for the difference between the NASA GISS data and the other two data sets of near-surface temperature, HadCRUT and NOAA. I have always preferred the GISS data because NASA fills the data gaps by interpolation from the edges, which is certainly better than not filling them at all.

A new gap filler

Now Kevin Cowtan (University of York) and Robert Way (University of Ottawa) have developed a new method to fill the data gaps using satellite data.

It sounds obvious and simple, but it’s not. Firstly, the satellites cannot measure the near-surface temperatures but only those overhead at a certain altitude range in the troposphere. And secondly, there are a few question marks about the long-term stability of these measurements (temporal drift).

Cowtan and Way circumvent both problems by using an established geostatistical interpolation method called kriging – but they do not apply it to the temperature data itself (which would be similar to what GISS does), but to the difference between satellite and ground data. So they produce a hybrid temperature field. This consists of the surface data where they exist. But in the data gaps, it consists of satellite data that have been converted to near-surface temperatures, where the difference between the two is determined by a kriging interpolation from the edges. As this is redone for each new month, a possible drift of the satellite data is no longer an issue.

Prerequisite for success is, of course, that this difference is sufficiently smooth, i.e. has no strong small-scale structure. This can be tested on artificially generated data gaps, in places where one knows the actual surface temperature values but holds them back ​​in the calculation. Cowtan and Way perform extensive validation tests, which demonstrate that their hybrid method provides significantly better results than a normal interpolation on the surface data as done by GISS.

The surprising result

Cowtan and Way apply their method to the HadCRUT4 data, which are state-of-the-art except for their treatment of data gaps. For 1997-2012 these data show a relatively small warming trend of only 0.05 °C per decade – which has often been misleadingly called a “warming pause”. The new IPCC report writes:


Due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends. As one example, the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade).

But after filling the data gaps this trend is 0.12 °C per decade and thus exactly equal to the long-term trend mentioned by the IPCC.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Cowtan.png)

Cowtan

The corrected data (bold lines) are shown in the graph compared to the uncorrected ones (thin lines). The temperatures of the last three years have become a little warmer, the year 1998 a little cooler.

The trend of 0.12 °C is at first surprising, because one would have perhaps expected that the trend after gap filling has a value close to the GISS data, i.e. 0.08 °C per decade. Cowtan and Way also investigated that difference. It is due to the fact that NASA has not yet implemented an improvement of sea surface temperature data which was introduced last year in the HadCRUT data (that was the transition from the HadSST2 the HadSST3 data – the details can be found e.g. here and here). The authors explain this in more detail in their extensive background material. Applying the correction of ocean temperatures to the NASA data, their trend becomes 0.10 °C per decade, very close to the new optimal reconstruction.

Conclusion

The authors write in their introduction:


While short term trends are generally treated with a suitable level of caution by specialists in the field, they feature significantly in the public discourse on climate change.

This is all too true. A media analysis has shown that at least in the U.S., about half of all reports about the new IPCC report mention the issue of a “warming pause”, even though it plays a very minor role in the conclusions of the IPCC. Often the tenor was that the alleged “pause” raises some doubts about global warming and the warnings of the IPCC. We knew about the study of Cowtan & Way for a long time, and in the face of such media reporting it is sometimes not easy for researchers to keep such information to themselves. But I respect the attitude of the authors to only go public with their results once they’ve been published in the scientific literature. This is a good principle that I have followed with my own work as well.

The public debate about the alleged “warming pause” was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless, because the trend of the last 15 or 16 years is nothing unusual – even despite the record El Niño year at the beginning of the period. It is still a quarter less than the warming trend since 1980, which is 0.16 °C per decade. But that’s not surprising when one starts with an extreme El Niño and ends with persistent La Niña conditions, and is also running through a particularly deep and prolonged solar minimum in the second half. As we often said, all this is within the usual variability around the long-term global warming trend and no cause for excited over-interpretation.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/11/global-warming-since-1997-underestimated-by-half/#more-16173


A couple CHOICE comments from the bought-and-paid-for-Denier-Squad  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg) and the informed, erudite and clear smack down (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)  of the Real Climate Blog Scientists   (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png) :


Quote

Blair Dowden says:   

13 Nov 2013 at 4:40 PM

Dr. Kevin Cowtan (http://www.york.ac.uk/chemistry/staff/academic/a-c/kcowtan/ (http://www.york.ac.uk/chemistry/staff/academic/a-c/kcowtan/)) is a chemist at the University of York specializing in X-ray crystallography. I do not see any hint of a connection with his work to climate change. Robert Way (http://uottawa.academia.edu/RobertWay (http://uottawa.academia.edu/RobertWay)) is a graduate student in geography at the University of Ottawa, but at least one of his few papers is somewhat relevant. These are not the qualifications I would expect for the authors of such a ground breaking paper. (This comment seemed to get lost, so I am posting it again.)

[Response: With the amount of open data available for anyone to analyse, this is not such a stretch. There are many good papers from 'outsiders' in the literature and in general this kind of constructive input should be welcomed (as with work done by Zeke Hausfather, Troy Masters etc.). - gavin]
[Response: p.s. It is well worth looking at his impressive citation record. I think it is excellent if top scientists from other fields make methodological contributions to climate science. -stefan]




12
Peter Lilley says:   

13 Nov 2013 at 4:47 PM

Why do nearly all data reanalyses on this site show the warming is greater than the raw data?

[Response: Not true.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif)
 The raw SST data show much larger trends that turned out to be spurious due to changes in measuring techniques. The GISTEMP analyses correct for an urban heating effect that would otherwise lead to a (slightly) stronger trend globally. Homogeneity corrections at GHCN go both ways. The analysis in this instance is correcting for an obvious hole in the HadCRUT4 data (mainly the Arctic) which even you know has been warming faster. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)Your question therefore smacks of a desire to have lower trends for reasons that are not clear.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif) I prefer to take the info as it comes rather than wishing it were otherwise. - gavin] (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg) 


Title: October 2013 Antarctic ice largest extent since records began in 1979!
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2013, 01:49:43 am
October 2013 Antarctic ice largest extent since records began in 1979! Is Snowleopard vindicated? Does Agelbert have to eat a snowball with his crow? :P            (http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/stock/thumb_smiley-sign0105.gif)



October was a RECORD HOT MONTH GLOBALLY!



Nevertheless, expect the Global Warming Deniers to do some world class mendacious "Antarctic ice is growing at a record pace! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) Global Warming is a hoax!" (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) cherry picking. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

Read the EVIDENCE that Global WARMING hasn't "paused" but is, in fact, worsening!

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/extremes/201310.gif)

During October 2013, most of the world land areas experienced warmer-than-average temperatures, with the most notable departures from the 1981–2010 average across Alaska, northwestern Canada, northwestern Africa, and parts of north central and southern Asia.

The departure from the 1981–2010 average in these locations varied between +2°C to +5°C or greater. When comparing the October 2013 departure from average with the location's period of record (minimum of 80 years), parts of Alaska, northwestern Canada, northwestern Africa, and southern Australia experienced their warmest October temperature on record.

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-percentile-mntp/201310.gif)

As shown in the anomalies map, some areas that had departures that were above the 1981–2010 average, but lower in magnitude—such as Australia, Mexico, most of Africa, western and central Europe, northern and southern Argentina, and parts of the Caribbean—fell in the much-warmer-than-average category, as shown in the percentiles map, with some locations in the Caribbean having their warmest October on record.

Some locations across the globe experienced departures that were below the 1981–2010 average. These areas include most of the western half of the United States, northern parts of the Middle East, and parts of central South America, western Russia and the Russian Far East. When comparing each location's October 2013 temperature with their respective period of record, the northern Middle East experienced much-cooler-than-average temperatures, while the rest had near-average to cooler-than-average temperatures. There were no land areas that experienced record coldest temperatures.

Averaged as a whole, the temperature across the land surfaces was 0.98°C (1.76°F) higher than the 20th century average of 9.3°C (48.7°F)—tying with 2012  as the eighth warmest October since records began in 1880.  

This was also the 21st consecutive October with a warmer-than-average temperature. The last October with below-average temperatures occurred in 1992,  when the global land temperature was 0.04°C (0.07°F) below the 20th century average.

The last below-average global land temperature for any month was February 1994. When averaging the temperature across the land surfaces across each hemisphere, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its seventh warmest October on record, with a departure from the 20th century average of +1.01°C (+1.82°F), while the Southern Hemisphere's October 2013 land surface temperature was +0.90°C (+1.62°F) higher than the 20th century average—the eighth warmest October on record.

Select national information is highlighted below. (Please note that different countries report anomalies with respect to different base periods. The information provided here is based directly upon these data):

•For the 15th consecutive month (since August 2012), Australia experienced above-average temperatures. The nationally averaged October maximum temperature was the third warmest on record with a departure from the 1961–1990 average of +2.1°C. Minimum temperatures were also above average, but did not rank among the top ten warmest on record. The mean national temperature was 1.43°C above average—the seventh warmest since national temperature records began in 1910, according to Australia's Bureau of Meteorology. Also, the 12-month (November 2012 to October 2013) mean temperature for the nation was 1.3°C above the 1961–1990 average—the highest 12-month period average for the nation. This value surpasses the previous record set the two previous months, +1.25°C (October 2012 to September 2013) and +1.11°C (September 2012 to August 2013). This is also 0.22°C higher than any 12-month period prior to 2013.

•Spain experienced warm temperatures during October, with an average monthly temperature of 17.5°C or 2.1°C above the 1971–2000 average. This resulted in the sixth warmest October since national records began in 1961.

•In Austria, the October 2013 temperature was 1.1°C warmer than the 1981–2010 average—the warmest October since 2006 and the 25th warmest October since national records began in 1767.

•The national temperature in Germany was 10.6°C or 1.4°C warmer than the 1981–2010 average, resulting in the 11th warmest October since national records began in 1881.

Across the oceans, temperature departures from 1981–2010 tend to be smaller than across the land surfaces. According to the percentiles map, much-warmer-than-average conditions were present across the tropical Atlantic Ocean, and along the European and the northeastern United States coasts, the tropical Western Pacific Ocean, the south-central Pacific Ocean, and across parts of the Indian Ocean. Some ocean areas in the Caribbean, western and south-central Pacific Ocean, and Indian Ocean experienced their warmest October temperature on record. ENSO-neutral (neither El Niño nor La Niña) conditions persisted across much of the tropical Pacific Ocean during October. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, neutral conditions are favored through the Northern Hemisphere spring 2014. Averaged globally, the global ocean temperature was 0.50°C (0.90°F) above the 20th century average, ranking as the eighth warmest October on record.

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-percentile-mntp/201310.gif)

Averaging the globe as a whole, the temperature across land and ocean surfaces combined during October 2013 was 0.63°C (1.13°F) above the 1901–2000 average of 14.0°C (57.1°F)—the seventh warmest October since records began in 1880. It also marked the 37th consecutive October and 344th consecutive month (more than 28 years) with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last below-average October global temperature was October 1976 and the last below-average global temperature for any month was February 1985.  The warmest October on record occurred in 2003 when global land and ocean surface temperatures were 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average, while the coldest October occurred in 1912 [-0.57°C (-1.03°F)].


http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/
Title: No Statistically Significant Correlations Between Cosmic Rays and Global Albedo
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2013, 06:34:28 pm
Simple physics and climate

Filed under: Climate modelling
Climate Science
Greenhouse gases
Sun-earth connections
— rasmus @ 12 November 2013


No doubt, our climate system is complex and messy. Still, we can sometimes make some inferences about it based on well-known physical principles. Indeed, the beauty of physics is that a complex systems can be reduced into simple terms that can be quantified, and the essential aspects understood.

A recent paper by Sloan and Wolfendale (2013) provides an example where they derive a simple conceptual model of how the greenhouse effect works from first principles. They show the story behind the expression saying that a doubling in CO2 should increase the forcing by a factor of 1+log|2|/log|CO2|. I have a fondness for such simple conceptual models (e.g. I’ve made my own attempt posted at arXiv) because they provide a general picture of the essence – of course their precision is limited by their simplicity.


However, the main issue discussed in the paper by Sloan and Wolfendale was not the greenhouse effect, but rather the question about galactic cosmic rays and climate. The discussion of the greenhouse effect was provided as a reference to the cosmic rays.

Even though we have discussed this question several times here at RC, Sloan and Wolfendale introduce some new information in connection with radiation, ionization, and cloud formation. Even after having dug into all these other aspects, they do not find much evidence for the cosmic rays playing an important role. Their conclusions fit nicely with my own findings that also recently were published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

The cosmic ray hypothesis is weakened further by observational evidence from satellites, as shown in another recent paper by Krissansen-Totton and Davies (2013) in Geophysical Research Letters, which also concludes that the there is no statistically significant correlations between cosmic rays and global albedo or globally averaged cloud height. Neither did they find any evidence for any regional or lagged correlations.

It’s nice to see that the Guardian has picked up these findings. Agelbert NOTE: IT will ALSO be nice as well as EDUCATIONAL and significant   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png) to observe who DIDN'T pick up on these findings (e.g. Globalresearch.org - Et tu Brute?  (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg)  ).   

Earlier in October, Almeida et al., 2013 had a paper published in Nature on results from the CLOUD experiment at CERN. They found that galactic cosmic rays exert only a small influence on the formation of sulphuric acid–dimethylamine clusters (the embryonic stage before aerosols may act as cloud condensation nuclei). The authors also reported that the experimental results were reproduced by a dynamical model, based on quantum chemical calculations.

Some may ask why we keep revisiting the question about cosmic rays and climate, after presenting all the evidence to the contrary.  ???

One reason is that science is never settled, and there are still some lingering academic communities nourishing the idea that changes in the sun or cosmic rays play a role.  ;) For this reason, a European project was estaqblished in 2011, COST-action TOSCA (Towards a more complete assessment of the impact of solar variability on the Earth’s climate), whose objective is to provide a better understanding of the “hotly debated role of the Sun in climate change” (not really in the scientific fora, (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)  but more in the general public discourse (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif)).  

ps  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)
Oldenborgh et al. (2013) also questioned the hypothesised link between extremely cold winter conditions in Europe and weak solar activity, but their analysis did not reproduce such claims.


References
1. T. Sloan, and A.W. Wolfendale, "Cosmic rays, solar activity and the climate", Environmental Research Letters, vol. 8, pp. 045022, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/045022

2. J. Krissansen-Totton, and R. Davies, "Investigation of cosmic ray-cloud connections using MISR", Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 40, pp. 5240-5245, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/grl.50996

3. J. Almeida, S. Schobesberger, A. Kürten, I.K. Ortega, O. Kupiainen-Määttä, A.P. Praplan, A. Adamov, A. Amorim, F. Bianchi, M. Breitenlechner, A. David, J. Dommen, N.M. Donahue, A. Downard, E. Dunne, J. Duplissy, S. Ehrhart, R.C. Flagan, A. Franchin, R. Guida, J. Hakala, A. Hansel, M. Heinritzi, H. Henschel, T. Jokinen, H. Junninen, M. Kajos, J. Kangasluoma, H. Keskinen, A. Kupc, T. Kurtén, A.N. Kvashin, A. Laaksonen, K. Lehtipalo, M. Leiminger, J. Leppä, V. Loukonen, V. Makhmutov, S. Mathot, M.J. McGrath, T. Nieminen, T. Olenius, A. Onnela, T. Petäjä, F. Riccobono, I. Riipinen, M. Rissanen, L. Rondo, T. Ruuskanen, F.D. Santos, N. Sarnela, S. Schallhart, R. Schnitzhofer, J.H. Seinfeld, M. Simon, M. Sipilä, Y. Stozhkov, F. Stratmann, A. Tomé, J. Tröstl, G. Tsagkogeorgas, P. Vaattovaara, Y. Viisanen, A. Virtanen, A. Vrtala, P.E. Wagner, E. Weingartner, H. Wex, C. Williamson, D. Wimmer, P. Ye, T. Yli-Juuti, K.S. Carslaw, M. Kulmala, J. Curtius, U. Baltensperger, D.R. Worsnop, H. Vehkamäki, and J. Kirkby, "Molecular understanding of sulphuric acid–amine particle nucleation in the atmosphere", Nature, vol. 502, pp. 359-363, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature12663

4. G.J. van Oldenborgh, A.T.J. de Laat, J. Luterbacher, W.J. Ingram, and T.J. Osborn, "Claim of solar influence is on thin ice: are 11-year cycle solar minima associated with severe winters in Europe?", Environmental Research Letters, vol. 8, pp. 024014, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024014


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/11/simple-physics-and-climate/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 25, 2013, 02:58:55 pm

(http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/methane1_h1.preview.jpg)
Arctic releasing twice as much methane as previously thought
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) Twice as Much Methane Escaping Arctic Seafloor

LiveScience.com, Nov. 24, 2013

The Arctic methane time bomb is bigger than scientists once thought and primed to blow, according to a study published today (Nov. 24) in the journal Nature Geoscience.

About 17 teragrams of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, escapes each year from a broad, shallow underwater platform called the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, said Natalia Shakova, lead study author and a biogeochemist at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. A teragram is equal to about 1.1 million tons; the world emits about 500 million tons of methane every year from manmade and natural sources. The new measurement more than doubles the team's earlier estimate of Siberian methane release, published in 2010 in the journal Science.

"We believe that release of methane from the Arctic, in particular, from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, could impact the entire globe, not just the Arctic alone," Shakova told LiveScience. "The picture that we are trying to understand is what is the actual contribution of the [shelf] to the global methane budget and how it will change over time."

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) Waiting to escape

Arctic permafrost is an area of intense research focus because of its climate threat. The frozen ground holds enormous stores of methane because the ice traps methane rising from inside the Earth, as well as gas made by microbes living in the soil. Scientists worry that the warming Arctic could lead to rapidly melting permafrost, releasing all that stored methane and creating a global warming feedback loop as the methane in the atmosphere traps heat and melts even more permafrost.

Researchers are trying to gauge this risk by accurately measuring stores of methane in permafrost on land and in the ocean, and predicting how fast it will thaw as the planet warms. Though methane gas quickly decays once it escapes into the atmosphere, lasting only about 10 years, it is 30 times more efficient than carbon dioxide at trapping heat (the greenhouse effect).

Shakova and colleague Igor Semiletov of the Russian Academy of Sciences first discovered methane bubbling up from the shallow seafloor a decade ago in Russia's Laptev Sea. Methane is trapped there in ground frozen during past ice ages, when sea level was much lower.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) Shallow waters

In their latest study, Shakova and her colleagues reported thousands of measurements of methane bubbles taken in summer and winter, between 2003 and 2012.

But the team also sampled seawater temperature and drilled into the ocean bottom, to see if the sediments are still frozen. Most of the survey was in water less than 100 feet (30 meters deep).
The shallow water is one reason so much methane escapes the Siberian shelf — in the deeper ocean, as methane-eating microbes digest the gas before it reaches the surface, Shakova said. But in the Laptev Sea, "it takes the bubbles only seconds, or at least a couple of minutes, to escape from the water column," Shakova said.

Arctic storms that churn the sea also speed up the release of methane from ocean water, like stirring a soft-drink releases gas bubbles, Shakova said. During the surveys, the amount of methane in the ocean and atmosphere dropped after two big Arctic storms passed through in 2009 and 2010, the researchers reported.

The temperature measurements revealed the water just above the ocean bottom warms by more than 12 degrees Fahrenheit (7 degrees Celsius) in some spots during the summer, the researchers found. And the drill core revealed that the surface sediment layers were unfrozen at the drill site, near the Lena River delta.

"We have now proved that the current state of subsea permafrost is incomparably closer to the thaw point than that of terrestrial permafrost," Shakova said.

Shakova and her colleagues attribute the warming of the permafrost to long-term changes initiated when sea levels rose starting at the end of the last glacial period. The seawater is several degrees warmer than the frozen ground, and is slowly melting the ice over thousands of years, they think.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-034.gif) Massive burst


But other researchers think the permafrost warming started only recently. "This is the first time in 12,000 years the Arctic Ocean has warmed up 7 degrees in the summer, and that's entirely new because the sea ice hasn't been there to hold the temperatures down," said Peter Wadhams, head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge in the U.K., who was not involved in the study. The summer ice melt season has lasted longer since 2005, giving the sun more time to warm the ocean.

"If we do have a methane burst it's going to be catastrophic," Wadhams said. Earlier this year, Wadhams and colleagues in Britain calculated that a mega-methane release from the Siberian shelf could push global temperatures up by 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degrees Celsius). The suggestion, published in the journal Nature, was widely debated by climate researchers. Climate change experts and international negotiators have said that keeping the rise in Earth's average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) is necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Shakova said much more research is needed to understand the factors that control how much methane is released from the entire East Siberian Arctic Shelf, which covers 772,000 square miles (2 million square kilometers), or nearly one-fifth the size of the United States.

"Ten years ago we started from zero knowledge in this area," Shakova said. "This is the largest shelf in the world's oceans. That's why it's very challenging to understand the natural processes behind the methane emissions in this area."

http://news.yahoo.com/twice-much-methane-escaping-arctic-seafloor-041738506.html
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 27, 2013, 11:40:39 pm

Snowleopard said about the following image:(http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.antarctic.png)

Quote
Do YOU see a significant trend here, hot or cold?  I don't.  IF there is a GLOBAL trend currently, the Antarctic ice seems immune. 


Agelbert Responds:


                                    Globe BELOW:
Antarctic region HERE---->(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif)


NOTE: When discussing GLOBAL TRENDS, it is customary to include the ENTIRE GLOBAL surface area.  (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg) That means, like, adding up the hotter than baseline normal areas and subtracting, in appropriate percentile segments  ;), the cooler than baseline normal areas.

IOW Antarctica is not the globe, as in "Global Trend", get it?  ;)

But since you fine fellows are all fired up about all that ice in the OCEAN around Antarctica, let's talk about ALL of Antarctica.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)
 

Quote
All the sea ice talk aside, it is quite clear that really when it comes to Antarctic ice and sea levels, sea ice is not the most important thing to measure. In Antarctica, the largest and most important ice mass is the land ice of the West Antarctic and East Antarctic ice sheets.

Therefore, how is Antarctic land ice doing?

Shepherd et al. 2012
Figure 2: Estimates of total Antarctic land ice changes and approximate sea level contributions using a combination of different measurement techniques (Shepherd, 2012). Shaded areas represent the estimate uncertainty (1-sigma).

Estimates of recent changes in Antarctic land ice (Figure 2, bottom panel) show an increasing contribution to sea level with time, although not as fast a rate or acceleration as Greenland. Between 1992 and 2011, the Antarctic Ice Sheets overall lost 1350 giga-tonnes (Gt) or 1,350,000,000,000 tonnes into the oceans, at an average rate of 70 Gt per year (Gt/yr). Because a reduction in mass of 360 Gt/year represents an annual global-average sea level rise of 1 mm, these estimates equate to an increase in global-average sea levels by 0.19 mm/yr.

There is variation between regions within Antarctica (Figure 2, top panel), with the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet losing ice mass, and with an increasing rate. The East Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing slightly over this period but not enough to offset the other losses.  There are of course uncertainties in the estimation methods but independent data from multiple measurement techniques (explained here) all show the same thing, Antarctica is losing land ice as a whole, and these losses are accelerating quickly.


Last updated on 10 July 2013 by mattking. View Archives

See images referenced in the quote at the link below along with the full and well referenced article. :emthup:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

The image below shows dovetails with images in the article quantifying the rapidly depleting Antarctic LAND ICE. As the article above claims, the CAUSE of the rapidly expanding Antarctic SEA ICE is the rapidly depleting LAND ICE.


Are you going to tell me these scientific facts and observations are "not considered 'CFS' to the lay person"? It doesn't pass the sniff test? Do you smell a global warming agenda rat here?

I don't. Check the reference!
(http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/antarctica2.jpg)



 (http://lucidating.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/eatcrow.gif)
Gentlemen Snowleopard and MKing, the specialty of the house, Hot Antarctic Crow, is served. Bon appetit!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/5yjbztv.gif)



Note: if you don't like crow, the meal may be substituted for standing at the door of the Doomstead Diner and repeating the word, "UNCLE" for several days. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/290.gif)         (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/245.gif)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 28, 2013, 06:52:00 pm


Snowleopard changes the subject of GLOBAL WARMING TRENDS with a question:
Quote
How many more of these volcanoes remain undiscovered????

You don't like crow? You refuse to say, "UNCLE"?

Such a proud, persistent prevaricator.

For the viewing audience, Snowleopard's "question" CARRIES AN UNDERLYING STATEMENT.

AND THAT "STATEMENT" is a, nauseatingly consistent, (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__burp.gif) propaganda point that Global Warming Deniers in the service of DIRTY ENERGY cling tenaciously and mendaciously to:

Snowleopard continues to claim day and night, 24/7 that "WE JUST DON'T KNOW".(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png)


How convenient.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)


I guess it's true that A LEOPARD WILL NEVER CHANGE ITS SPOTS!   


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usDzh7l5HZw&feature=player_embedded
 Video on Antarctic Land Ice measuring science

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/06/de-ice-antarctica/

Snowleopard, please look up "order of magnitude". It will help you establish a proper perspective on total planetary volcanic heat versus Anthropogenic CO2 emissions caused HEAT.

Quote
Annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions exceed annual volcanic CO2 by two orders of magnitude, and probably exceed the CO2 output of one or more super-eruptions***. Thus there is no scientific basis for using volcanic CO2 emissions as an excuse for failing to manage humanity’s carbon footprint.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/08/volcanic-vs-anthropogenic-co2/
Title: Two Subglacial Lakes Discovered in Greenland
Post by: AGelbert on November 29, 2013, 11:22:12 pm
Two Subglacial Lakes Discovered in Greenland
Nov 28, 2013 by Sci-News.com 

A team of researchers from the University of Cambridge’s Scott Polar Research Institute has discovered two lakes about 800 m below the ice sheet near the town of Qaanaaq in northwestern Greenland.

(http://cdn4.sci-news.com/images/2013/11/image_1581_1-Greenland-lakes.jpg)
This map shows the location of two subglacial lakes near the town of Qaanaaq in northwestern Greenland.

Subglacial lakes are likely to influence the flow of the ice sheet, impacting global sea level change. The discovery of the lakes in Greenland will help researchers to understand how the ice will respond to changing environmental conditions.

The Cambridge scientists used airborne radar measurements to reveal the lakes underneath the ice sheet.

The two lakes are roughly 8-10 km2, and at one point may have been up to 3 times larger than their current size.

They are found in the northwest sector of the Greenland Ice Sheet, about 40 km from the ice margin, and below 757 and 809 m of ice, respectively.

“Our results show that subglacial lakes exist in Greenland, and that they form an important part of the ice sheet’s plumbing system. Because the way in which water moves beneath ice sheets strongly affects ice flow speeds, improved understanding of these lakes will allow us to predict more accurately how the ice sheet will respond to anticipated future warming,” said Dr Steven Palmer, the lead author of the study published online in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

The lakes are unusual compared with those detected beneath Antarctic ice sheets, suggesting that they formed in a different manner.

(http://cdn4.sci-news.com/images/2013/11/image_1581_2-Greenland-lakes.jpg)
This radar map shows subglacial bed elevations near the town of Qaanaaq; lines show contours of the newly discovered subglacial lakes; dashed lines show possible previous larger contours. Image credit: Palmer SJ et al.

The scientists propose that, unlike in Antarctica where surface temperatures remain below freezing all year round, the newly discovered lakes are most likely fed by melting surface water draining through cracks in the ice. A surface lake situated nearby may also replenish the subglacial lakes during warm summers. This means that the lakes are part of an open system and are connected to the surface, which is different from Antarctic lakes that are most often isolated ecosystems.

While nearly 400 lakes have been detected beneath the Antarctic ice sheets, the two newly discovered lakes are the first to be identified in Greenland.
______
Bibliographic information: Palmer SJ et al. 2013. Greenland subglacial lakes detected by radar. Geophysical Research Letters, published online; doi: 10.1002/2013GL058383

http://www.phenomenica.com/pin/e97ee2054defb209c35fe4dc94599061
Title: Artic Death Spiral and the Methane Time Bomb
Post by: AGelbert on December 06, 2013, 02:34:16 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6pFDu7lLV4&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 16, 2013, 06:25:01 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xYWIbgr_v0&feature=player_embedded
Title: Amazon Becomes Net Emitter of CO2
Post by: AGelbert on December 26, 2013, 03:39:52 pm
Climate Change Threatens Peru’s Economic Progress As Amazon Becomes Net Emitter of CO2  :(


Climate Change Threatens Peru’s Economic Progress As Amazon Becomes Net Emitter of CO2

Climate News Network | December 26, 2013 12:22 pm | Comments

By Alex Kirby

Peru is the country chosen to host the 2014 United Nations (UN) climate conference, a key meeting for trying to advance an ambitious plan to rein in greenhouse emissions which is planned for agreement in 2015.

Scientists think Peru’s role reversal from being a carbon sink to a net emitter of CO2 in 2012 is result of droughts in the western Amazon.

But the country has recently earned a rather more dubious distinction. In 2012, for the first time, the Peruvian Amazon became a net emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2) rather than oxygen, according to the latest human development country report of the UN Development Programme (UNDP).

The Amazon rainforest usually acts as a carbon sink, absorbing atmospheric CO2 rather than releasing it. Scientists think this reversal of its normal behavior results from the droughts in the western Amazon in 2005 and 2010 and say it shows Peru’s vulnerability to climate change.

Peru has more than halved its poverty rate in the last decade, from 48.5 percent in 2004 to 25.8 percent in 2012. But the 2013 UNDP report said its vulnerability to a warming climate could cancel the progress it has made in directing economic growth into sustained poverty reduction.

Glaciers Going

One of the UNDP report’s authors, Maria Eugenia Mujica, said: “If we disregard [environmental] sustainability, whatever progress we have made in poverty reduction or improvement of human development will just be erased due to climate change.”

With a temperature rise in the Andes of 0.7 degrees Celsius between 1939 and 2006, Peru has already lost 39 percent of its tropical glaciers. Temperature rises of up to 6 degrees Celsius are expected in many parts of the Andes by the end of this century.

Peru’s economic success is in some cases directly linked to activities which contribute to climate change, for example illegal gold mining and logging, and the **** trade—all of them environmentally destructive, but lucrative.

“The growth does not come from education or health, but from predatory activities, like [resource] extraction and mining,” said Francisco Santa Cruz, another of the report’s authors.

Peru is trying to protect itself against the ravages of a warmer world, but the odds are against it. It recently announced plans to invest $6 billion USD in renewable energy projects: around the same time came predictions that climate change could cost between 8 percent and 34 percent of its GDP. A report by the Inter-American Development Bank has said the entire Latin American and Caribbean region will face annual damages from global warming of about $100 billion USD by 2050.

Taken for Granted

The Global Canopy Programme and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture, describing climate change as “a threat multiplier,” called in a report this month for a new security agenda for Amazonia and the countries of the region.

Manuel Pulgar, Peru’s environment minister, said at the report’s launch: “Climate change is a global problem, but one that will multiply local and regional problems in unforeseeable ways.”

“In Latin America, we have taken Amazonia and its seemingly limitless water and forests as a given,” Pulgar continued. “But recent unprecedented droughts have shown us just what happens when that water security falters.

“It impacts food and energy production, it affects the wellbeing of entire populations, and it leaves governments and businesses with a big bill to pay,” Pulgar concluded. “The science is clear, so we cannot afford to miss the opportunity for positive action now. (http://www.nhclc.org/files/nhclc/u38/fl-church-translators-20120622-001.jpg)



http://ecowatch.com/2013/12/26/climate-change-threatens-perus-amazon-net-emitter-co2/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 01, 2014, 11:34:37 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhJR3ywIijo&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 08, 2014, 09:54:36 pm
New Report Affirms Dark Money Lines Utility Pockets

The rooftop solar industry closed out 2013 with a 4-0 winning streak against the monopoly utilities’ attempts to eliminate net metering. Net metering gives rooftop solar customers full retail credit for the excess electricity they deliver to the electric grid. The utility turns around and sells this electricity to homes and businesses nearby, and saves money on big costs like transmission and distribution.

Idaho, Louisiana, California, and Arizona all upheld net metering this year, siding with public opinion, consumer choice, and competition. The battle in Arizona was particularly heated, as Arizona Public Service (APS) took the fight to new levels with dark money tactics and a multimillion-dollar

campaign against rooftop solar. After reports from October exposed the utility for lying about funding anti-solar ad campaigns and phony grassroots organizations, a web of dark money surfaced.

In response, Arizonans came out in droves to support the energy choice and competition that rooftop solar provides. More than 30,000 Arizonans wrote to the state’s Corporation Commission to defend net metering, particularly notable considering there are only 18,000 rooftop solar customers in the state. On the day of the final hearing in November, more than 1,000 Arizonans descended on the Arizona Corporation Commission headquarters. Ultimately, Arizona Public Service failed to get the large solar tax they had requested, and net metering was upheld.

The Arizona activities make us question which other utilities are using dark money tactics in their state-by-state campaigns against rooftop solar. Yet other utilities and their trade association, Edison Electric Institute (EEI), remain silent on this issue, even after a request that they disavow such tactics.

A recent Washington Post article validates the pervasiveness of dark money in climate change denial and the fights against solar. The piece, titled, “The Dark Money in Climate Change,” reports:

The thrust of the study, done by Dr. Robert J. Brulle, is that climate-denial money has largely been driven underground to dark-money sources. About 75 percent of the money backing climate-denial efforts is untraceable, primarily via conservative foundations and shadowy tax-exempt groups that obscure their funding sources.

The story goes on to explain that untraceable funding to attack climate change has increased at the same time that publicly traceable funding from major industrial donors has decreased. Notable industrial donors whose public funding has dwindled of late include ExxonMobil and Koch Industries. As the Washington Post states, “You don’t have to be a genius to figure out what’s happening there.”

As we enter 2014, net metering battles are already underway in notable solar markets such as Colorado. Fortunately, while the solar industry doesn’t have the deep pockets of fossil fuel supporters, we do have the public on our side. According to a new poll, nearly four in five Colorado voters (78%) support solar net metering. What’s more, these results match other state-by-state findings across the country – including California, Arizona and Hawaii – that show overwhelming public support for rooftop solar.

The Washington Post affirms that there’s no shortage of dark money supporting monopoly utilities. It remains to be seen where and how it will surface in 2014.

http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/07/new-report-affirms-dark-money-lines-utility-pockets/#s5p0Yr061R9AJgjQ.99

(http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/63135/large/Climatic_Change_Denial_Funding_zps6e784905.png?1388188139)

The above is climate denial funding. This is in LOCKSTEP with support for utility monopolies. So look to MKing's fossil fueler pals above who claim they are more "competitive" that Renewable Energy

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 21, 2014, 09:04:21 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)
 NOAA: 2013 Was Tied For The Fourth-Hottest Year On Record


 By Ryan Koronowski   on  January 21, 2014 at 7:34 pm

While Americans deal with a wintery January and try to understand what a polar vortex is, one thing is clear: 2013 was one of the ten hottest years since records began in 1880. For the 37th consecutive year, global temperatures were higher than average.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported Tuesday that 2013 was tied with 2003 as the fourth-warmest year since records began in 1880 — annual land and ocean surface temperatures were 0.62°C (1.12°F) higher than average. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) reported that along with 2009 and 2006, 2013 was tied for the seventh-warmest year on record, “continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures.” NASA used essentially the same data — it just processes it slightly differently than NOAA does. Indeed, the difference between 4th place and 7th place is just two-hundredths of a degree. NASA had the “temperature anomaly” — how much the global temperature deviated from the average — pegged at 0.60°C and NOAA had 0.58°C.
 
The data from 2013 is just one report, but it is another data point in a trend that people can expect as the atmosphere gets more and more filled with increasing amounts of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Gavin Schmidt, Deputy Chief at NASA GISS, told reporters on a conference call Tuesday that “long-term trends in climate are extremely robust — there is year-to-year variability, there is season-to-season variability, there are times such as today, when we can have snow, even in a globally warmed world.

“But the long-term trends are very clear, they’re not going to disappear, and people should be aware of that,” Schmidt said. He cautioned against allowing short memories and cold snaps to get in the way of the data.

Though cold weather might help people lose weight, it does not help them understand the reality of long-term trends like climate change. Studies in recent years have found that colder days make people less likely to be concerned about — and acknowledge — global warming.

Where was the extra warmth in 2013 concentrated? Almost everywhere except the middle of North America and parts of the Pacific Ocean. This map shows how observed temperatures in 2013 compared to the 1951-1980 average:

(http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20140121/gistemp_maps_100.jpg)
NASA2013temperaturemap
CREDIT: NASA/GSFC/Earth Observatory, NASA/GISS

A map of where these hot and cold temperature anomalies occur can help give a picture of what is happening on a global scale, and just how odd it was for parts of North America to be colder than normal. Much of the rest of the globe had blooms of reds and pinks, signifying hotter-than-average temperatures.

Watching a video that puts six decades of these maps in one constant flow shows quite clearly the warming trend facing everyone on Earth, even if some parts experience periodic cold snaps:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaJJtS_WDmI&feature=player_embedded

NASA’s Schmidt said that “the warmth that we’ve seen in the last decade clearly makes this decade the warmest in the historical period.” Videos like this help bring a trend like that to life. The complete year-by-year animation of 1880-2013 takes longer, but can be viewed here.

The geographic breakdown shows that recent warming has been concentrated in parts of the Arctic, Australia, South America, and large swaths of Asia and Africa. Many of these areas experienced record warms. January 2013 was the hottest month ever observed in Australia — last summer was the hottest one ever, followed by the third-warmest winter and warmest-ever spring. Despite some slightly colder-than-average periods in the middle of North America and over the Southern Pacific Ocean, not one region of the globe experienced record colds.



Even still, most of North America experienced warmer-than-average temperatures. Alaska had its second-warmest summer on record. Mexico had its hottest summer on record.


This trapped energy in the atmosphere does not just manifest as heat, it also affects the water cycle. Areas that tend to be wet often get wetter, because the heat allows the air to hold more moisture, increasing the strength of precipitation events. Dry areas, as they get hotter, yield more and more of their trapped moisture to evaporation, which often gets blown away, sometimes worsening droughts. In 2013, precipitation was close to average on the whole for the globe, but this fact can hide how some regions experienced record drought and some saw record flooding.

In addition to the massive flash floods on Colorado’s Front Range, many parts of the world experienced damage from extended precipitation or flash floods of their own, including: the coast of Queensland, Australia; La Plata, Argentina; Mozambique and Mali; Germany, Poland, Czech Republic, Austria, and Switzerland; Northwest India and Nepal; the Russian-Chinese border, and much of Mexico. Higher-than-average snowfall hit Moscow, Russia, the United Kingdom, Israel, Lebanon, and Jordan.

Other parts of the planet had a lot less water than normal, and suffered serious and sometimes record droughts, including: Northeastern Brazil, large parts of the Amazon Basin, and the Brazilian Plateau; the Marshall Islands; New Zealand; Angola and Namibia; Southern China, and parts of California.

Another remarkable thing about 2013′s heat is that there was no El Nino — a long-term weather pattern that results in periodic warming of the equatorial Pacific region. Gavin Schmidt said Tuesday that that the long-term trends caused by an increase in greenhouse gases will continue whether there is an El Nino or a La Nina. La Nina years are going to be slightly cooler than normal, El Nino years are going to be slightly warmer than normal. 2013 was one of the warmest neutral years (not a strong El Nino or La Nina) on record.

James Hansen, now an adjunct professor at Columbia University (and formerly head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies) noted that because of the likelihood of a strong El Nino this year, 2014 or 2015 would probably see another global temperature record.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/21/3187581/noaa-nasa-2013-temperature/
Title: The California drought is bad. REALLY bad!
Post by: AGelbert on January 22, 2014, 08:43:49 pm
The California drought is bad. REALLY bad. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png):(

(http://o1.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/format/jpg/quality/82/resize/313x295/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0ed801e72cd13fa65292c91671818d0)
You can see the obvious lack of snow pack from one year to the next but look closely at the valley where all the fruit and vegetables is grown: IT'S BONE DRY!  :P  :(



 
California Drought Could Trigger Food Inflation

Wednesday, 22 Jan 2014 06:49 AM

By Michael Carr

A lack of rainfall in California could have a nationwide impact on food prices. According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture, the state produces almost half of U.S.-grown fruits, nuts and vegetables.

California produces about one-eighth of the nation's total farming output. The state accounts for more than 90 percent of the U.S. production of artichokes, broccoli, celery, almonds, grapes, walnuts and other crops.


http://www.moneynews.com/MichaelCarr/California-drought-fruit-vegetable/2014/01/22/id/548289#ixzz2rBQw2jp5 (http://www.moneynews.com/MichaelCarr/California-drought-fruit-vegetable/2014/01/22/id/548289#ixzz2rBQw2jp5)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 28, 2014, 09:13:43 pm
UB said when questioning climate change skeptic Snowleopard (fossil fuel defender),
Quote
Why doesn't the weather you mention suggest warming due to jetstream breakout due to polar vortex weakening?

This is the part that always gets me too. The slower Jetstream due to less difference in temperature in the equatorial atmosphere and the polar one was predicted by climate scientists nearly a decade ago! I have brought this up but Snowleopard refuses to believe it. It is an effect, not a cause. The temperature gradient is reduced between the poles and the equator. That takes energy OUT of the Jetstream's velocity. The Jetstream begins to meander and produce oxbows that move along the northern hemisphere producing horrendous temperature extremes. This was ALL PREDICTED by climate scientists as an EFFECT of the CO2 CAUSE that brings Global Warming.

That SAME oxbow pattern, since it has been so extreme in sending arctic air at us in the past 50 days or so will probably give us a February that will break all records for being so HOT.

That's the way it works, Snowleopard. As to early frosts, I can tell you that the frosts in Vermont are consistently coming later, not earlier. But the main issue here is that NOAA figures show a warming planet and you don't believe their figures. We can sit here and through anecdotes at each other until the cows come home but the fact reminds that the average temperature is rising, not descending.

I realize that none of us here have the power to do much about it but regardless of how much you think the facts are "fixed" to hoax a GW scenario, Cui Bono (i.e. Who stands, or stood, to gain from a crime, and so might have been responsible for it?)???

DOING NOTHING and adopting a WAIT AND SEE attitude BENEFITS THE CORRUPT STATUS QUO! WHY don't you see that?  Do you LIKE the way our laws and government and energy policy are NOW? According to everything you write here, the answer is NO! But then you turn around and advocate doing NOTHING. That does not compute!

EVEN IF the global warming thing was bull**** ( I WISH!), destroying the fossil and nuclear fuel industries is a noble goal, is it not? Al Capone was finally nailed on income tax evasion even though he had murdered hundreds. Get it?  ;)

It will be a cold day in hell before the energy you use to feed yourself will be at a reasonable price unless the centralized energy monsters running this planet into the ground are not taken apart. By advocating inaction, you are cutting off you nose to spite your face. Think about it.
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7EHvfaY8Zs&feature=player_embedded


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en9Cz-kdbvc&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 29, 2014, 12:51:03 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgnvbMwRaf8&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 30, 2014, 02:24:03 pm
Psalm 27

7  Hear, O LORD, when I cry with my voice:
have mercy also upon me, and answer me.
 
 
8  When thou saidst, Seek ye my face;         
my heart said unto thee,
Thy face, LORD, will I seek.
 
 
9  Hide not thy face far from me;       
put not thy servant away in anger:
thou hast been my help;
leave me not, neither forsake me,
O God of my salvation.
 
 
10  When my father and my mother forsake me,         
then the LORD will take me up.
 
 
11  Teach me thy way, O LORD,         
and lead me in a plain path,
because of mine enemies.
 
 
12  Deliver me not over unto the will of mine enemies:     
for false witnesses are risen up against me,
and such as breathe out cruelty.
 

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 30, 2014, 07:13:18 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV8PI4R5nI4&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 06, 2014, 11:26:47 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060214232233.png)

Exploring CRUTEM4 with Google Earth

Filed under: Climate Science Instrumental Record — group @

4 February 2014 -

 See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/02/exploring-crutem4-with-google-earth/#sthash.KazZ5CWj.dpuf
Title: Why You Shouldn’t Hope for an Early Spring
Post by: AGelbert on February 26, 2014, 02:12:48 pm
"False springs" lethal to vulnerable plants, animals

Why You Shouldn’t Hope for an Early Spring


Increasingly common false spring events are leaving crops and plants vulnerable to subsequent freezes, creating a cascade of consequences for ecosystems

www.ensia.com, Feb, 2014

February 10, 2014 — Observers in Massachusetts and Wisconsin reported that flowering came earlier than it had since Henry David Thoreau took note of when plants began to bloom near Walden Pond in the 1850s or since Aldo Leopold observed flowering times at “The Shack” in Sauk County inThe spring of 2012 was the earliest recorded across the United States since 1900. In many states, signs of spring arrived almost three to four weeks earlier than expected. Unseasonable warmth prompted unusually early blooms, particularly on fruiting trees in the Northeast and Great Lakes regions.  the 1930s and ’40s.

Then, in what has come to be recognized as a characteristic of climate change — unusual variability — the exceptionally early warm temperatures were followed abruptly by a hard freeze.

“We thought 2010 was weird. But 2012 was really weird,” says Jake Weltzin, executive director of the USA National Phenology Network.

Unusually early warming, known as “false spring,” is becoming increasingly common as climate changes. Its effects are also prompting increasing concern. For when warm temperatures awaken dormant plants and animals prematurely, they can throw the timing of seasonal events crucial to an entire ecological food web off kilter. The results can cause devastating harm to both wild and cultivated species. False spring events have caused enormous losses in U.S. fruit crops, damaged large swaths of forest and decimated sensitive California butterfly populations.

Distinct Trend

Naturalists and scientists, farmers and gardeners have long taken note of when plants leaf out and bud each year — part of the study of seasonal events known as phenology. Scientists and more casual backyard observers alike have noted an ongoing shift toward earlier springs across North America over the past 50 to 100 years. At the same time, a growing number of scientific studies have documented the advancing emergence of buds, blooms and hibernating animals.

Since the early 1900s, about two-thirds of the species studied have shifted toward earlier spring blooming, breeding or migrating. This is true for every major group of species studied, including amphibians, birds, fish, invertebrates and mammals as well as trees, nonwoody plants, corals and plankton. These changes have been observed on every major continent and ocean, according to Camille Parmesan, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, whose research focuses on the biological impacts of climate change.

Early buds and blooms killed by a hard frost can mean failure to flower and fruit for the rest of that year.  :P  :( The USA National Phenology Network, which gathers leaf-out and bloom data along with information about when species migrate and reproduce from across the U.S., has helped confirm that the advancing onset of spring and precipitous shifts between warm and cold temperatures are part of ongoing trends. While the network was officially established in the mid-2000s, observations recorded by its contributing scientists and volunteers date back to the 1950s. Some of the longest running records, which chronicle first leaf growth of honeysuckle and lilacs across the lower 48 states, show a noticeable shift toward earlier dates since the 1980s. Like the temperatures recorded as part of climate change research, the leaf-out dates show great variability from year to year but the trend is distinct — earlier warmer temperatures and earlier first buds and blooms.

While occasional false springs are not new, what is new in recent years is the combination of increasingly warmer springs and extreme temperature swings, overall shorter times throughout fall and winter of below-freezing temperatures, and the altered precipitation patterns associated with global climate change.

The fall and winter warm spells in both 2010 and 2012, for example, were longer than others. This phenomenon increases the likelihood that plants will emerge from dormancy prematurely, producing young leaves, buds and blooms. When unusually mild temperatures and subsequent plant growth are followed by freezing temperatures, early buds and blooms killed by a hard frost can mean failure to flower and fruit for the rest of that year. And, in addition to the acute impacts on fragile plant parts, early warming can also cause problems by truncating the winter cooling period many plant seeds need for proper germination, plants need for budding and blooming, and hibernating animals need to complete their yearly cycles in good health.

Ripple Effect

The prospect of a freeze after a crop has leafed out, bloomed or set fruit presents obvious problems for farmers. The 2007 false spring, for example, hit agricultural crops and deciduous trees in the U.S. Midwest to Southeast and Mid-Atlantic regions particularly hard, causing crop damage — particularly to fruit trees and berries — that prompted a request for a disaster declaration in North Carolina. In 2012, losses in fruit tree crops in Michigan due to the false spring bloom and freeze cycles were estimated at half a billion dollars.

The timing of leaf and flower development has effects that ripple throughout an ecosystem because these changes prompt the flow of sap, nectar and nutrients within plants and so affect the availability of shelter and sustenance for other organisms. False spring can harm not only the plants that put forth early sprouts, leaves or blooms, but other species and entire ecosystems. The timing of leaf and flower development has effects that ripple throughout an ecosystem because these changes prompt the flow of sap, nectar and nutrients within plants and so affect the availability of shelter and sustenance for other organisms. This can have profound consequences, particularly when species emerge from hibernation or during migration.

Desynchronization of seasonal events has been reported around the world, from the American Southeast to New England, and the Rockies to the Tibetan Plateau and across Europe. Rocky Mountain marmots have emerged to find the plants they rely on for food buried beneath not yet fully melted snow. Butterflies in California’s Sierra Nevada have wriggled out of their cocoons in what seemed like spring warmth, only to be felled by the freeze that followed.

Another disturbing effect of false spring is the damage it can cause to plant and tree cover.
If a false spring freeze substantially reduces the success of trees’ summer leaf cover across wide swaths of landscape as it did in the U.S. Southeast in 2007, it can also reduce the amount of carbon and other nutrients those trees can process. This can lead to impaired soil health and also jeopardize the health of insects and other organisms that rely on plants’ nutrient cycling. And depending on which plants a false spring freeze affects, such events could also alter the balance of under- and overstory plants, thus introducing other potential ecosystem disruptions.

Anthony Barnosky, University of California, Berkeley professor of integrative biology and author of Heatstroke: Nature in the Age of Global Warming — a 2009 book that examines the effects of climate change on various species in the wild — says when trying to understand global warming’s implications, including those related to the false spring phenomenon, it’s important to consider how different affected species interact. “There are all sorts of complexities we need to be looking at in more detail,” he says.

Trying to Adjust

“Species’ primary response to climate change is to move around the landscape and try to reclaim their climate space,” Barnosky explains. In other words: they try to find conditions that replicate those of the places where they had previously thrived. Indeed, University of Texas at Austin’s Parmesan reported in 2013 that a summary of numerous research studies conducted around the world over the past 10 years shows that since the early 1900s, approximately half of all species studied have shifted their ranges closer to the poles — between about 30 and 995 miles poleward — or upwards in altitude, as much as about 1,300 feet, seeking cooler temperatures.

From a food production standpoint, farmers around the world are trying to adjust to the growing likelihood of false springs by planting in ways that accommodate both early warming and temperature and moisture extremes, says Sharon Muzli Gourdji, postdoctoral fellow in energy and environment at Stanford University. Varieties of wheat are being bred for heat tolerance and other variables that come with climate change so they can endure warming temperatures in the tropical regions of Asia, Africa and South America as well as the challenges of both warming and extreme variability in the Northern Hemisphere. “Farmers are adapting,” says Parmesan.

Meanwhile, wild species are on the move in search of conditions suitable for their entire life cycle under increasingly unpredictable circumstances. But when success at a particular life stage depends on a steady transition from one season’s conditions to the next — a progression false spring disrupts — that’s when many species are now beginning to encounter difficulties. “The phenology issue could be a really big problem,” says Barnosky.

The consensus among scientists studying climate change is that the disruptions in what have been considered normal patterns of seasonal temperature and precipitation set in motion by the build-up of greenhouse gases are with us for some time to come.According to Parmesan, we “don’t have any evidence yet of any evolutionary changes of the kind that would suggest species are adapting” to extreme temperature swings despite the fact that some species may already be capable of dealing with such extremes. Some species are responding to or accommodating these changes, she explains, but that does not necessarily mean an evolutionary adaptation. Weltzin, at the USA National Phenology Network, uses the term “adjustment.”

The consensus among scientists studying climate change is that the disruptions in what have been considered normal patterns of seasonal temperature and precipitation set in motion by the build-up of greenhouse gases are with us for some time to come. Even if there were a precipitous decrease of such emissions worldwide, what’s now in the atmosphere would continue to affect global climate patterns for years to come. Given this reality, early and false springs are also likely to become increasingly familiar phenomena. So among scientists’ next steps are to learn not only more about how species are responding to these events but also how to predict them.

While predicting false springs can’t help wild species in the same ways it can agriculture — or solve the root causes of the problem — it may point the way to conservation efforts that could help protect some vulnerable species. As Parmesan said of farmers’ adaptive strategies, “It may be very important to get that right.”

http://ensia.com/features/why-you-shouldnt-hope-for-an-early-spring/
Title: Satellite data reveal the rapid darkening of the Arctic
Post by: AGelbert on February 28, 2014, 08:03:30 pm
Satellite data reveal the rapid darkening of the Arctic

Forty-five years after scientists hypothesized that global warming would make Arctic Ocean surfaces darker, Scripps team determines how much the planet’s albedo has diminished
Feb 17, 2014

The retreat of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean is diminishing Earth’s albedo, or reflectivity, by an amount considerably larger than previously estimated,  :o according to researchers at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego.

As the sea ice melts, its white reflective surface is replaced by a relatively dark ocean surface. This diminishes the amount of sunlight being reflected back to space, causing the Earth to absorb an increasing amount of solar energy.

The Arctic has warmed by 2° C (3.6° F) since the 1970s. The summer minimum Arctic sea ice extent has decreased by 40 percent during the same time period. These factors have decreased the region’s albedo.

Scripps graduate student Kristina Pistone and climate scientists Ian Eisenman and Veerabhadran Ramanathan used satellite measurements to calculate changes in the albedo of the Arctic region associated with the changing sea ice cover. Albedo is measured as a percentage. A perfectly black surface has an albedo of zero percent and a perfectly white surface has an albedo of 100 percent. The albedo of fresh snow is typically between 80 and 90 percent whereas the albedo of the ocean surface is less than 20 percent. Clouds and other factors also influence the albedo of the Earth.

The researchers calculated that the albedo of the Arctic region fell from 52 percent to 48 percent between 1979 and 2011. 

 “It’s fairly intuitive to expect that replacing white, reflective sea ice with a dark ocean surface would increase the amount of solar heating,” said Kristina Pistone. “We used actual satellite measurements of both albedo and sea ice in the region to verify this and to quantify how much extra heat the region has absorbed due to the ice loss.  It was quite encouraging to see how well the two datasets – which come from two independent satellite instruments – agreed with each other.”

The National Science Foundation-funded study appears in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 45 years after atmospheric scientists Mikhail Budyko and William Sellers hypothesized that the Arctic would amplify global warming as sea ice melted.

The Scripps study is the first to use direct satellite measurements to assess the changes in albedo associated with retreating sea ice. Previous studies have relied on computer models. The Scripps team used NASA’s CERES satellite instruments as well as observations of sea ice cover made with other satellites.

The researchers found that the magnitude of surface darkening has been two to three times as large as that found in previous studies. They also compared their results to model simulations to assess the capability of computer models to portray and forecast albedo changes.

“Scientists have talked about Arctic melting and albedo decrease for nearly 50 years,” said Ramanathan, a distinguished professor of climate and atmospheric sciences who has previously conducted similar research on the global dimming effects of aerosols. “This is the first time this darkening effect has been documented on the scale of the entire Arctic.”


 “Based on our results, the albedo forcing from Arctic sea ice retreat is quite large,” said Eisenman, an assistant professor of climate dynamics. “Averaged over the entire globe, it’s one-fourth as large as the direct radiative forcing from CO2 during the same period. This suggests that Arctic sea ice retreat has been an important player in the global warming that we’ve observed during recent decades. Although more work is needed, a possible implication of these results is that the amplifying feedback of Arctic sea ice changes on global warming is larger than previously expected.”

 

News Category: News
Note to broadcast and cable producers: University of California, San Diego provides an on-campus satellite uplink facility for live or pre-recorded television interviews. Please phone or email the media contact listed above to arrange an interview.

About Scripps Institution of Oceanography Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, is one of the oldest, largest, and most important centers for global science research and education in the world. Now in its second century of discovery, the scientific scope of the institution has grown to include biological, physical, chemical, geological, geophysical, and atmospheric studies of the earth as a system. Hundreds of research programs covering a wide range of scientific areas are under way today on every continent and in every ocean. The institution has a staff of about 1,400 and annual expenditures of approximately $170 million from federal, state, and private sources. Scripps operates robotic networks and one of the largest U.S. academic fleets with four oceanographic research ships and one research platform for worldwide exploration. Birch Aquarium at Scripps serves as the interpretive center of the institution and showcases Scripps research and a diverse array of marine life through exhibits and programming for more than 425,000 visitors each year. Learn more at scripps.ucsd.edu.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news
Title: Scripps and NOAA Researchers Take Flight to Observe Atmospheric River
Post by: AGelbert on February 28, 2014, 08:07:35 pm
Research Highlight: Scripps and NOAA Researchers Take Flight to Observe Atmospheric River

Precipitation provided partial relief to drought-stricken West
 
Feb 25, 2014

Nice graphic at link:   8)

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/research-highlight-scripps-and-noaa-researchers-take-flight-observe-atmospheric-river
Title: Globally, January was VERY HOT.
Post by: AGelbert on March 01, 2014, 01:42:02 pm
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-percentile-mntp/201401.gif)

Quote
During January 2014, most of the world's land areas experienced warmer-than-average temperatures, with the most notable departures from the 1981–2010 average across Alaska, western Canada, Greenland, Mongolia, southern Russia, and northern China, where the departure from average was +3°C (+5.4°F) or greater. Meanwhile, parts of southeastern Brazil and central and southern Africa experienced record warmth with temperature departures between 0.5°C to 1.5°C above the 1981–2010 average, contributing to the highest January Southern Hemisphere land temperature departure on record at 1.13°C (2.03°F) above the 20th century average. This was also the warmest month for the Southern Hemisphere land since September 2013 when temperatures were 1.23°C (2.21°F) above the 20th century average.

Some locations across the globe experienced departures that were below the 1981–2010 average. These areas include the eastern half of the contiguous U.S., central Canada, and most of Scandinavia and Russia. The most notable cold anomalies were in Russia, where in some areas the departure from average was 5°C (9°F) below average. Overall, the Northern Hemisphere land surface temperature was 1.17°C (2.11°F) above average—the warmest January since 2007 and the fourth warmest since records began in 1880.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 01, 2014, 01:51:27 pm
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/extremes/201401.gif)
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/extremes/201401.gif
Title: National Park Service-commissioned film called Tides Of Change
Post by: AGelbert on March 26, 2014, 10:30:09 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZt0OS12ty0&feature=player_embedded
Title: Civilizational Cluster FORK (dark humor - LOTS of TRUTH!)
Post by: AGelbert on March 27, 2014, 01:44:06 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMgOTQ7D_lk&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: monsta666 on April 02, 2014, 05:02:28 pm
Crisis of civilisation is a great documentary that offers a holistic viewpoint to our predicament and because of that I showed this to some family members.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 08, 2014, 07:14:29 pm
Glad you liked it Monsta. I found that last scene with the wild Bass player and xylophone playing ladies was hilarious!

The SF writers are having a ball making money off the apocalyptic future scenarios, by the way... ;)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jcHO1c9NlRE/Uwme3spJmFI/AAAAAAAAii4/f1GAIVFG0Mk/s1600/murphy+sands+copy.jpg)
 
The world as we knew it is gone. :P
Fahrenheit 451 and rising

Climate change: The hottest thing in science fiction

By Dave Burdick

Even if nobody is talking explicitly about it, it’s clear that something terrible has happened and in its wake, humanity must once again reset its priorities. Can we, in this resource-scarce new world, fashion some kind of idyllic agrarian commune with shared goods, serene faces, and hemp robes? Or are we doomed to be selfish hoarders, creating even greater scarcity which we can then leverage for our own benefit? Also, is that … is that some kind of genetically modified man-wolfephant?

Post-apocalyptic science fiction isn’t new. But you may have noticed an uptick in books set in the wake of some kind of major climate disaster. Some call it “cli-fi” — sci-fi infused with the increasingly frightening impacts of climate change. The trope has deep roots, says science fiction scholar Istvan Csicery-Ronay, and plenty of room to grow.

In fact, of late, cli-fi has been creeping out of the fantasy and science fiction sections of bookstores and libraries and into the mainstream. Margaret Atwood’s Maddaddam trilogy, for example, is everywhere. Its simple, cartoon-like, GMO-gone-wrong future isn’t hard to imagine. Once you get past the brand names and animal mashup portmanteaus (pigoons, rakunks, wolvogs), you realize you’re just looking at a version of us, not all that far in the future. It’s relatable, in a woozy way.

Cli-fi is “getting some interest from folks who are not necessarily interested in science fiction,” says Csicery-Ronay, an English professor at DePauw University in Indiana and co-editor of the journal, Science Fiction Studies. For some people, it may be even be a sort of gateway into science fiction, which has a long and proud history of tearing civilization down and making characters build it back, or deal with the consequences of living in someone else’s rebuilt world.

The Russians, according to Csicsery-Ronay, were pioneers of the genre. “They had a category, late 19th century, early 20th century, called the ‘If-This-Goes-On Fiction,’ kind of a warning,” he says, “a particular kind of dystopian fiction, that if a certain trend goes on, and we don’t stop, then this is what’s going to happen.”

An if-this-goes-on moment actually sparked the anticipated next novel from Paolo Bacigalupi, critically acclaimed writer of science fiction novels for young (Ship Breaker, Drowned Cities) and standard (The Windup Girl) adults.

“This is sort of my fetish,” Bacigalupi says. “Bad decisions made badly by bad people. What happens next?”

His latest inspiration? Erstwhile Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry. “I was down in Texas when their drought was getting going,” Bacigalupi says. “It was sort of biblical, apocalyptic heat. The cows were being put down because the land can’t support them. All this great systemic collapse stuff percolating around, and at the same time, Rick Perry … is organizing a prayer circle and praying for rain.

“That was the moment,” Bacigalupi says.

The result is The Water Knife, a novel set in a near-future, drought-stricken southwestern United States — similar to the one he created in his short story “The Tamarisk Hunter” — and featuring a water war between Phoenix and Las Vegas. The two cities have arrived at this point in the future with different approaches. Good old, cynical Las Vegas recognizes it’s going to have trouble as water becomes more scarce and prepares for battles to come, legal and otherwise. Phoenix takes more of a Rick Perry approach.

The book, and others like it, could provide a model for scientists and environmentalists who are clamoring for some kind of approachable yet still awesome — in both senses of the word — way of communicating a very real if-this-goes-on message. As in, if this goes on, inland real estate is where it’s at, presuming we don’t revert to a system of bartering or pillaging or maybe just asphyxiating.

And this is why there may be more at stake with cli-fi than most fiction. For Annalee Newitz, editor-in-chief of science fiction site io9.com, there’s real value in getting climate change right. In a post on that site, she hails Tobias Buckell’s Arctic Rising for the way it “explores how the loss of ice in the Arctic Ocean will change international relations and reverse some countries’ economic fortunes,” and Kim Stanley Robinson’s epic 2312, in which humans have colonized much of the solar system, with a great, moving city that stays on Mercury, but never on the side the sun hits; moving colonies inside asteroids; and, of course, a city of canals in what we know now as New York City. His approach to technology is held in science fiction circles to be both plausible and cynical — cli-fi characteristics, to be sure.

Others in the science fiction realm with climate themes you might consider, according to Csicsery-Ronay: Robinson’s Forty Signs of Rain trilogy, the aforementioned Atwood Maddaddam trilogy, Ian McDonald’s River of Gods and The Sea and the Summer, also published as The Drowning Towers, by George Turner.

And there’s more coming soon. After making a deal for Bacigalupi’s Water Knife, due out in spring of next year, an editor at Knopf told the New York Times that he thinks it’ll “attract a crossover audience beyond Mr. Bacigalupi’s core readers.”

It’s about time for that crossover, too. Climate fiction suggests a few things: First, humans are humans, and we’ll have the same stupid fights on any backdrop spacetime throws at us. Second, that today’s hero, be it a captain of industry, a liberation fighter, or a seemingly clever technology, could well be tomorrow’s villain — a lesson we in the real world tend to learn 30 years too late. And third, that climate change might be awfully scary, especially for those of us who’ve grown accustomed to building sprawling, air-conditioned cities, on inhospitable terrain, with apparent impunity.
 

Dave Burdick lives in Denver, where he is the deputy features editor of the Denver Post. Find him on Twitter at @daveburdick.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-change-the-hottest-thing-in-science-fiction
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 11, 2014, 10:58:44 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzaFzwH4S3k&feature=player_embedded
Someone should take this film and stuff it down Snowleopard/GW denier/fossil fuel SHILL's throat  until he GETS IT!  >:(


Stills from the movie:


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120414003757.png)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120414004133.png)

 
Title: Meet The Surprising Star Of Showtime’s New Climate Change Series
Post by: AGelbert on April 14, 2014, 02:44:04 pm
Meet The Surprising Star Of Showtime’s New Climate Change Series (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185047.png)


 By Kiley Kroh   on  April 14, 2014 at 11:11 am

Agelbert NOTE: It's NOT surprising to me. In fact, as a Christian I believe anyone claiming to BE a Christian who denies GW is NOT a Christian at all! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)



On a recent Washington, DC evening, a few hundred people gathered to catch a sneak peak of Showtime’s new star-studded series on climate change. The surprisingly action-packed first episode of “Years Of Living Dangerously” featured big names doing bigger things: In one scene, Harrison Ford helicopters over the scorched forests of Indonesia. In another, Thomas Friedman interviews rebel fighters in war-torn, drought-ridden Syria. But when the audience stepped out into the unseasonably warm night, people were buzzing about one person they’d never seen on the big screen before.

An evangelical Christian, married to a pastor, living in conservative West Texas, and widely regarded as a top-notch climate scientist, Dr. Katharine Hayhoe is a rare breed on paper — in person, she’s even rarer. Deftly moving between topics like science, religion, and gender with equal parts insight and levity, Hayhoe is an unassuming force of nature.


“I’ve never heard of anyone like Katharine Hayhoe,” actor Don Cheadle remarks before meeting her in the episode.

Science has been a guiding force in Hayhoe’s life for as long as she can remember. One of her earliest memories comes at just four years old, lying on a blanket with her father, a science educator, out long past her bedtime so he could show her how to find the Andromeda galaxy with binoculars. Family vacations involved driving from Canada all the way to the Outer Banks in North Carolina to catch a glimpse of Haley’s comet, simply because that was the only place you could see it. “That kind of gives you a picture of the level of commitment,” Hayhoe laughed.

As the brother to six sisters and father to three daughters, Hayhoe describes her father as “gender blind,” meaning she was never hindered by the feeling girls often have “that science is too hard or isn’t a girl’s thing.” When she was nine, her family moved to Cali, Colombia, where both of her parents taught and worked with the local church. Raised by missionaries and teachers, Christianity has always been a fundamental part of Hayhoe’s life — something she simply never saw as being at odds with her passion for science.




While attending graduate school, Hayhoe met Andrew Farley, a Ph.D. student who was a member of the same Christian student group. Even when Hayhoe moved back to Toronto to work as a consultant after completing her master’s degree, the two remained good friends. After a couple years, Farley and Hayhoe ended up getting together and the two were married in 2000. Having known each other for years, “we just assumed that we had most of our values in common,” Hayhoe recalls, but “it wasn’t until after we got married that we realized how different we were.”

One of the ways we realized we were different … was that he didn’t think climate change was real.


“One of the ways we realized we were different, besides the fact that I did not keep butter in the fridge and he did,” Hayhoe said, “was that he didn’t think climate change was real.” After pausing for the surprise she knew would follow, Hayhoe offered an explanation: “I, growing up in Canada, had never really met anybody that didn’t think it was real and he, growing up in Virginia and going to southern Baptist school, had never met anybody who did think it was real.”

Farley and Hayhoe found themselves at an impasse. They both respected the other person, not only as researchers and academics, but as people who shared the same deep faith. If those things were true, then they had to talk about it. Eventually, Farley came around, but it wasn’t easy. “We are both first borns who love to argue and will not back down,” Hayhoe said. In all, Hayhoe guesses Farley, her first climate change convert, took about two years to convince — though she notes “it wasn’t like we talked about this every day.”

“A lot of my political opinions are Republican,” Farley tells Cheadle from the couple’s kitchen table. “The politics, the questions about God, and then the climate change — it’s all just become this ball of sound bites and people can’t parse it out.”

The tipping point for Farley? When the two went to the NASA website, downloaded global temperature data, and plotted it on their own computer. “It was clearly going up,” Hayhoe said, so “he had to decide, was NASA, the organization that put people on the moon, involved in some worldwide massive hoax or were they telling the truth?”

The same data, simply plotted, makes an appearance in the Showtime episode. “We see that temperature and carbon dioxide track together,” Hayhoe tells Cheadle, running her finger along the jagged line to the sharp uptick at the end. “We also see that right now we are way out of the ballpark.”

In hindsight, Hayhoe recognizes that the hours spent debating climate science with her husband were critical to sharpening her understanding of the fundamental science behind climate change and, perhaps more importantly, her ability to communicate it to a doubtful audience.


The science is there, it’s been around and it’s not getting through so what’s the point of publishing another paper or 10 more papers?


Climate science wasn’t always Hayhoe’s chosen path. When it came time to go to college, she dove straight into her favorite subject, astrophysics. Looking to fulfill a course requirement, she saw a class on climate change and recalls thinking, “Why don’t I take that? It doesn’t sound too hard.” Not only was she immediately blown away by the fact that climate science was grounded in physics, but even more so by the urgency of the problem, “and this was way back in the early 1990s.”

Hayhoe credits this course and the professor, Danny Harvey, with opening her eyes to the importance of communicating science, particularly when it’s as pressing as with climate change. “The science is there, the science is solid … and it’s not getting through so what’s the point of publishing one more paper on climate science — or 10 more papers or even 100 more papers — if it’s not going to get through?” she realized.

Unable to decide between atmospheric science and astrophysics for graduate school, Hayhoe decided to apply for both. “Back in the day” when applications were submitted via mail with money orders, she had already applied to nine schools and had one money order left, so she basically flipped a coin and sent her last application to the University of Illinois. It was a fortuitous flip.

Unbeknownst to Hayhoe at the time, the school had brought on a new department chair, who saw her application and asked her to come visit. Don Wuebbles turned out to be the perfect person for young Hayhoe to learn from, “somebody who recognized not just the importance of the science but communicating that science.” And the feeling was clearly mutual. “Right from the beginning she was an excellent communicator,” Wuebbles said. “She not only has an excellent understanding of the science … but being able to communicate that science clearly is a special skill.”


Wuebbles dropped Hayhoe “right into the deep end, in terms of working on not just research but communication.” Marking another important turning point in her career, Wuebbles introduced her to the Union of Concerned Scientists and brought her on board for a significant research project assessing the health of the Great Lakes. Examining the climate projections they were using, Hayhoe was shocked to discover they were woefully out of date. “I realized that there was this massive disconnect between the physical climate science that develops climate projections and the people who are actually using these projections to figure out what it means for our world,” she said.


Figuring out how to deliver the best available climate science to the people who need it the most would become a primary motivation in Hayhoe’s life.


Continued in next post:

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 14, 2014, 03:32:35 pm
Continued from previous post:



Figuring out how to deliver the best available climate science to the people who need it the most would become a primary motivation in Hayhoe’s life.


In 2005, Hayhoe and Farley decided to move from South Bend, Indiana and needed to find a university with both a program in second language acquisition, Farley’s specialty, and atmospheric science. Texas Tech University met all of those criteria and offered Hayhoe a research professor position while she completed her Ph.D. at the University of Illinois, so the couple packed up and moved to Lubbock, Texas.

In Lubbock, a conservative town in West Texas, “people started to ask us even more questions about climate change,” Hayhoe remembers, and shortly after their arrival she received her first invitation to speak to a women’s group. “Some thought [climate change] was real, a lot didn’t” but regardless of their position coming in, Hayhoe realized that they all had questions and weren’t sure whom to trust.

“In the evangelical community, science is not a key value,” explained Mitch Hescox, president of the Evangelical Environmental Network.  >:(

An evangelical Christian church in the area had recently lost its pastor and asked Farley to fill in. Eventually, he was offered the job. Because he loved it and could continue his academic work at the same time, Farley accepted and the questions about climate change became even more frequent. It was soon routine for him to come home look up the answers to the questions he received with Hayhoe — things like, how can polar bears be endangered if there are more of them now? Or, how can global warming be real if the planet is cooling? In the process, the couple quickly saw that they “couldn’t find any book or any resource of any type that started where the people who we were talking to were at, who were not even convinced that this was a real problem and also convinced that this problem fundamentally challenged their core values and beliefs,” Hayhoe said.

So the two decided they needed to create that resource. Farley’s task was to gather all of the questions he received about climate change from members of their church and posited in movies like “The Global Warming Hoax” and together they would answer them. “Oh, and we had a baby at the same time,” Hayhoe said. The new baby combined with their decision that nothing would go into the book unless they both agreed to it led to many late nights “arguing over one sentence in the book or two sentences in the book.”

A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions was published in 2009 and immediately caught the eye of Hescox. After buying copies for all of his employees, Hescox called her up and said, “Katharine, you and I have to get together.”

Hayhoe’s unique gifts impressed Hescox from the very beginning. “She’s the best communicator of climate science that I’ve ever met and she’s also a person of profound faith” — a rare combination. Hescox recalls inviting her to Washington, DC to speak with leaders of several Christian relief and development organizations about what was happening to the Earth’s climate and the impacts of those changes. Among the attendees was, according to Hescox, a very conservative Christian who was quite skeptical of what she had to say. Hearing Hayhoe speak about the science in terms he was comfortable with, however, sparked a total 180. “That’s just an example of the kind of typical impact she has when she can share faith and science at the same time,” Hescox said.

“Religious communities get confused about which voices to listen to and trust,” explained Jennifer Wiseman, an astronomer and Director of the Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. She points to a recent survey conducted by Rice University sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund which found that evangelicals are more than twice as likely as the rest of the population to turn to a religious leader or text when they have questions about science and technology than to a scientist. “It’s here where the ambassador makes such a difference,” Wiseman said, and “Katharine is a terrific ambassador.”

As Christians, we already have all of the values we need to care about climate change.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

The inroads Hayhoe has been able to make with conservative religious communities focuses around one fundamental guiding belief: the key to bridging what has become such a divisive, heated issue is not hoping to present people with enough information that they adopt new values. “As Christians, we already have all of the values we need to care about climate change,” she said. And when climate change is presented in terms of its impacts on people, impacts that will disproportionately affect the world’s poor, then the path for engaging Christians is clear.

“When we tie that to our Christian values there’s no conflict. In fact, quite the opposite — our faith demands that we act on this issue,” Hayhoe said.
 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)



Over the years that she’s been giving her presentation to religious groups, Hayhoe has seen a noticeable difference. Even when she knows probably half of the audience doesn’t believe in climate change, by the time she’s finished, the questions revolve around solutions: What can we do about this? Will it ruin the economy? But “I don’t get questions anymore about the science,” she said.

It hasn’t all been smooth sailing for Hayhoe, however. In 2012, she agreed to contribute a chapter to a book Newt Gingrich was writing, a collection of environmental essays that would serve as a sequel to his 2007 A Contract With The Earth. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh caught wind of Hayhoe’s contribution when he had Mark Morano, former staffer to longtime climate denier Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), on as a guest. “Morano has posted numerous attacks on Hayhoe in the past month and provided her email address so his readers could contact her,” journalist Kate Sheppard wrote at the time.

Shortly after Limbaugh attacked Hayhoe, whom he referred to as a “climate babe,” on air, Gingrich was asked about the chapter at a campaign stop in Iowa from a woman who was concerned about what she heard. “That’s not going to be in the book. We didn’t know that they were doing that and we told them to kill it,” Gingrich responded. Hayhoe learned that her chapter had been cut from a reporter.

“Nice (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png) to hear  that Gingrich (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif) is tossing (http://drphilyerboots.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/cherry-picking.jpg) my #climate chapter in the trash.  100+ unpaid hrs I cd’ve spent playing w my baby,” Hayhoe tweeted.

The targeting of Hayhoe led to a dramatic spike in the hate mail directed her way, to the point where she “received hundreds of harassing emails in a single day,”  >:(  E&E reported. According to Hayhoe, a lot of the vitriol she receives centers around the fact that she is a woman. “There’s definitely a gender component to it and we’d be naive to assume that there isn’t,” she said.

There’s definitely a gender component to it and we’d be naive to assume that there isn’t.

Taking the risk that comes with repeatedly espousing an unpopular opinion isn’t just unnerving to Hayhoe as an individual but for her children, as well. “As a mother, it’s also very scary to feel like you’re putting yourself out there,” she said. “But also as a mother, that’s one of the main reasons I care. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-047.gif) (http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg)  (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg) As a parent, you’d do anything for your child — you’d lay down your life for your child — and when you see this massive problem threatening the world that your child will live in, that’s what makes you want to do something about it.”

The politicization of climate change comes as an unwelcome surprise for many scientists. “I think there is a tendency for some scientists to withdraw and not want to be a part of that,” said Don Wuebbles, Hayhoe’s graduate advisor. “Our lives are based around the search for truth … and here we’re being attacked for only the reason that we’re trying to tell people the truth about the science,” Wuebbles said. The experience with Gingrich and Limbaugh taught Hayhoe that “politics and science are about as different as any two areas could be.” Rather than ignore the politics to pursue the science, however, she now works in the political science department at Texas Tech. “Understanding how they can work together … is essential to solving the climate problem,” she said. “Otherwise, we have no hope.”

Ian Scott-Fleming, a current student of Hayhoe’s at Texas Tech, said that one of the reasons Hayhoe is so effective as an educator is her ability to empower her students with the knowledge she gives them. Rather than overwhelm students with too much information, Hayhoe builds a context in which the information has meaning. “What’s nice about Katharine is she’s good at presenting that framework, giving you the hooks to hang the knowledge on, then presenting you with the knowledge so you know what to do with it when you’ve got it,” he explained.

After starting his career as a consultant for various DC-area firms working on weapons systems and other projects, Scott-Fleming “was making lots of money, feeling very important” but he woke up one day and realized, “the better I am at what I do … the worse off the world is as a result.” Working with Hayhoe, Scott-Fleming sees the importance not only of the deep research and data gathering that occurs at the highest academic level, but also being able to reach people outside of that bubble.

“I think that’s one of her strengths,” he said of Hayhoe. “Communicating this to folks that aren’t already so deeply buried in it that the arguments are obvious.”

The most memorable example of this occurred on a night of climate change speakers that was open to interested attendees from all over Lubbock, not just the university. “This is a very conservative part of the country and it is also Big Oil country,” Scott-Fleming notes. There were several people in the audience who were not receptive to Hayhoe’s statements regarding the effect of fossil fuels and human activity on the Earth’s climate — one older fellow in particular who stood up during the question and answer portion of the evening and “started talking and got a little bit more and more into his own rant.” Scott-Fleming remembers being impressed with Hayhoe’s ability to gently steer what began as a confrontational moment to a more thoughtful discussion.

“I think the questioner felt like he had been heard, even if the answer he got wasn’t to his liking,” Scott-Fleming said. “This is a skill few folks have, and a big part of what makes Katharine so effective.”

As a person with “about 20 projects on the go at any one time,” Hayhoe has several irons in the fire these days. With her research team — “a group of fantastic women post-docs from Korea, India, Denmark and Romania who all ended up here in West Texas like me” — Hayhoe is looking at how climate change might impact specific types of weather and climate events, such as drought, ice storms, and heat extremes. She’s also working with a variety of cities, government agencies, and non-profits to help them figure out how to reduce their vulnerability, as well as their impact on the climate.

And she just had another paper accepted for publication last week, this one written with her first science teacher: her dad. “How cool is that!” she said in an email.

For a person whose life’s work is dedicated to the alarming changes occurring to the planet, Hayhoe is unwaveringly upbeat and focused on the cause that drives her. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-036.gif) This ebullience makes her approachable and relatable but also never downplays or sugar-coats the severity of climate change.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif) “I naively thought that I would study climate science until we fixed the problem and then I’d go back to astrophysics,” she said with her characteristic smile. “Until we have policies in place to actually start curbing our carbon emissions and reducing the impact we’re having on our planet, I have to keep going.”(http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)


"Years Of Living Dangerously" airs on Sundays at 10 p.m. EST on Showtime.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/14/3425256/meet-star-showtime-series
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 06, 2014, 01:03:58 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfBAr__d6lQ&feature=player_embedded






Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 06, 2014, 01:04:47 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0kFCv6gOQ0&feature=player_embedded

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 06, 2014, 01:06:11 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfEEV3kNQnQ&feature=player_embedded

Later on in the Abu Dhabi Ascent opening ceremony, Sir Trevor McDonald had the chance to ask Gore a few more questions. Here’s that more impromptu back and forth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHO6Uv9bGOA&feature=player_embedded


Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2014/05/04/al-gores-tremendous-presentation-abu-dhabi-ascent-exclusive-videos/#U8w8vsFvH8MuSfXA.99
Title: Stephen Colbert’s refreshing solution for fighting climate change
Post by: AGelbert on May 17, 2014, 12:43:39 am
Quote
Stephen Colbert’s refreshing solution for fighting climate change

By Amber Cortes  ;D
 
It’s been a bummer couple of weeks when it comes to apocalyptic climate change news. First, the National Climate Assessment came out, letting us know that, hey, climate change got our invitation and may be showing up a little early to the party – in fact, it’s already in the corner eating all the dip, guzzling all the drinks, and trying to light the couch on fire. Then, that darn West Antarctic ice sheet decided it had enough and is in irreversible collapse.

“It is so terrifying,” Stephen Colbert says, “that it left a carbon footprint … in my pants.”

So, what can the carbon-soiled among us do? Colbert’s solution: “**** it!” Americans, we can all rest easy and go back to continue being our apathetic, indifferent selves. Let the grandkids fix climate change (as well as Medicare and Social Security). In fact, the “**** it” solution can work for just about everything.  (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fam/fam12.gif)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif) “Are you worried that money in politics is undermining democracy?” Colbert asks. “Just do nothing, and soon there will no democracy left to undermine.”  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/d2.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

I’m going to use the “**** it” principle for other painful realities I’ve been trying to ignore. Crushing student debt? **** it! That should work, right?  (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

Amber Cortes is a Grist fellow, radio producer, and a digital media grad student at the University of Washington. Follow her on Twitter

http://grist.org/climate-energy/find-climate-change-terrifying-stephen-colbert-has-a-refreshing-solution/
Title: Emissions from forests influence very first stage of cloud formation
Post by: AGelbert on May 19, 2014, 12:16:14 am
Emissions from forests influence very first stage of cloud formation
 (http://dl7.glitter-graphics.net/pub/2046/2046807qoer9uc27q.gif)

Date: May 15, 2014
Source:Carnegie Mellon University

Clouds play a critical role in Earth's climate. Clouds also are the largest source of uncertainty in present climate models, according to the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Much of the uncertainty surrounding clouds' effect on climate stems from the complexity of cloud formation.

New research from scientists at the CLOUD (Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets) experiment at CERN, including Carnegie Mellon University's Neil Donahue, sheds light on new-particle formation -- the very first step of cloud formation and a critical component of climate models. The findings, published in the May 16 issue of Science, closely match observations in the atmosphere and can help make climate prediction models more accurate.

Cloud droplets form when water vapor in the atmosphere condenses onto tiny particles. These particles are emitted directly from natural sources or human activity, or they form from precursors emitted originally as gaseous pollutants. The transformation of gas molecules into clusters and then into particles, a process called nucleation, produces more than half of the particles that seed cloud formation around the world today. But the mechanisms underlying nucleation remain unclear.

Although scientists have observed that the nucleation process nearly always involves sulfuric acid, sulfuric acid concentrations aren't high enough to explain the rate of new particle formation that occurs in the atmosphere. This new study uncovers an indispensable ingredient to the long sought-after cloud formation recipe -- highly oxidized organic compounds.

"Our measurements connect oxidized organics directly, and in detail, with the very first steps of new particle formation and growth," said Donahue, professor of chemistry, chemical engineering, engineering and public policy, and director of CMU's Steinbrenner Institute for Environmental Education and Research. "We had no idea a year ago that this chemistry was happening. There's a whole branch of oxidation chemistry that we didn't really understand. ;D  It's an exciting time."

The air we breathe is chock-full of organic compounds, tiny liquid or solid particles that come from hundreds of sources including trees, volcanoes, cars, trucks and wood fires. Once they enter the atmosphere, these so-called organics start to change.


In research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2012, Donahue and colleagues showed conclusively that organic molecules given off by pine trees, called alpha-pinene, are chemically transformed multiple times in the highly oxidizing environment of the atmosphere. Additionally, other research, including from Donahue's lab, has suggested that such oxidized organics might take part in nucleation -- both in new particle formation and in their subsequent growth. Donahue and an international team of researchers with the CLOUD experiment at CERN set out to test that hypothesis.

The CLOUD project at CERN is a unique facility that allows scientists to reproduce a typical atmospheric setting inside of an essentially contaminant-free, stainless steel chamber. By performing experiments in the precisely controlled environment of the CLOUD chamber, the project's scientists can change the concentrations of chemicals involved in nucleation and then measure the rate at which new particles are created with extreme precision.

In the current work, the team filled the chamber with sulfur dioxide and pinnanediol (an oxidation product of alpha-pinene) and then generated hydroxyl radicals (the dominant oxidant in Earth's atmosphere). Then they watched the oxidation chemistry unfold. Using very high-resolution mass spectrometry, the scientists were able to observe particles growing from single, gaseous molecules to clusters of up to 10 molecules stuck together, as they grew molecule by molecule.

"It turns out that sulfuric acid and these oxidized organic compounds are unusually attracted to each other. This remarkably strong association may be a big part of why organics are really drawn to sulfuric acid under modern polluted conditions," Donahue said.

Agebert NOTE: ANOTHER invisible SUBSIDY (because WE are paying when OUR HEALTH is affected by said pollution) give away to the FOSSIL FUEL WELFARE QUEEN PIGS! >:( At any rate, as Dr. David Zuzuki says, WE STILL KNOW TOO LITTLE ABOUT NATUIRE TO TRY TO GEOENGINEER IT WITH OUR CRUDE SCIENCE! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)


After confirming that oxidized organics are involved in the formation and growth of particles under atmospheric conditions, the scientists incorporated their findings into a global particle formation model. The fine-tuned model not only predicted nucleation rates more accurately but also predicted the increases and decreases of nucleation observed in field experiments over the course of a year, especially for measurements near forests. This latter test is a strong confirmation of the fundamental role of emissions from forests in the very first stage of cloud formation, and that the new work may have succeeded in modeling that influence.

Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by Carnegie Mellon University. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140515154136.htm

Journal Reference:
F. Riccobono, S. Schobesberger, C. E. Scott, J. Dommen, I. K. Ortega, L. Rondo, J. Almeida, A. Amorim, F. Bianchi, M. Breitenlechner, A. David, A. Downard, E. M. Dunne, J. Duplissy, S. Ehrhart, R. C. Flagan, A. Franchin, A. Hansel, H. Junninen, M. Kajos, H. Keskinen, A. Kupc, A. Kurten, A. N. Kvashin, A. Laaksonen, K. Lehtipalo, V. Makhmutov, S. Mathot, T. Nieminen, A. Onnela, T. Petaja, A. P. Praplan, F. D. Santos, S. Schallhart, J. H. Seinfeld, M. Sipila, D. V. Spracklen, Y. Stozhkov, F. Stratmann, A. Tome, G. Tsagkogeorgas, P. Vaattovaara, Y. Viisanen, A. Vrtala, P. E. Wagner, E. Weingartner, H. Wex, D. Wimmer, K. S. Carslaw, J. Curtius, N. M. Donahue, J. Kirkby, M. Kulmala, D. R. Worsnop, U. Baltensperger. Oxidation Products of Biogenic Emissions Contribute to Nucleation of Atmospheric Particles. Science, 2014; 344 (6185): 717 DOI: 10.1126/science.1243527
Title: Heavy Hailstorm in Sao Paulo Brazil
Post by: AGelbert on May 26, 2014, 02:05:45 am
http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/2014/05/19/sao-paulo-brazil-hail/


Video(s) and several great pictures :o at link.
Title: "If We Destroy Creation, Creation Will Destroy Us." Pope Francis
Post by: AGelbert on May 26, 2014, 02:48:29 pm
Pope Francis Makes Biblical Case For Addressing Climate Change: ‘If We Destroy Creation, Creation Will Destroy Us’



Pope Francis made the religious case for tackling climate change on Wednesday, calling on his fellow Christians to become “Custodians of Creation” and issuing a dire warning about the potentially catastrophic effects of global climate change.

Speaking to a massive crowd in Rome, the first Argentinian pope delivered a short address in which he argued that respect for the “beauty of nature and the grandeur of the cosmos” is a Christian value, noting that failure to care for the planet risks apocalyptic consequences.
 
“Safeguard Creation,” he said. “Because if we destroy Creation, Creation will destroy us! Never forget this!”

The pope centered his environmentalist theology around the biblical creation story in the book of Genesis, where God is said to have created the world, declared it “good,” and charged humanity with its care. Francis also made reference to his namesake, Saint Francis of Assisi, who was a famous lover of animals, and appeared to tie the ongoing environmental crisis to economic concerns — namely, instances where a wealthy minority exploits the planet at the expense of the poor.

“Creation is not a property, which we can rule over at will; or, even less, is the property of only a few: Creation is a gift,  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif) it is a wonderful gift that God has given us, so that we care for it and we use it for the benefit of all, always with great respect and gratitude,” (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) Francis said.

Francis also said that humanity’s destruction of the planet is a sinful act, likening it to self-idolatry.
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

“But when we exploit Creation we destroy the sign of God’s love for us, in destroying Creation we are saying to God: ‘I don’t like it! This is not good!’ ‘So what do you like?’ ‘I like myself!’  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png)– Here, this is sin! Do you see?” (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)

The pope’s comments come on the heels of a five-day summit on sustainability convened at the Vatican earlier this month. The summit, entitled “Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature, Our Responsibility,” drew together microbiologists, legal scholars, economists, philosophers, astronomers, and other experts to discuss ways for the Catholic church to address a range issues caused by climate change. In a joint statement published after the close of the conference, participants echoed Francis’ belief that environmental justice and economic justice are inextricably linked.

“Human action which is not respectful of nature becomes a boomerang for human beings that creates inequality and extends what Pope Francis has termed ‘the globalization of indifference’ and the ‘economy of exclusion’ (Evangelii Gaudium), which themselves endanger solidarity with present and future generations,” the statement read.

The pontiff’s catechesis and the Vatican’s summit appear to be part of a renewed effort by the Catholic church to draw attention to environmental issues. Keeping with a long history of Catholic environmentalism (including several pro-environmentalist sermons delivered by Pope Benedict XVI, Francis’ predecessor), Francis addressed climate change in his inaugural mass as pope, and is rumored to be working on a formal encyclical on the environment.

Tags: Catholic Church
Climate Change
Pope Francis
   
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/21/3440075/pope-francis-if-we-destroy-creation-creation-will-destroy-us/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 29, 2014, 11:29:19 pm
(http://i1.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2014/05/Poster-Divestment.jpg)

(http://i2.wp.com/cleantechnica.com/files/2014/05/ClimateVictory-Logo-color.jpg)
Title: New Video Turns Up the Heat on GOP Climate Change Deniers
Post by: AGelbert on June 05, 2014, 06:53:36 pm
New Video Turns Up the Heat on GOP Climate Change Deniers


EcoWatch | June 4, 2014 3:11 pm In support of President Obama’s plan to cut carbon emissions, Americans United for Change released a video today calling out climate deniers in the GOP.

Not A Scientist features members of Congress, potential presidential candidates and Republican leaders—from Marco Rubio to John Boehner—all preaching from the same climate skeptic handbook and refusing to acknowledge the overwhelming scientific evidence that supports man-made climate change.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWc0XhIGgRQ&feature=player_embedded

“The GOP’s new talking point when challenged on climate change is ‘I’m no scientist’, and yet they remain 100 percent certain as that 97 percent of the scientific community is pulling a fast one on us all for no explicable reason,” said Jeremy Funk of Americans United for Change. “Could it be because Big Oil and the pollution-profiting Koch brothers have given Republicans tens of millions of reasons to feign or maintain ignorance to the detriment of our environment, health and national security?”  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)


While the Republican party maintains their ignorance, a new poll commissioned by Americans United for Change shows that crucial Independent voters are not sympathetic to this anti-science position,   ;D with only 29 percent open to supporting a climate skeptic in the 2016 presidential elections.

http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/04/video-gop-climate-change-deniers/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 06, 2014, 08:43:29 pm
How do you like your state cooked?

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) American Southwest heating faster than rest of nation


http://grist.org/news/american-southwest-heating-faster-than-rest-of-nation/
Title: 1950s Lousy Flyng Saucer movie with Spectacular Alaska Glacier Scenery!
Post by: AGelbert on June 09, 2014, 01:39:30 am
This is a historical film.  ;D No, not because the USA wants to beat the Russians to own a flying saucer so they can carry NUCLEAR BOMBS  :P, it's because of all the glacier scenes!

I will dig up some current photos of the area and make a few screen shots from the movie to compare soon. Meanwhile, check it out!  (http://robservations.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/happy-cat1.jpg)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DEQ-a0C7U0&feature=player_embedded
P.S. The cigarette companies must have funded the movie.  ;) 

Just about everyone smokes like a fiend!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__smokelots.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/minzdr.gif)  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-020.gif)




Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2014, 12:30:52 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7tntAdhJUY&feature=player_embedded
Title: The Guitar of Reality
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2014, 12:46:05 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRpacAr3jQ8&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2014, 10:15:23 pm
PETITION TO: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/420/529/456/demand-liberty-from-fossil-fuels-through-100-renewable-energy-wwii-style-effort/)


Become a Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations. All you need to do is sign the petition  ;D and print your banner/flag to display any way you want from a window to a T-shirt to a bumper sticker.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110614145742.jpeg)

(http://veronicadelcarpio.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/dont.jpeg)

Future Generations will (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/thankyou.gif)
(http://www.grantham.k12.nh.us/UserFiles/Servers/Server_5213317/Image/thank_you_happyface.jpg)(http://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/2012/8/14/1344970546338-awesome_mc_ht_smiley.gif)



Title: Are you a GLSA in the Service of Future Generations? Tell the WORLD!
Post by: AGelbert on June 12, 2014, 10:33:19 pm
GLSA = Green Leaf Star American
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-games-022.gif)


GLSA Coffee mugs

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614215622.jpeg)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614162349.jpeg)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614215503.jpeg)

Statue of Liberty Poster
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614215758.jpeg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614215930.png)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614220102.jpeg)

SWEATSHIRT
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120614220217.jpeg)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 13, 2014, 03:10:41 pm
Progress report on GLSA Petition to President Obama to get his ass in gear and push for a 100% Renewable energy Transition

we signed:  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-042.gif) (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg) Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)


Mr. Jim de Cordova, CA

Jun 13, 11:09

# 14


Mr. Timothy Havel, MA

Jun 13, 08:29

# 13


Ms. Sandra Speicher, CO

Jun 13, 06:36

# 12


Mr. PJ van Staden, South Africa

Jun 13, 03:44

# 11


Mr. David Ferraro, VA

Jun 13, 02:10

# 10

Absolutely necessary for the preservation of humankind. Expect scorched-earth opposition from the fossil fuel lobby.
sent

Ms. Natasha Salgado, ON

Jun 13, 01:41

# 9


Mr. frank mcclain, CA

Jun 12, 23:20

# 8

I hear Sen Inhofe says the solutions to 'climate change' are "too costly". Never mind that continuing to burn fossil fuels is 'too stupid". When we humans start doing something because it is 'smart' instead of 'cheap', we may have a thriving planet to pass on to our great great grandchildren. As of now, it looks like they'll get a smoldering wreck. We can prevent this. Today is the day to change course. We can do this. We really can. (http://media.giphy.com/media/HjPbLbmep2aJO/giphy.gif)



Ms. Mary Ch, ON

Jun 12, 09:35

# 7

Please watch shows "SOS Global Warming" on www.suprememastertv.com
 

Ms. Stacey Calvert, United Kingdom

Jun 12, 09:08

# 6
 

Mr. Joseph Wenzel, MN

Jun 12, 05:29

# 5
 

Ms. Kaileen Reynolds, TX

Jun 12, 04:00

# 4
 

Mr. Serdar Murat, Austria

Jun 12, 02:55

# 3
 

Mr. John Forbes, United Kingdom

Jun 11, 21:42

# 2


Here's the link to the petition:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/420/529/456/demand-liberty-from-fossil-fuels-through-100-renewable-energy-wwii-style-effort/

Please pass it on for the good of future generations. You can paste that link directly into any Disqus comment section of forum comment.






(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ljpxj2H9m51qdy8pao1_500.gif)


Title: THIS is not good at all...
Post by: AGelbert on June 15, 2014, 10:53:29 pm
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5rI01qK0m0w/U5WReqJGp-I/AAAAAAAANdw/I8eVTxsLofU/s1600/FIG1-2A.JPG)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmcGXe_xNoU&feature=player_embedded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdaR33FqnfU&feature=player_embedded

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/arctic-atmospheric-methane-global-warming-veil.html
Don't just sit there, sign this petition!  (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/420/529/456/demand-liberty-from-fossil-fuels-through-100-renewable-energy-wwii-style-effort/)

Pass it on. The planet you save may be your own...
Title: Where is the Global Warming HEAT going?
Post by: AGelbert on June 15, 2014, 11:02:51 pm
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4XZVLQGJwwQ/U5a2q6RJnmI/AAAAAAAANgs/QRUrg5Ylh2w/s1600/FIG29B.JPG)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 16, 2014, 10:00:50 pm
(http://localtvwtvr.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/drought.jpg)

California is under a DROUGHT. Shut the water off to the 900 Golf Courses statewide
author: Nicholas Pierotti
target: Governor Jerry Brown
signatures: 538

we've got 538 signatures, help us get to 1,000

overview


As the State of California has now been officially declared to be in a drought emergency, I have to ask: Are all the 900 golf courses in the State still being watered? I'd say we cut those off so that people will have water to drink and cook and wash with.

Golf is NOT a necessary activity.

SHUT 'EM OFF! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)

Who really NEEDS golf courses. NOBODY. The water should be used for necessary activities. Let's shut off the water to the golf courses state-wide.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)


If you agree, help Nicholas Pierotti by signing his petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/361/553/523/california-is-under-a-drought-shut-the-water-off-to-the-900-golf-courses-statewide/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 20, 2014, 10:49:21 pm
The Turning Point: New Hope for the Climate  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)


It's time to accelerate the shift toward a low-carbon future  ;D
 

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-turning-point-new-hope-for-the-climate-20140618#ixzz35Eoye7k8

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 30, 2014, 08:37:16 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) Is the Arctic Warming Faster than the Rest of the World?

The Arctic is warming faster than the rest of the world — twice as fast, on average. From the 1970s through the 2000s. However, the average temperature of some parts of the Arctic has increased 10 times more  :o than the average worldwide temperature increase of 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit (0.2 degrees Celsius) per decade. The Arctic, Earth's ice-covered most northern region, is thought to be warming more quickly than the rest of Earth because of the albedo effect, which occurs when the loss of ice reduces the reflection of the sun’s heat back into space, and instead uncovers bare water and rock that take in and store the sun’s heat.

More about the Arctic:

•The amount of ice in the Arctic region decreased 14% from the 1970s to 2012.

•Eight countries have regions that extend into the Arctic: Canada, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the US.

•Polar bears are located only in the Arctic, and environmentalists project that they could be extinct by the year 2100 if the region continues to warm at the projected rate.

http://www.wisegeek.com/is-the-arctic-warming-faster-than-the-rest-of-the-world.htm

Agelbert NOTE: A lot more species than polar bears, including Homo SAP, may be extinct by the year 2100 if the suicidal trajectory we or on is not changed within a decade or so.  >:(
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 04, 2014, 09:43:21 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSuzNSHPv6c&feature=player_embedded

If we change, if we act to leave dirty and centralized, political power concentrating energy behind, we will give future generations a chance to live in a Viable Biosphere AND a political democracy.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-160614020239.gif)

Vote for the above:  http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 07, 2014, 02:28:31 pm
(http://files.cdn.ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/quakers.jpg)
Image courtesy of 350.org

Quakers Divest From Fossil Fuels

Paula Kline, Fossil Free Friends  | July 7, 2014 12:09 pm 

Quote
“We understand that addressing the climate crisis is a moral imperative,” said Bruce Harrison of Westtown Monthly Meeting. “The divestment movement draws attention to the seriousness of climate disruption and the need to combat the powerful coal, oil and gas companies, which persist in resisting efforts to curb polluting carbon and methane emissions.”
(http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)

http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/07/quakers-divest-from-fossil-fuels/

You see folks, the Quakers live mostly in PENNSYLVANIA. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-034.gif) For those who don't know what Fracking has done, thanks to the environmental cost math challenged MKing's of this world (the fossil fuel loving crazies), just Google Frackcidents.

Here's my search results for those, unlike MKing, who can add and subtract.  https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS485US486&q=frackcidents

NOTE: fraccidents is a DIFFERENT search item. Do that one after the above one for more "externalized costs of fossil fuels" that WE-THE-PEOPLE get STUCK with.

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 08, 2014, 03:54:28 pm
For those who wish to see where the typhoon is and the wind velocity in any part of the typhoon only about 15 minutes after real time AND in animated format, go here.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080714154634.png)
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/1000hPa/orthographic=-73.08,26.62,291

That superb web site is just like Google Earth, but for near real time wind velocities anywhere on earth.    (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)    (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)
Just position the globe and zoom in to the typhoon Raccoon (in Korean). Then click on any point and see the wind velocity readout.  8)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 09, 2014, 03:30:50 pm
Release of the International Surface Temperature Initiative’s (ISTI’s) Global Land Surface Databank, an expanded set of fundamental surface temperature records

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) Calling GW denying pieces of lying **** everywhere (you too, Snowleopard). Go crawling to your Koch dirty energy funded mendacity for profit-over-planet mind**** propaganda "think"(septic) tanks for your "talking points". (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif) The liars are going to have to come up with some world class bull**** verbal gymnastics to find ANY questionable data in this COMPREHENSIVE, PEER REVIEWED DATA SET. ;D

Quote
Guest post by Jared Rennie, Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, North Carolina on behalf of the databank working group of the International Surface Temperature Initiative

In the 21st Century, when multi-billion dollar decisions are being made to mitigate and adapt to climate change, society rightly expects openness and transparency in climate science to enable a greater understanding of how climate has changed and how it will continue to change. Arguably the very foundation of our understanding is the observational record.

Today a new set of fundamental holdings of land surface air temperature records stretching back deep into the 19th Century   ;D has been released as a result of several years of effort by a multinational group of scientists.

The International Surface Temperature Initiative (ISTI) was launched by an international and multi-disciplinary group of scientists in 2010 to improve understanding of the Earth’s climate from the global to local scale. The Databank Working Group, under the leadership of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), has produced an innovative data holding that largely leverages off existing data sources, but also incorporates many previously unavailable sources of surface air temperature.

This data holding provides users a way to better track the origin of the data from its collection through its integration. By providing the data in various stages that lead to the integrated product, by including data origin tracking flags with information on each observation, and by providing the software used to process all observations, the processes involved in creating the observed fundamental climate record are completely open and transparent to the extent humanly possible. -

Full READ IT AND WEEP (for fossil fuelers ;)) fact filled article HERE.  (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/07/release-of-the-international-surface-temperature-initiatives-istis-global-land-surface-databank-an-expanded-set-of-fundamental-surface-temperature-records/#sthash.B3iSoqwu.dpuf)

Demand an END to DIRTY ENERGY NOW! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)

Quote
Approximately 13 percent of the U.S. electricity supply was powered by renewables as of the end of 2013, roughly half of Germany’s rate."
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/08/3456934/renewable-one-third-germany/

The USA, a historic leader in new technology, is getting left behind because of the profit-over-planet biosphere degrading fossil fuel industry that buys our politicians with the profits from pollution producing fuels while said politicians keep fossil fuel and nuclear power plant "subsides" (taxpayer theft!) to tilt the energy playing field against renewable energy.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/d2.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif)

We need to ELIMINATE DIRTY ENERGY SUBSIDIES and start the FULL TRANSITION to CLEAN ENERGY NOW!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)

America DOES NOT have to play second fiddle to being the first country to win the Climate Victory because of idiot greedball, war loving fossil fuelers. As part of being responsible, caring human beings, we have to pressure our government to take major action to stop the degradation of the biosphere from climate change. This is causing death and disease to both domestic animals and wildlife, all of which have done nothing to deserve such a horrible fate at our hands. It's time to eliminate the excuse our fossil fuel loving oligarchy uses for "resources" wars for oil that bring nothing but misery to us and profits for them.

I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb


Thank you and please pass it on. The biosphere you save may be your own.
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 15, 2014, 08:23:19 pm
Has There Been an Increase in Incidence of Natural Disasters in the Past Several Decades?    (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6656.gif)                  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)  (http://assets1.bigthink.com/system/idea_thumbnails/51779/headline/natural_disasters_big_think.jpg?1374159208)
 

There has been an increase in the incidence of natural disasters in the past several decades. The 2011 United Nations (UN) World Economic and Social Survey found that the rate of natural disasters increased by five times since the 1970s. Researchers believe this is related to climate change brought on by excessive energy consumption and pollution related to human behaviors such as an increase in technology and industrial output. An increase in global temperature may particularly increase the extreme temperatures that can cause natural disaster storms by producing more water vapor in the air that turns into precipitation.

More about the increase in natural disasters:

•The total worldwide death toll of natural disasters decreased by over 90% from the 1930s to the 2000s.

•Scientists project that there will be an increase of up to 20% more snow and rain by the year 2100, making natural disasters more prevalent, as well as more powerful.

•The average annual cost of a natural disaster aftermath was $50 billion US Dollars (USD) to nearly $200 billion USD on average in 2012.

http://www.wisegeek.com/has-there-been-an-increase-in-incidence-of-natural-disasters-in-the-past-several-decades.htm

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 17, 2014, 01:35:02 pm
The One Metric That’s Hiding The True Cost Of Climate Change(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif)


By Jeff Spross on July 17, 2014 at 11:22 am

Snippet:
Quote
So what value do we place on the ocean’s coral reefs and the myriad animals they support, and how do we weigh their loss against other values? What price tag do you put on a species of bird or fish or mammal which, once gone, will never return? How does humanity weigh moral accountability if our own carbon emissions contributed to that destruction?

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/17/3458718/one-metric-cost-climate-change

Agelbert NOTE: "HUMANITY" in the above quote REALLY MEANS the upper 20% OR LESS of Homo SAP! Never forget that... >:( The bill (even though the damage can NEVER be totally undone  :()  is coming due for all this destruction and WE KNOW who HAS to get that bill! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 17, 2014, 04:07:19 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif)
BBC THE TRUTH ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE PART 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a51mWYhVmek&feature=player_embedded
Title: World's Oceans face "Irreparable Damage"
Post by: AGelbert on July 17, 2014, 08:02:55 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiHdDjLm7CE&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 17, 2014, 11:43:54 pm
Has the METHANE BOMB GONE OFF?   ???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqdlaLufBa0&feature=player_embedded

The striking abyss is believed to be up to 80 meters wide although its depth has not been estimated yet. A scientific team sent to investigate the hole was due to arrive at the scene on Wednesday, reports Siberian Times.

The cause of its sudden appearance in the remote Siberian land is not yet known, although one scientific claim, cited by the newspaper, is that global warming may be to blame.

There is additional speculation that the giant hole – that appeared close to a forest some 30 kilometers from Yamal's biggest gas field Bovanenkovo – could be caused by a space object – possibly a meteorite – striking earth. It could also be a sinkhole caused by collapsing rock beneath the hole caused by an unknown reason.

Startled helicopter passengers told their pilot to loiter over the mysterious crater as they came by the mind-blowing hole. The passengers were cited as saying the hole was big enough for their helicopter – and 18 meter long Mi8 – to have comfortably enter the crater without touching the sides.

The most deadly meteor impact of modern times known as "The Tunguska air burst" – took place in the region in 1908. The impact flattened vast swathes of forest over a 2,000 square kilometer area.

No streak in the sky, flash of explosion or seismic events has been recorded in the recent time, but the hole has, nonetheless appeared.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/meteor-ufo-landing-site-mysterious-crater-siberias-end-world-baffles-scientists-604542
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 18, 2014, 03:56:47 pm
Wanna see what climate change looks like? Check out the vicious fires in northwest Canada (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)

http://grist.org/news/wanna-see-what-climate-change-looks-like-check-out-the-vicious-fires-in-northwest-canada/ (http://grist.org/news/wanna-see-what-climate-change-looks-like-check-out-the-vicious-fires-in-northwest-canada/)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180714162042.png)

Current fire sites British Columbia only:
http://bcwildfire.ca/hprScripts/WildfireNews/Fires.asp
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 19, 2014, 01:09:38 am
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif)
BBC THE TRUTH ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE PART 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTgAiyo0xwY&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 19, 2014, 03:59:19 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)California Board Votes to Investigate Covert Climate Engineering    (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)


Watch the disturbing video as concerned environmentalists, scientists, and aircraft pilots speak out.

http://aircrap.org/california-board-votes-to-investigate-covert-climate-engineering-7152014/339138/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 22, 2014, 03:22:59 pm
National Conversation on Climate Change Has Shifted (http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/22/national-conversation-climate-change-shifted/)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183515.bmp)
Title: Hottest June in All Recorded Human History
Post by: AGelbert on July 22, 2014, 04:29:43 pm
(http://files.cdn.ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/shutterstock_147036620.jpg)

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)Last Month Was the Hottest June in All Recorded Human History (http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/22/hottest-june-of-all-time)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 23, 2014, 04:07:38 pm
Climate Change Insights
Two Realities

SNIPPET:
Quote

If the problem of political realists is self-delusion, the predicament of many physical realists is a sense of defeat and dread.

So for the sake of the latter I will conclude with a little pep talk (directed as much to myself as to readers).

Too much is at stake to retire in cynical self-assurance that we are right, they are wrong; we are weak, they are strong. Yes, horrible consequences from past growth are inevitable; today’s physical reality is a given. However, tomorrow’s reality is still, at least to some degree, up to us.
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/23/two-realities/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 24, 2014, 02:40:58 am
Faux Pause 3: More Evidence Global Surface Temperatures Poised To Rise Rapidly  :(


http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/22/3462647/global-surface-temperatures/
Title: Senator Denies Climate Change On Senate Floor And Gets A Science Lesson
Post by: AGelbert on July 30, 2014, 02:02:46 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDL4Bs3NbB0&feature=player_embedded

[embed=640,380]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDL4Bs3NbB0#[/embed]
 Senator Denies Climate Change On Senate Floor And Gets A Science Lesson From His Colleague (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/29/3465442/whitehouse-blasts-inhofe-on-climate/)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 31, 2014, 11:32:42 pm
Moral Power for Climate Action VIDEO

http://vimeo.com/80328134

from Whidbey Institute Plus 8 months ago Not Yet Rated 

The climate crisis is not an environmental problem. It is a human problem. Humans have caused it and only humans can act to avert catastrophe. Yet many of us continue to live as if this crisis isn't happening. Even those who accept the science, and care a lot. The time has come to go beyond the science, to a place of heart. The time has come to tap our deepest sources of moral courage and commitment.

To learn more about the Climate Collaborative, visit whidbeyinstitute.org/our-work/climate-collaborative.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 01, 2014, 03:49:12 pm
Glaciology
Data mix-up in sea-ice record
Nature 511, 510 (31 July 2014) doi:10.1038/511510b Published online 30 July 2014

SNIPPET:
The recent, mysterious expansion of Antarctic ice could be overestimated because of a data-analysis error, according to US scientists.

Ian Eisenman at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California, and his colleagues found the mistake when they compared two versions of satellite data on Southern Hemisphere sea ice that…
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v511/n7511/full/511510b.html

Agelbert begging  ;D: If any of you fellows with spare cash DO subscribe (or buy this article for $8   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)) to this prestigious scientific journal called Nature, please give us the details on this story.

The huge and growing Antarctic FLOATING ice is a data point the GW deniers have been using (while IGNORING THE GREATER LOSS OF ICE on the Antarctic continent!) for some time. They need a knuckle sandwich for their mendacious duplicity.
  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210614221847.gif)

Okay! I found the data FREE!   ;D Enjoy:

Quote

A recent paper investigated the processing of Antarctic sea ice data and how this affects the interpretation of Antarctic ice extent trends. While their findings do not affect NSIDC’s analysis of Antarctic sea ice extent, as we use a different data set, it is an interesting example of scientific rigor regarding data, and it does affect other reports of Antarctic sea ice trends.

The paper studied the Bootstrap algorithm, which has been used in several published reports of Antarctic trends, including the last two IPCC Assessment Reports. These reports suggested that the Antarctic sea ice extent shifted from a small, statistically insignificant upward trend in the early 2000s to a more substantial, and statistically significant upward trend in recent years. (NSIDC uses a different algorithm, called NASA Team, to estimate sea ice extent.)

The paper found that following an update to the algorithm in 2007, using the newer Version 2 of the Bootstrap algorithm produced Antarctic sea ice extent trends that were approximately two times larger than those derived using Version 1. Closer examination of the data showed a noticeable step change in extent at the point of transition to a new satellite sensor in 1991. This step change appeared to be related to an error in calibration between the sensors, rather than actually being an abrupt shift in Antarctic sea ice.

Trends derived from both versions for time periods either before or after the sensor transition are similar. However, the two algorithms produce different results when trends that span the 1991 sensor transition are calculated. Using Version 2 of the algorithm produces a markedly higher trend.

Using the newer version of the algorithm, Antarctic extent trends agree much more closely with the trends from the NASA Team algorithm used by NSIDC. Regardless, the expansion in Antarctic sea ice is confirmed by other groups using different techniques.

References

Eisenman, I., W. N. Meier, and R. J. Norris. 2014. A spurious jump in the satellite record: has Antarctic sea ice expansion been overestimated?, The Cryosphere 8, 1289-1296, doi:10.5194/tc-8-1289-2014.
 
Posted in Analysis   

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 05, 2014, 04:02:35 pm
Russian Scientists: Global Warming Played Major Role in Siberian Craters  :o

Giant methane blow-holes in Siberia have many scientists worried about runaway climate change.

Last night on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, Ed Schultz explained that scientists believe the massive craters are caused by thawing permafrost and directly linked to the abnormally hot Yamal summers of 2012 and 2013. As temperatures rose, the permafrost thawed and collapsed, releasing methane that had been trapped in the icy ground.

Joining Schultz last night was Dr. Reese Halter, distinguished conservation biologist and author of nine books, who said, “This is a ticking time bomb. The only thing we can do is reduce the amount of fossil fuels that we are spewing daily, 85 million tons of greenhouse heat-trapping gas, into the atmosphere.”

Watch below (at link)to hear more.

http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/05/russian-scientists-global-warming-siberian-craters/

Wait until your hear what Dr. Reese Halter said is happening to the forests! (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 05, 2014, 07:17:49 pm
Atlantic warming turbocharges Pacific trade winds

Date:August 3, 2014

Source:University of New South Wales

Summary:

Rapid warming of the Atlantic Ocean, likely caused by global warming, has turbocharged Pacific Equatorial trade winds. This has caused eastern tropical Pacific cooling, amplified the Californian drought, accelerated sea level rise three times faster than the global average in the Western Pacific and has slowed the rise of global average surface temperatures since 2001.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/08/140803193642.htm
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 05, 2014, 08:13:50 pm
Take THIS, GW deniers!  ;D

My 1975 'Cooling World' Story Doesn't Make Today's Climate Scientists Wrong   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)

It's time for deniers of human-caused global warming to stop using an old magazine story as ammunition against the consensus of today's climate scientists.    (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-005.gif)

Originally published: May 21 2014 - 11:30am
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050814195113.jpeg)
By: Peter Gwynne, Guest Columnist

Inside Science Minds presents an ongoing series of guest columnists and personal perspectives presented by scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and others in the science community showcasing some of the most interesting ideas in science today.
Quote

(Inside Science) – "The central fact is that, after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the Earth seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century." – Newsweek: April 28, 1975

That's an excerpt from a story I wrote about climate science that appeared almost 40 years ago. Titled "The Cooling World," it was remarkably popular; in fact it might be the only decades-old magazine story about science ever carried onto the set of a late-night TV talk show.   (http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png) Now, as the author of that story, after decades of scientific advances, let me say this: while the hypotheses described in that original story seemed right at the time, climate scientists now know that they were seriously incomplete. Our climate is warming -- not cooling, as the original story suggested.



Agelbert NOTE: Full rather lengthy, detailed and thorough article at link:
  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)

http://www.insidescience.org/content/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong/1640
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050814194624.jpeg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050814194738.jpeg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050814194840.jpeg)


SNIPPET EXPOSING THE FOSSIL FUEL AND NUKE PUKE DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN:

Quote
There are many lines of observational evidence that the world is warming, including globally rising air and ocean temperatures, retreating glaciers worldwide, increasing sea level, decreasing Arctic Sea ice extent, and mass loss on the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica," he wrote. "In addition, an entire new body of climate science called 'detection and attribution' convincingly shows that the observed climate changes have distinctive space-time patterns that are consistent with causes due to human activities."

The counterattack had started by the beginning of the 1990s. The purported evidence against global warming included the news articles on cooling by myself and others.

Some commentators, such as Dixy Lee Ray, former chair of the Atomic Energy Commission, asserted that the articles represented climate scares that inevitably turned out to be untrue – as would the idea of global warming, they asserted.

Others took a less subtle route. The articles proved, they argued, that the atmosphere was cooling and that there was no reason to change that conclusion. In that view, climate science never changes.

However, both types of warming deniers, along with policymakers who have consistently opposed any regulation designed to reduce acid rain, the destruction of the ozone layer, and other perceived ills, have consistently used the articles – particularly mine – as ammunition.

But that's just one line of attack. Mann suffered another starting in 1998, after he published an article in the journal Nature; that included a "hockey stick" model that demonstrated a dramatic increase in the rate of recent global warming.

"I was at the receiving end of the attacks from many of the same individuals, think tanks, and organizations implicated in past attacks on other climate scientists, such as [late] climatologist Steve Schneider," he wrote in an email. "The attacks on climate science and on me specifically have escalated for a simple reason: As the scientific evidence becomes clearer and the threat becomes clearer, it takes yet more disinformation and propaganda to obscure the truth. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent by fossil fuel interests     (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) seeking to muddy the waters. That has, in turn, provided cover for politicians doing their bidding in opposing any attempts to regulate carbon emissions."  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg)
 

http://www.insidescience.org/content/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong/1640
Title: How big is the Arctic?
Post by: AGelbert on August 06, 2014, 06:48:17 pm
How big is the Arctic? (http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~bitz/map_scaling.html) (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif)

Cecilia Bitz's Homepage
Tel: (206) 543-1339
 office: Atmos Sci & Geophys Bld 502
bitz@atmos.washington.edu

I am a Professor in the  Atmospheric Sciences Department, an Affiliate Physicist for the Polar Science Center, and part of the Program on Climate Change, all at University of Washington


My research interests include

•The role of sea ice in the climate system and high-latitude climate and climate change.

• The predictability of Arctic sea ice.

•The role of aerosols and other short-lived species as a source of Arctic decadal variability.

• Global coupled climate modeling. I am part of a the PetaApps team, which has run the CCSM4 at very high resolution.  Check out our animations of our century long control at 1/10 degree sea ice and ocean.  I use the Community Earth System Model.



http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~bitz/       (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 06, 2014, 07:10:23 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) (http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif)

Climate models using either 1% or 2% PER YEAR CO2 increase. (http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~bitz/PSC/future.html)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 06, 2014, 07:30:26 pm
Glaciology
Data mix-up in sea-ice record
Nature 511, 510 (31 July 2014) doi:10.1038/511510b Published online 30 July 2014

SNIPPET:
The recent, mysterious expansion of Antarctic ice could be overestimated because of a data-analysis error, according to US scientists.

Ian Eisenman at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California, and his colleagues found the mistake when they compared two versions of satellite data on Southern Hemisphere sea ice that…
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v511/n7511/full/511510b.html

Agelbert begging  ;D: If any of you fellows with spare cash DO subscribe (or buy this article for $8   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)) to this prestigious scientific journal called Nature, please give us the details on this story.

The huge and growing Antarctic FLOATING ice is a data point the GW deniers have been using (while IGNORING THE GREATER LOSS OF ICE on the Antarctic continent!) for some time. They need a knuckle sandwich for their mendacious duplicity.
  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210614221847.gif)

Okay! I found the data FREE!   ;D Enjoy:

Quote

A recent paper investigated the processing of Antarctic sea ice data and how this affects the interpretation of Antarctic ice extent trends. While their findings do not affect NSIDC’s analysis of Antarctic sea ice extent, as we use a different data set, it is an interesting example of scientific rigor regarding data, and it does affect other reports of Antarctic sea ice trends.

The paper studied the Bootstrap algorithm, which has been used in several published reports of Antarctic trends, including the last two IPCC Assessment Reports. These reports suggested that the Antarctic sea ice extent shifted from a small, statistically insignificant upward trend in the early 2000s to a more substantial, and statistically significant upward trend in recent years.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif)(NSIDC uses a different algorithm, called NASA Team, to estimate sea ice extent.)

The paper found that following an update to the algorithm in 2007, using the newer Version 2 of the Bootstrap algorithm produced Antarctic sea ice extent trends that were approximately two times larger than those derived using Version 1.  :o Closer examination of the data showed a noticeable step change in extent at the point of transition to a new satellite sensor in 1991. This step change appeared to be related to an error in calibration between the sensors, rather than actually being an abrupt shift in Antarctic sea ice.  ;D

Trends derived from both versions for time periods either before or after the sensor transition are similar. However, the two algorithms produce different results when trends that span the 1991 sensor transition are calculated. Using Version 2 of the algorithm produces a markedly higher trend.

Using the newer version of the algorithm, Antarctic extent trends agree much more closely with the trends from the NASA Team algorithm used by NSIDC. Regardless, the expansion in Antarctic sea ice is confirmed by other groups using different techniques.

References

Eisenman, I., W. N. Meier, and R. J. Norris. 2014. A spurious jump in the satellite record: has Antarctic sea ice expansion been overestimated?, The Cryosphere 8, 1289-1296, doi:10.5194/tc-8-1289-2014.
 
Posted in Analysis   

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 10, 2014, 03:22:26 pm
(http://climatesafety.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/climate-grinches2013_560.jpg)
Title: Change at the Top of the World
Post by: AGelbert on August 11, 2014, 09:37:09 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K_9K0JvxOQ&feature=player_embedded
Change at the Top of the World

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110814224725.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 20, 2014, 11:51:08 pm
What is the Highest Temperature Ever Recorded?

The highest temperature ever recorded was 134 degrees Fahrenheit (57 Celsius) in Death Valley on July 10, 1913. Located in the US and stretching across parts of California and Nevada, Death Valley is one of the hottest desert areas in North America and has average temperatures over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (38 Celsius). During the period of July 9 through July 13 in 1913, Death Valley’s temperatures were especially hot and reached at least 129 degrees Fahrenheit (54 Celsius) each day, with July 10 reaching the record-breaking 134 degrees Fahrenheit (57 Celsius). Death Valley is prone to extreme heat because its lack of plant cover makes the desert surface unprotected from sunlight, and the heat becomes trapped due to the valley’s depth.

More about temperature:

•It was thought that El Azizia, Libya reached the highest temperature ever recorded in 1922 at 136 degrees Fahrenheit (58 Celsius), but those measurements have not been verified.

•The first experiments to measure temperature dates back to Greek scientist Galen in A.D. 170.

•The lowest temperature on official record is -128.6 degrees Fahrenheit (-89 Celsius) in Antarctica in 1983.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-highest-temperature-ever-recorded.htm
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 24, 2014, 03:10:06 pm
MORE EXTERNALIZED COSTS thanks to the fossil fuel foes  of humanity.  >:(
Unlike the Fossil Fueler GREEDBALLS  of this world, PNAS really DOES DO THE MATH!  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)

(http://www.nasonline.org/assets/wrapper-images/PNAS-banner-rollover.jpg)
Quote
Our findings indicate that under future levels of atmospheric CO2, T. radicans may grow larger and become more noxious than it is today. Given the global distribution of this and other closely related species, these results have implications for forest dynamics and human health. Increased abundance of woody vines in old-growth and fragmented forests is reducing tree regeneration and increasing tree mortality in tropical (18, 19, 22, 23) and temperate (20, 21) regions.

Biomass and toxicity responses of poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) to elevated atmospheric CO2
Jacqueline E. Mohan * , † , ‡ , § ,
Lewis H. Ziska ¶ ,
William H. Schlesinger * , ‖ , § ,
Richard B. Thomas **,
Richard C. Sicher ¶ ,
Kate George ¶ , and
James S. Clark * , ‖

Abstract
Contact with poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) is one of the most widely reported ailments at poison centers in the United States, and this plant has been introduced throughout the world, where it occurs with other allergenic members of the cashew family (Anacardiaceae). Approximately 80% of humans develop dermatitis upon exposure to the carbon-based active compound, urushiol. It is not known how poison ivy might respond to increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), but previous work done in controlled growth chambers shows that other vines exhibit large growth enhancement from elevated CO2. Rising CO2 is potentially responsible for the increased vine abundance that is inhibiting forest regeneration and increasing tree mortality around the world. In this 6-year study at the Duke University Free-Air CO2 Enrichment experiment, we show that elevated atmospheric CO2 in an intact forest ecosystem increases photosynthesis, water use efficiency, growth, and population biomass of poison ivy. The CO2 growth stimulation exceeds that of most other woody species. Furthermore, high-CO2 plants produce a more allergenic form of urushiol. Our results indicate that Toxicodendron taxa will become more abundant and more “toxic” in the future, potentially affecting global forest dynamics and human health.

Poison ivy [Toxicodendron radicans (L.) Kuntze] ranks among the most medically problematic plants in the United States (1, 2), annually causing >350,000 reported cases of human contact dermatitis (3). Its active component, urushiol, could be used for simulating the transmittal and subsequent symptoms of chemical warfare agents for the U.S. military (4). T. radicans is widely distributed and abundant in North America and also occurs in Central America, parts of Asia, Bermuda, and the Bahama Islands (5). It has been introduced in Europe (6, 7) and South Africa ( 8 ) and also in Australia and New Zealand, where it has become invasive and caused reported cases of contact dermatitis (9).

Other allergenic Toxicodendron species occur in much of the world (10–12). Consequently, the response of Toxicodendron to global environmental change, particularly the current increase in global atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations, bears consequences for human health on a panoptic scale.

Although the response of poison ivy to changing CO2 has not been investigated previously, various vine species show large photosynthetic and growth increases with CO2 enrichment when grown in noncompetitive conditions in enclosed, indoor growth chambers with optimal resource levels (13–15) and in low-light chambers simulating forest understory environments (16). In the first year of a 2-year field study in Tennessee, an exotic vine species (Lonicera japonica) grew significantly faster at elevated CO2 (17). Stimulation of biomass production likely results from a positive feedback of high CO2 for vines: With an increase in CO2 concentration and a corresponding increase in photosynthesis, vines can allocate more photosynthate to additional photosynthetic tissue, because of a low allocation to support tissue relative to other woody growth forms (13, 14, 18, 19). Increasing abundance of woody vines is causing increased tree mortality and reduced tree regeneration in forests around the globe (18, 20–23), potentially resulting in shifts in community composition that may impact carbon cycling and biodiversity (23). Although it is unclear how elevated CO2 will affect the growth of vines in forest environments, the contemporary increase in woody vine abundance may be the result of rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations (19, 23).

When grown under low resource levels and/or in competitive environments, plants often show small growth enhancements from increased concentrations of CO2 (24, 25). In competitive environments such as forest understories, plant growth may be limited by noncarbon resources such as soil moisture and nutrients. In such cases, additional photosynthate produced under elevated CO2 may be allocated to carbon sinks, such as the generation of secondary carbon-based compounds (26). Thus, production of urushiol, the 3-n pentadecylcatechol hydrocarbon whose reaction with the human immune system is responsible for Toxicodendron dermatitis (27), may increase under elevated CO2.

In this 6-year study at the Duke University Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiment, we assessed the impacts of elevated atmospheric CO2 (200 μl/liter above the ambient level of ≈370 μl/liter and representing the predicted global concentration at the middle of this century; ref. 28) on in situ growth and survivorship of poison ivy in an intact forest environment. Additionally, we determined effects of increased CO2 on photosynthesis, water use, and production of five variants of the secondary compound, urushiol. The human dermatitis response to poison ivy is correlated with the ratio of [unsaturated:saturated] urushiol congeners (29, 30); the higher the relative unsaturated component, the more “poisonous” the plant is to humans.

Full peer reviewed article and scholarly references at link below:

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/24/9086.full

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/234/521661900_9be77a263b.jpg)
Toxicodendron radicans


Ya gonna need an OCEAN, of Calamine lotion ... THANKS TO FOSSIL FUEL FORKS!  >:(  Make em' PAY for their DAMAGE!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRfRITVdz4k&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 25, 2014, 07:35:10 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjE9TwzM4E8&feature=player_embedded
(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140731095553/powerpuff/images/e/ee/Methane_Monster.png)
Suggestion for people on ships that see lots of bubles coming up.


Do not light a match.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 28, 2014, 05:20:08 pm
Massive Half-Mile-Long Crack Appears in Ground in Northern Mexico  :o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-MAPOFshM0&feature=player_embedded

http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/28/massive-fissure-northern-mexico/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 28, 2014, 07:31:49 pm
I've been thinking some strange Fibonacci thoughts about the retreating North pole ice cap.   :(

You see, a lot of things follow Fibonacci sequences in nature. But it's not just numbers and patterns in leaves and whatnot. It works on physical cause and effect thermodynamic phenomenon in a non-fractal way. For example, when you flush a toilet, the low pressure area that forms and starts the water swirling n a counterclockwise fashion (in the northern hemisphere) is nearly perfect Fibonacci sequence. The outer edges are relatively flat and the center is a deep tight spiral. Suppose the positive feedback mechanism on the ice cap shrinkage AND the temperature rise on our planet turns out to be a Fibonacci sequence?  :o It will catch all the scientists and math models flat footed because of the nearly exponential nature of the acceleration!

I've been developing a theory to explain why the models have been so wrong (too modest) in predicting the velocity of shrinkage as well as the increase rate of shrinkage of the floating ice.

I'm just thinking out loud but here is a 3D drawing of a Fibonacci spiral I recently drew:
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280814191050.png)
I'm still plugging in some numbers but if I find a correlation between a the Fibonacci sequence and ice reduction, we are WAY PAST Thelma and Louise's cliff.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-q3vNlNg0i38/UZpFX5K42bI/AAAAAAAADPc/tA1gf0JsLpA/s1600/ThelmaLouise4_001Pyxurz.jpg)
The flat trajectory  of the car above is about to go exponentially DOWN in a close approximation of a Fibonacci sequence reduction.  :P
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 30, 2014, 03:28:26 pm
Leonardo DiCaprio Narrates Climate Change Films Urging Shift From Fossil Fuels to Renewables

Anastasia Pantsios

Production company Tree Media, whose mission is to inspire positive social action, has just released the first of four films in the Green World Rising series focusing on solutions to the climate crisis.
climatemovieart

Leonardo DiCaprio is the voice of a series of short films exploring what we can do to protect our Earth.

The eight-minute film, CARBON, narrated by actor and dedicated environmentalist Leonardo DiCaprio, was created with support from the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation and in collaboration with Thom Hartmann. The film’s goal is to draw attention to how some governments are already putting a price on carbon through carbon taxes and carbon trading to encourage polluters to shift from dirty energy sources to renewables prior to the UN Climate Summit in New York on Sep. 23. All four films will be released in the next month leading up to the summit.

“97% of climate scientists agree: climate change is happening now—and humans are responsible,”
said DiCaprio. “We cannot sit idly by and watch the fossil fuel industry make billions at our collective expense. We must put a price on carbon—now.”

“We need serious action to address the most pressing issue of our time,” said Hartmann. “Communities across the world have taken action in the most direct and effective way possible by taxing and trading carbon. For us to beat this crisis, many more need to join.”

The film explains what a carbon tax and carbon trading are, how they can help us stop “using the atmosphere as a sewer,” as Joseph Romm of the Center for American Progress says in the film, and what ordinary people can do to push elected officials to act.

You can watch the film here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP-Twj2lzB8&feature=player_embedded

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170614152530.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 31, 2014, 01:06:57 am
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif)
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/glob/201407.gif)
July 2014
plus ocean and land temps 1880 to present

                                                                                                                (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070814193155.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 01, 2014, 08:53:07 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Cg5yx6P5w&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 02, 2014, 08:56:19 pm
World Ocean Temps Spike to +1.26 Positive Anomaly as Antarctic Polar Amplification Ramps Up Prospects for a moderate to strong El Nino are fading even as the eventual emergence of El Nino this year grows increasingly in doubt. (http://robertscribbler.wordpress.com/2014/08/29/world-ocean-temps-spike-to-1-26-positive-anomaly-as-antarctic-polar-amplification-ramps-up/)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201604.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 03, 2014, 02:22:50 pm
Found this article today while floating around the web for news articles, and Monbiot describes a phenomenon that has been very much on my mind lately. Has it been on anyone else's?


Sick of this market-driven world? You should be (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/05/neoliberalism-mental-health-rich-poverty-economy)
The self-serving con of neoliberalism is that it has eroded the human values the market was supposed to emancipate


George Monbiot
The Guardian, Tuesday 5 August 2014

[float=left](http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/8/5/1407259274913/Aerial-views-of-London-Br-008.jpg)[/float] To be at peace with a troubled world: this is not a reasonable aim. It can be achieved only through a disavowal of what surrounds you. To be at peace with yourself within a troubled world: that, by contrast, is an honourable aspiration. This column is for those who feel at odds with life. It calls on you not to be ashamed.

I was prompted to write it by a remarkable book, just published in English, by a Belgian professor of psychoanalysis, Paul Verhaeghe. What About Me? The Struggle for Identity in a Market-Based Society is one of those books that, by making connections between apparently distinct phenomena, permits sudden new insights into what is happening to us and why.

We are social animals, Verhaeghe argues, and our identities are shaped by the norms and values we absorb from other people. Every society defines and shapes its own normality – and its own abnormality – according to dominant narratives, and seeks either to make people comply or to exclude them if they don’t.

Today the dominant narrative is that of market fundamentalism, widely known in Europe as neoliberalism. The story it tells is that the market can resolve almost all social, economic and political problems. The less the state regulates and taxes us, the better off we will be. Public services should be privatised, public spending should be cut, and business should be freed from social control. In countries such as the UK and the US, this story has shaped our norms and values for around 35 years: since Thatcher and Reagan came to power. It is rapidly colonising the rest of the world.

Verhaeghe points out that neoliberalism draws on the ancient Greek idea that our ethics are innate (and governed by a state of nature it calls the market) and on the Christian idea that humankind is inherently selfish and acquisitive. Rather than seeking to suppress these characteristics, neoliberalism celebrates them: it claims that unrestricted competition, driven by self-interest, leads to innovation and economic growth, enhancing the welfare of all.

At the heart of this story is the notion of merit. Untrammelled competition rewards people who have talent, work hard, and innovate. It breaks down hierarchies and creates a world of opportunity and mobility.

The reality is rather different. Even at the beginning of the process, when markets are first deregulated, we do not start with equal opportunities. Some people are a long way down the track before the starting gun is fired. This is how the Russian oligarchs managed to acquire such wealth when the Soviet Union broke up. They weren’t, on the whole, the most talented, hardworking or innovative people, but those with the fewest scruples, the most thugs, and the best contacts – often in the KGB.

Even when outcomes are based on talent and hard work, they don’t stay that way for long. Once the first generation of liberated entrepreneurs has made its money, the initial meritocracy is replaced by a new elite, which insulates its children from competition by inheritance and the best education money can buy. Where market fundamentalism has been most fiercely applied – in countries like the US and UK – social mobility has greatly declined.

If neoliberalism was anything other than a self-serving con, whose gurus and thinktanks were financed from the beginning by some of the world’s richest people (the US multimillionaires Coors, Olin, Scaife, Pew and others), its apostles would have demanded, as a precondition for a society based on merit, that no one should start life with the unfair advantage of inherited wealth or economically determined education. But they never believed in their own doctrine. Enterprise, as a result, quickly gave way to rent.

All this is ignored, and success or failure in the market economy are ascribed solely to the efforts of the individual. The rich are the new righteous; the poor are the new deviants, who have failed both economically and morally and are now classified as social parasites.

The market was meant to emancipate us, offering autonomy and freedom. Instead it has delivered atomisation and loneliness.

The workplace has been overwhelmed by a mad, Kafkaesque infrastructure of assessments, monitoring, measuring, surveillance and audits, centrally directed and rigidly planned, whose purpose is to reward the winners and punish the losers. It destroys autonomy, enterprise, innovation and loyalty, and breeds frustration, envy and fear. Through a magnificent paradox, it has led to the revival of a grand old Soviet tradition known in Russian as tufta. It means falsification of statistics to meet the diktats of unaccountable power.

The same forces afflict those who can’t find work. They must now contend, alongside the other humiliations of unemployment, with a whole new level of snooping and monitoring. All this, Verhaeghe points out, is fundamental to the neoliberal model, which everywhere insists on comparison, evaluation and quantification. We find ourselves technically free but powerless. Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy.

These shifts have been accompanied, Verhaeghe writes, by a spectacular rise in certain psychiatric conditions: self-harm, eating disorders, depression and personality disorders.

Of the personality disorders, the most common are performance anxiety and social phobia: both of which reflect a fear of other people, who are perceived as both evaluators and competitors – the only roles for society that market fundamentalism admits. Depression and loneliness plague us.

The infantilising diktats of the workplace destroy our self-respect. Those who end up at the bottom of the pile are assailed by guilt and shame. The self-attribution fallacy cuts both ways: just as we congratulate ourselves for our success, we blame ourselves for our failure, even if we have little to do with it.

So, if you don’t fit in, if you feel at odds with the world, if your identity is troubled and frayed, if you feel lost and ashamed – it could be because you have retained the human values you were supposed to have discarded. You are a deviant. Be proud.

Quote
To be at peace with a troubled world:  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/meditationf.gif)  this is not a reasonable aim.

Although I don't agree with Monbiot on nukes, the above should be shouted from the roof tops 24/7. The status quo is a DEATH SENTENCE on HOMO SAP! Those who support it or defend it are COMPLICIT in our imminent demise.

No more Mr. Nice Guy!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)
 (http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1230/6680/original.jpg)
Smart Kitty! (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)
Title: CO2 levels in atmosphere rising at dramatically faster rate, U.N. report warns
Post by: AGelbert on September 16, 2014, 10:36:08 pm
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif)CO2 levels in atmosphere rising at dramatically faster rate, U.N. report warns — The Washington Post

September 9, 2014


By Joby Warrick

Levels of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose at a record-shattering pace last year, a new report shows, a surge that surprised scientists and spurred fears of an accelerated warming of the planet in decades to come.

Concentrations of nearly all the major greenhouse gases reached historic highs in 2013, reflecting ever-rising emissions from automobiles and smokestacks but also, scientists believe, a diminishing ability of the world’s oceans and plant life to soak up the excess carbon put into the atmosphere by humans, according to data released early Tuesday by the United Nations’ meteorological advisory body.

The latest figures from the World Meteorological Organization’s monitoring network are considered particularly significant because they reflect not only the amount of carbon pumped into the air by humans, but also the complex interaction between man-made gases and the natural world. Historically, about half of the pollution from human sources has been absorbed by the oceans and by terrestrial plants, preventing temperatures from rising as quickly as they otherwise would, scientists say.

“If the oceans and the biosphere cannot absorb as much carbon, the effect on the atmosphere could be much worse,” said Oksana Tarasova, a scientist and chief of the WMO’s Global Atmospheric Watch program, which collects data from 125 monitoring stations worldwide. The monitoring network is regarded as the most reliable window on the health of Earth’s atmosphere, drawing on air samples collected near the poles, over the oceans, and in other locations far from cities and other major sources of pollution.


The new figures for carbon dioxide were particularly surprising, showing the biggest year-over-year increase since detailed records were first compiled in the 1980s, Tarasova said in an interview. The jump of nearly three parts per million over 2012 levels was twice as large as the average increase in carbon levels in recent decades, she said.


“The changes we’re seeing are really drastic,” Tarasova said. “We are seeing the growth rate rising exponentially.”

The organization’s annual report on greenhouse gas levels was released ahead of a climate summit of world leaders at this year’s U.N. General Assembly meetings in New York. On Sept. 23, President Obama will meet with chief executives from dozens of other countries to discuss ways to lower industrial emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other gases blamed for heating up the planet.

Natural carbon dioxide is an essential ingredient for life on Earth, enabling green plants to convert sunlight into energy. But at excessive levels it acts as a heat trap, causing the planet to warm. Scientists say that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been rising since the start of the Industrial Revolution and that the increase has accelerated since the 1990s.

The WMO’s data for 2013 shows the global average level of atmospheric carbon at just under 400 parts per million, about 40 percent higher than in pre-industrial times and higher than in any other period in at least 800,000 years. The symbolically important threshold of 400 parts per million — described by scientists as the level at which more dramatic climactic impacts become likely — will probably be crossed in the next two years, the report said.

“It’s the level that climate scientists have identified as the beginning of the danger zone,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a Princeton University professor of geosciences who was not involved in the WMO report. “It means we’re probably getting to the point where we’re looking at the ‘safe zone’ in the rearview mirror, even as we’re stepping on the gas.”


A landmark report last year by a U.N.-appointed panel of climate scientists warned that, if current trends continue, the world could soon see major disruptions to both natural ecosystems and human civilization, including rising sea levels that could swamp many of the world’s coastal cities. That report, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, projected a rise in temperatures of up to nine degrees in the next century unless action is taken to lower carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Methane, another major greenhouse gas, also rose significantly in the WMO’s latest report, continuing a steady climb that began six years ago. Global concentrations of methane — a byproduct of farming and fossil-fuel extraction, as well as numerous natural processes — are now 21 / 2 times as high as they were at the start of the industrial age, in the mid-18th century, the report said.

The organization’s annual report included, for the first time, figures on the increasing acidification of the oceans stemming from higher levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As the seas absorb more carbon dioxide from the air, the water’s chemical composition becomes more acidic. Studies extrapolating from the fossil record suggest that the rate of acidification is now “unprecedented, at least over the past 300,000 years,” the WMO said.

Higher acidity in seawater is known to disrupt the life cycles of many marine species — from reef-building corals to shellfish beloved by humans — by interfering with the creatures’ ability to use sea-borne calcium to build their shells.

In an indirect way, the acidification of seawater also exacerbates climate change: The oceans over time become less capable of absorbing carbon from the air, allowing more of the greenhouse gas to accumulate in the atmosphere, the report said.
http://www.ncwarn.org/2014/09/co2-levels-in-atmosphere-rising-at-dramatically-faster-rate-u-n-report-warns-the-washington-post/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 20, 2014, 01:54:11 pm
Arctic Melt season ending
September 16, 2014   

The end of this year’s Arctic sea ice melt season is imminent and the minimum extent will be slightly lower than last year’s, making it the sixth lowest extent in the satellite record. Earlier in the month, a small area of the Laptev Sea ice edge was within five degrees of the North Pole. This appears to be the result of persistent southerly winds from central Siberia. Meanwhile, Antarctic sea ice is poised to set a record maximum this year, now at 19.7 million square kilometers (7.6 million square miles) and continuing to increase.

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2014/09/melt-season-ending/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 20, 2014, 04:50:38 pm
If you are a pro-fossil fuel BULLSHIT artist GW denier, please be sure to claim the following peer reviewed article is wild eyed breathless screaming, sky is falling scare mongering and unscientific silliness.  ;D

Quote
Science 22 August 2014:
 Vol. 345  no. 6199  pp. 860-861 
 DOI: 10.1126/science.345.6199.860 

Climate Change

Is Atlantic holding Earth's missing heat?


Eli Kintisch

Armchair detectives might call it the case of Earth's missing heat: Why have average global surface air temperatures remained essentially  ;)  steady since 2000, even as greenhouse gases have continued to accumulate in the atmosphere?

The suspects include changes in atmospheric water vapor, a strong greenhouse gas, or the noxious sunshade of haze emanating from factories. Others believe the culprit is the mighty Pacific Ocean, which has been sending vast slugs of cold bottom water to the surface.

But two fresh investigations finger a new suspect: the Atlantic Ocean.

One study, in this issue of Science,
presents sea temperature data implying that most of the missing heat has been stored deep in the Atlantic.

The other, published online in Nature Climate Change, suggests a warming Atlantic is abetting the Pacific by driving wind patterns that help that ocean cool the atmosphere. But some climate specialists remain skeptical.

In a third recent paper, also published online in Nature Climate Change, other researchers argue that the Pacific remains the kingpin. One reason some scientists remain convinced the Pacific is behind the hiatus   ;) is a measured speedup in trade winds that drive a massive upwelling of cold water in the eastern Pacific. But there, too, the Atlantic may be responsible, modeling experiments suggest.

A consensus about what has put global warming on pause   ;)may be years away,
but one scientist says the recent papers confirm that Earth's warming has continued during the hiatus, at least in the ocean depths, if not in the air.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6199/860.summary (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6199/860.summary)

Agelbert NOTE: There is a logical problem with the above article. It might be considered a quibble (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif)  but since we aren't talking opinions here but a hard boiled scientific method approach to data and the definition of terms, it is inaccurate and unscientific to discuss a HIATUS of GLOBAL warming when ONLY the atmospheric temperature records are considered!

Hello? The oceans, covering two thirds of this planet's SURFACE, are part of the GLOBE (two thirds of it!). So, OBVIOUSLY, the temperature of the oceans in conjunction with the temperature of the atmosphere MUST be computed as a UNIT if a GLOBAL WARMING HIATUS is to be CLAIMED!

So, this hair splitting exercise about the ATMOSPHERE being in a Global Warming HIATUS is an incorrect statement.

WHY? First of all, because even the atmospheric temperature data NEVER flat lined; it's SLOPE continued UP at a much lower angle. That is a RELATIVE hiatus from the STEEP ANGLED TEMPERATURE UP SLOPE, not a TEMPERATURE INCREASE HIATUS! How scientists can equate those Apples with those Oranges only Mking could tell us.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg)

Hair splitting IS science when we are JUST TALKING ABOUT HAIR! But we have an OCEAN of molecular activity (known as temperature  ;D)  in INTIMATE CONTACT with those "hairs" (the atmosphere) that it is just plain unscientific as well as STUPID to ignore (unless you want to distort the data, of course  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)).

Sure, the oceans have high specific heat. So, it is expected scientifically that the temperature of the oceans in a warming planet will lag behind the atmosphere. But the thermodynamics in regard to specific heat is not the only process going on here; there is a CHEMICAL PROCESS TOO!

Science teaches us that there are exothermic and endothermic processes in nature. HELLO? The increase in CO2 is creating an ENDOTHERMIC chemical process in the oceans making them have, in effect, a slightly lower specific heat which SUCKS heat from the atmosphere!

And THAT SHOULD have caused a flat line or possibly COOLING in the atmosphere. But the Global Warming from fossil fuel burning green house gasses is so SEVERE that, even with the oceanic endothermic chemical process going on, the slope STILL DID NOT FLAT LINE.


There has BEEN NO HIATUS in anything but a departure from the ANGLE of the slope on INCREASE of atmospheric temperature.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

Below please find a "wild eyed, hyperbolic, extreme, polarized, unobjective and definitely not measured definition" (according to Mking :evil4:) of the word "hiatus". This "breathless" definition forces us prudent and measured types to accept the unacceptable! That is, that since an INCREASE in average global atmospheric temperature NEVER STOPPED, the "hiatus" is ONLY attributable to the ANGLE OF THE SLOPE of the temperature increase, and not the temperature increase itself. And even worse than that:  :o Horror of horrors for our fossil fuel stock portfolio, the alleged hiatus doesn't include MOST of the molecular activity (i.e. temperature) on two thirds of the PALNET! So, woe is us, we can't call it a GLOBAL temperature warming pause, hiatus or fossil fuel stock buying opportunity.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/shame.gif)

But we can give those reality based community rubes the old Fossil Fuel (Skullduggery) College TRY, just the same!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/Banane21.gif)(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil19.gif)


Quote
hi·a·tus

noun

noun: hiatus; plural noun: hiatuses

a pause or gap in a sequence, series, or process.
"there was a brief hiatus in the war with France"

synonyms: pause, break, gap, lacuna, interval, intermission, interlude, interruption, suspension, lull, respite, time out, time off, recess; 

There's a place in France, where Mking does a dance;
and the dance he do, costs a dollar, ninety two money for me and you.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)
 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/4fvfcja.gif)


https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS485US486&q=hiatus (https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS485US486&q=hiatus)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 22, 2014, 10:42:51 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXGfZPd57hE&feature=player_embedded
 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/Laie_28.gif) Hickory, hickory dock, Wall Street  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__smokelots.gif) is soon going to have a clean clock!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)
(http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)


And now for the ROUTINE PLANET EARTH NEWS... (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aR4H52WSjo&feature=player_embedded
Title: US elites beginning to realize there's a problem
Post by: AGelbert on September 23, 2014, 01:09:24 am
Sun Sep 21, 2014 at 10:12 PM PDT.

US elites beginning to realize there's a problem


by
NBBooks (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)
 
 

SNIPPET:  ;D


Quote
There are 85 million single family homes in the US, and just over 30 million apartment and condo units. $40,000 (to properly upgrade and insulate all of them) multiplied by 115 million is $4.6 trillion. Sounds like a lot of money? That is just one third of what the Treasury and the Federal Reserve used to save the useless predators of Wall Street and the banking system over the past six years - and what have we got to show for that?  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif)

The Scandinavians build houses that are so well engineered and so carefully constructed that they are beyond efficient. A new Scandinavian house can keep its occupants warm from just their body heat and the heat thrown off by a pc, a few appliances, and the light bulbs in use.  :o  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png) That's pretty damn impressive, for being only a couple hundred miles from the Arctic Circle. But they don't build such structures using the cheapest labor they can illegally import. As Larson points out:
Quote

There are reasons for shoddy insulation.  Installing it can be very unpleasant.  The job is usually given to the lowest guy on the totem pole.  It becomes just another task to finish as quickly as possible. Worse, [USA] architects take 50 times as much time selecting the bathroom tile than designing insulation systems and rarely design sufficient space for them.  :P
Quote
And let's be truthful here - if you were to actually make your house as efficient as possible, meeting the highest USA standards, you would have accomplished more to reduce your carbon footprint   (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/465/465823jzy0y15obs.gif) than attending a dozen marches demanding action from our corporatist overlords. What are people demanding now to stop global climate change? Cap and trade? Carbon offsets? How about a $4.6 trillion program over the next five or ten years to radically rebuild and upgrade every single damn house and apartment building in America?  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/09/22/1331455/-US-elites-beginning-to-realize-there-s-a-problem
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 23, 2014, 03:10:52 pm
The story of methane in our climate, in five pie charts (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)


Filed under: Climate Science — david @ 23 September 2014

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//methane_pie.png)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/09/the-story-of-methane-in-our-climate-in-five-pie-charts/

Agelbert NOTE: The web site, "RealClimate Climate Science From Climate Scientsts" is the gold standard in Climate Science.  (http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png)

Unlike the PSEUDO scientific web sites claiming their ain't nuttin' to worry about posted by Fossil Fuelers like the Mking Wedge (see basic engineering for the definition of a wedge  ;D), This web site IS a hard boiled source of no bullshit, objective, empirical evidence, peer reviewed climate science data (They won a Science and Technology Web Award from Scientific American.)

And as to Mking's disingenuous attempts to disparage climate modeling as if it were alarmist guesswork, here is the way REAL climate scientists view climate modeling built from statistical data projections:


Quote
Is expert judgement about the structural uncertainties in a statistical procedure associated with various assumptions that need to be made different from ‘making things up’? Actually, yes – it is. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)

The above quote is from a VERY LONG, DETAILED, point by point refutation of the specious arguments brought here by Mking.
Judith Curry (http://www.whydidyouwearthat.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/tumblr_l7j9nik8Wf1qaxxwjo1_5001.jpeg) is probably one of Mking's pseudo scientific hair splitter heroes! 
 
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/08/ipcc-attribution-statements-redux-a-response-to-judith-curry/#more-17409
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 25, 2014, 07:57:52 pm
A few choice pieces of data resist most Spin Doctoring, mainly Ocean Heat Content and Acidity

(http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content55-07.png)

(http://www.dosits.org/images/dosits/noaa-hitimeseries2.600.jpg)

The atmosphere is very turbulent, so getting any kind of reliable data globally is pretty tough.  You can cherry pick data and show what you want.  The Ocean is tougher. It is CLEAR it has risen in total heat energy by an order of magnitude.  Similarly, it is CLEAR the pH is steadily dropping.  Both effects are significant far as the food chain is concerned, so it is stupid to go arguing about what is going on in the atmosphere, the Ocean is clearly in deep trouble resultant from total energy distribution changes..

RE
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 30, 2014, 07:15:39 pm
By Eric Holthaus | Tue Sep. 30, 2014

Study further confirms global warming is changing Antarctica in fundamental ways.

(http://www.motherjones.com/files/imagecache/top-of-content-main/glacier-630.jpg)

This story originally appeared in Slate and is republished here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Gravity—yes, gravity—is the latest victim of climate change in Antarctica. That's the stunning conclusion announced Friday by the European Space Agency.

"The loss of ice from West Antarctica between 2009 and 2012 caused a dip in the gravity field over the region," writes the ESA, whose GOCE satellite measured the change. Apparently, melting billions of tons of ice year after year has implications that would make even Isaac Newton blanch. Here's the data visualized.

To be fair, the change in gravity is very small. It's not like you'll float off into outer space on your next vacation to the Antarctic Peninsula.

The biggest implication is the new measurements confirm global warming is changing the Antarctic in fundamental ways. Earlier this year, a separate team of scientists announced that major West Antarctic glaciers have begun an "unstoppable" "collapse," committing global sea levels to a rise of several meters over the next few hundred years.

Though we all learned in high-school physics that gravity is a constant, it actually varies slightly depending on where you are on the Earth's surface and the density of the rock (or, in this case, ice) beneath your feet. During a four-year mission, the ESA satellite mapped these changes in unprecedented detail and was able to detect a significant decrease in the region of Antarctica where land ice is melting fastest.

The new results in West Antarctica were achieved by combining the high-resolution gravity field measurements from the ESA satellite with a longer-running but lower resolution gravity-analyzing satellite mission called Grace, which is jointly operated by the United States and Germany. Scientists hope to scale up this analysis to all of Antarctica soon, which could provide the clearest picture yet of the pace global warming is taking in the frozen continent. Current best estimates show that global seas could be as much as 50 inches higher by century's end, due in large part to ice melt in West Antarctica.
 Previous research with data from a third satellite, CryoSat (also from ESA), has shown ice loss from this portion of West Antarctica has increased by three-fold since just 2009, with 500 cubic kilometers of ice now melting each year from Greenland and Antarctica combined. That's an iceberg the size of Manhattan, three-and-a-half miles thick.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/antarctic-ice-melt-causes-small-shift-gravity (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/antarctic-ice-melt-causes-small-shift-gravity)
Title: Heat Wave: A Poem and a Plea for Compassion and Sanity
Post by: AGelbert on October 03, 2014, 12:56:08 am
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080814213147.png)
Heat Wave

Sheryl Lee | October 1, 2014 3:49 pm

everything around me is dying
brown, brittle, scorched
no rain

and my skin
my skin is blistering, too

i am on fire in this heat

and bow down in prayer for my brothers and my sisters across the globe who live in places where these temperatures have become the normal

i cannot fight these unforgiving flames
or run from their winning sun

i must lay down my sword of complaints, my luxuries of discomfort
and step to the center of the fire

go straight into the pain
the midwife said to me in labor
do not pull away from it

so now i must dare to melt

what does it want from me? this relentless triple digit number
and what must be burned? i ask with each rising degree

beads of sweat, an offering to thirsty Earth
trickle down my chest
like beads from an old necklace that held the promises of dreams
now broken
scatter to the floor in a give away of hope

i am a dry, crackling leaf
falling from my tree into this claiming fever of the land
unable to hold on until my moment of gold, autumn glory
the purpose of my September

but with no moisture
i am weak
and i am done
surrendered finally to this alchemy of heat
i float slowly toward a dusty field of graves

and bow down in prayer for my brothers and my sisters across the globe
who live in places where these temperatures have become the normal
countries where even drops of water can be sparse and toxic
and a way out may no longer be possible

what will it take to ease their pain?


http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/01/heat-wave-california-climate-change/

(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif)                                       (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2953.gif)
Title: Jailing Climate Deniers
Post by: AGelbert on October 04, 2014, 01:16:40 am
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41yJTxrPFhM&feature=player_embedded

Jailing Climate Deniers (http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/exagerent/police/enprison.gif)(http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/exagerent/police/boulet.gif)
  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)         (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)              (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | October 1, 2014 8:29 am

Hysterics at the right wing think tanks and their acolytes at The Washington Times, talk radio and the blogosphere, are foaming in apoplexy because I supposedly suggested that “all climate deniers should be jailed.” Last week, that canard leapt from the wingnut echo chamber into New York magazine, which reported, under Jonathan Chait’s by-line, that “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. shares the opinion that climate denial should be criminalized.” Chait was quoting the National Review’s Kevin Williamson who made that outlandish claim at one of Heritage Foundation’s annual “Conference for Kooks.” Of course I never said that. I support the First Amendment which makes room for any citizen to, even knowingly, spew far more vile lies without legal consequence.

I do, however, believe that corporations which deliberately, purposefully, maliciously and systematically sponsor climate lies should be given the death penalty.  ;D This can be accomplished through an existing legal proceeding known as “charter revocation.” State Attorneys General can invoke this remedy whenever corporations put their profit-making before the “public welfare.”

In 1998, New York State’s Republican Attorney General, Dennis Vacco successfully invoked the “corporate death penalty” to revoke the charters of two non-profit tax-exempt tobacco industry front groups, The Tobacco Institute and the Council for Tobacco Research (CTR). The two groups Vacco annulled were creatures of a decade long campaign funded principally by tobacco giant, Brown & Williamson to avoid costly health regulations that would diminish the profit margins of an industry that was killing one out of five of its customers. “Doubt is our Product,” explained Brown & Williamson’s notorious 1969 memo outlining the reptilian communications strategy that hatched its front groups.    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

Vacco complained that these companies were “[feeding] the public a pack of lies in an underhanded effort to promote smoking so as to addict America’s kids.” Attorney General Vacco seized their assets and distributed them to public institutions.

Laws in every state maintain that companies that fail to comply with prescribed standards of corporate behavior may be either dissolved or, in the case of foreign corporations, lose their rights to operate within that state’s borders. These rules can be quite expansive and, in contrast to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ­­­­recent rulings on campaign finance law, companies, under state laws, enjoy far less protection than human beings. New York, for example, prescribes corporate death whenever a company fails to “serve the common good” and “to cause no harm.”

Just as Big Tobacco funded the now moribund CTR and the Tobacco Institute to systematically deceive the public about the perils of cigarettes, the carbon cronies, with far larger profits at stake, have funded an army of front groups to persuade the public that global warming is a hoax.
For more than a decade, petroleum industry behemoths lead by Koch Industries and ExxonMobil, have waged a successful multi-million dollar propaganda blitz to mislead the public about global warming using the same techniques honed by Big Tobacco in its campaign to hoodwink the public about smoking.

In their efforts to impede state, national and international efforts to protect humans from the destructive climate chaos, both companies have engaged in massive spending sprees purchasing phony “junk” science devised to undermine the overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming. Between 1997 and 2013, ExxonMobil, pumped more than $29.9 million into an elaborate network of more than 75 front groups to manufacture skepticism about the oncoming climate catastrophe. At the same time, Koch Industries has piped at least $67,042,064 to more than 50 groups that play central roles in the Koch-funded offensive against climate science.

Two decades after Brown & Williamson’s notorious “Doubt is our Product” memo, the oil industry launched its own anti-science juggernaut replicating Big Tobacco’s and utilizing many of the same corrupt scientists and PR firms. Two secret memos dictated the blueprint for Big Carbon’s anti-science offensive. The American Petroleum Institute (API)—lobbyist for ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Shell and ConocoPhillips    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) —was the spear tip of a multi-million dollar campaign to confound American citizens about climate science by manipulating the media. On April 3, 1998, API laid out its “Global Climate Science Communications action plan,” the detailed blueprint of “tactics and strategies” for deceiving the American people and press by sewing doubts about climate science. The API team would create front groups and “educate” editorial boards and corporate CEOs to challenge “prevailing scientific wisdom.” Under “recruiting and training,” API outlines its plan for tapping neophyte—“read malleable”—scientists and tame journalists (“e.g. John Stossel,” the memo suggests) to bamboozle the public. “Victory will be achieved,” API promises, “when average citizens and the media recognize uncertainties in climate science;” recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the “conventional wisdom.”

Four years later in 2002, conservative pollster Frank Luntz in an influential memo to President George Bush and oil patch lawmakers, applauded the industry for the success of the API campaign. “Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community.” Nevertheless, he warned Big Carbon’s indentured servants on Capitol Hill “the science [is closing against us] but is not yet closed.” He advised, “therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.”

Over the next dozen years, a string of front groups conducted the deceptive anti-science campaign outlined in the API’s 1998 plan and Luntz’s 2002 memo and funded primarily by ExxonMobil and Koch.

Among the groups that have received millions from Exxon and Koch Industries are the Cato Institute, The Heritage Foundation, Cooler Heads Coalition, Global Climate Coalition, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Americans for Prosperity, Heartland Institute, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), George C. Marshall Institute, State Policy Network, Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Like the Tobacco Institute and CTR, these front groups are snake pits for sociopaths. Run by venomous carbon industry toadies, they stable a craven menagerie of propaganda wizards, slick biostitutes, tobacco scientists, snake oil hucksters, voodoo economists and other so called “experts” employed to publish beguiling studies, appear on TV and radio, and write deceptive articles critiquing the “flawed science” predicting climate change. They broadcast zany theories to bolster policies that encourage increased energy consumption, torpedo renewable energy, attack pollution rules, maintain Big Carbon’s obscene government subsidies and, in general, provide the philosophical underpinnings for a system of cushy socialism for the “dirty energy” tycoons and bitter, savage capitalism for the rest of mankind.

For example, CEI, which describes itself as being “a leader in the fight against the global warming scare,” spent years denying that warming was real, and then, as the tsunami of evidence made that position untenable, pivoted to the more defensible posture that human beings are not causing it. CEI has more recently beat its final retreat to the terminal default position that global warming is great because it will “create a milder, greener, more prosperous world.” The floods, fires, drought, rising oceans, disappearing ice caps, melting glaciers, drowned cities and refugees have not exactly been “mild.” But things have been prosperous and “green”—if one means greenbacks—for the Koch Brothers and ExxonMobil, who are enjoying the biggest profits in world history. “You’re Welcome, Planet Earth!”

AEI, one of the richest and most influential think tanks in the U.S.—and the high priest of climate denial—offered a $10,000 bounty in 2006 to any scientist or economist who could produce an article undermining the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. The IPCC report was the most comprehensive review yet of climate change science representing the scientific consensus among thousands of climate scientists comprising the leading and most prestigious and scientific stars from more than 130 participating nations.

Any state attorney general with the will, resolve and viscera to stand to up to the dangerous and duplicitous corporate propagandists, has authority to annul the charters of each of these mercenary merchants of deceit. An attorney general with particularly potent glands could revoke the charters not just oil industry surrogates like AEI and CEI, he or she could also withdraw state operating authority from the soulless, nationless oil companies that have sponsored “Big Lie” campaigns and force them to sell their in-state assets to more responsible competitors.

Koch Industries and ExxonMobil have particularly distinguished themselves as candidates for corporate death. No other companies have worked harder or spent more money to impede the government from taking action on global warming to safeguard public welfare. Both companies have employed artifice on a massive scale and spent tens of millions of dollars to purchase fraudulent junk science. The greedy, immoral, anti-social pathology behind ExxonMobil and Koch’s mendacious crusade is even starker given the open acknowledgment since 2007 by the other major oil companies including Shell, Chevron and BP, that burning oil is causing climate change.

Though they like to invoke patriotic themes and drape themselves in the flag, the oil barons have persistently demonstrated their enthusiasm for putting corporate profits ahead of the public welfare.    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

“I’m not a U.S. company,” Exxon’s legendary former CEO, Lee Raymond told his board, “and I don’t make decisions on what is good for the U.S..” These companies are not friends to America. They are enemies of mankind.

The notion that a state attorney general might actually execute one of these villains is not a pipe dream.  ;D State attorneys general have historically shown a willingness to stand up to American democracy’s biggest corporate bullies including, Wall Street, Big Tobacco, coal burning utilities and the oil titans even in eras, like the present, when corporate money has subverted our democracy and extracted the spinal cords from most politicians. It was 46 courageous state attorneys generals who brought down the cigarette companies. It was nine northeastern state attorneys general who sued the coal burning utilities for damages to their citizens from airborne pollutants. And it was state attorneys general in New York, Ohio and Texas who, during the Gilded Age, dismantled the Standard Oil octopus, and restored economic democracy to America. That deadly Frankenstein monster, now reassembled and resurrected as ExxonMobil, poses an even greater threat today to our historical values and quality of life.

Let’s all hope for and vote for a home state Attorney General candidate who promises to stand up against carbon’s duplicitous proxies and fight for truth, justice and democracy, and to provide our children with safe, healthy, dignified and wholesome communities and the prosperity that should not be exclusive to the Koch Brothers and ExxonMobil.

http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/01/jailing-climate-deniers-robert-kennedy-jr/


Title: Walruses get LESS EROEI (less viability) thanks to the BURNING of Fossil Fuels
Post by: AGelbert on October 04, 2014, 11:07:38 pm
Yes, animals have Energy Return On Energy Invested (EROEI). (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)

 In fact the CONCEPT was originally applied to LIFE FORMS, not Fossil Fuels exploited by Corporate CROOKS and LIARS.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF-aNYhCr8k&feature=player_embedded
Another Externalized Cost thanks to the Profit Over Planet, Fossil Fuel Burning CRIMINALS.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2rzukw3.gif)

The Fossil Fuelers DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME, but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) and conscience free crooks , they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!  Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 05, 2014, 04:10:01 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0xwkrMQYlI&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 09, 2014, 11:59:30 pm
Find Out Which State Contributes Most to Climate Change  >:(

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/GreenhouseGaschart.jpg)

Story at link below:

http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/08/state-contributes-climate-change/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 19, 2014, 03:58:29 pm

32 Dead, 85 Missing In Himalayan Trekking Disaster After Unseasonal Blizzard


October in Nepal is a peak season for trekkers to gather and work their way up the Himalayan mountains. Skies are usually clear and sun shines though. However, heavy snowfall on Tuesday followed by a series of avalanches has caused a nightmare scenario, leaving at least 32 people dead and 85 missing.

Most of the fatalities happened as the blizzard reached a point on the Annapurna Circuit, 100 miles northwest of the capital, Kathmandu. A well-known trekking route in central Nepal, the area is about 14,800 feet above sea level and close the the circuit’s highest point, the Thorung La pass. Helicopters have saved survivors stranded in lodges and huts along the route, with at least 200 trekkers already rescued according to authorities. Tourists from countries around the world, including Israel, Indonesia, Germany, Spain, India, Canada, Russia, and Poland, were caught on the mountain. This is the worst disaster in the history of Nepal’s mountain-climbing industry — snowfall from the storm topped six feet in some places.
 
“I was sure I was going to die on the way to the pass because I lost my group, I lost all the people I was with and I could not see anything,” said Linor Kajan, an injured trekker from Israel, who said she was stuck in waist-deep snow. “One Nepalese guide who knows the way saw me and asked me to stay with him. And he dragged me, really dragged me to the tea shop. And everybody there was really frightened.”

In this handout photo provided by the Nepalese army, rescue team members carry the body of an avalanche victim at Thorong La pass area in Nepal, Friday, Oct. 17, 2014. Rescuers widened their search Friday for trekkers stranded since a series of blizzards and avalanches battered the Himalayas in northern Nepal early this week.

In this handout photo (at link) provided by the Nepalese army, rescue team members carry the body of an avalanche victim at Thorong La pass area in Nepal, Friday, Oct. 17, 2014. Rescuers widened their search Friday for trekkers stranded since a series of blizzards and avalanches battered the Himalayas in northern Nepal early this week.

CREDIT: AP/Nepalese Army

The blizzard was the tail end of Cyclone Hudhud, which hit the Indian coast a few days earlier and was reportedly one of the strongest storms on record to hit the region. The equivalent of a category 4 hurricane, Hudhud made landfall on October 12 in Andhra Pradesh, India.

Climate scientists are hesitant to link any one weather event to climate change, but they have pointed out in the past that the Himalayas are especially vulnerable to the increased storm intensity expected to result from climate change.

“Storms in that region are getting stronger,” John Stone, an IPCC lead author and adjunct professor at Carleton University in Ottawa, told the Toronto Star. “It is not inconsistent with what scientists have been saying … by making the atmosphere contain more energy, we have increased the likelihood of more frequent and severe storms.”

The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, a regional agency based in Kathmandu that serves eight countries, released a report in May showing that rising temperatures caused Nepal’s glaciers to shrink by almost a quarter between 1977 and 2010 — at an average loss of about 15 square miles per year. The report also pointed out that Nepal’s average temperature change has been two to eight times greater than the global average. The report says that these changes could bring more intense and frequent floods, avalanches, and landslides.

This is not the first time a deadly blizzard has struck trekkers during the hiking season. In 1995 and 2005 more than a dozen climbers and guides were killed by storms. Then earlier this year in April an avalanche killed 16 Nepalese guides near a base camp on Mount Everest in the deadliest disaster in the mountain’s history. This avalanche was not caused by a storm, but melting ice on the famous Khumbu Icefall.


“Accurate weather forecasting has reduced the risk of being surprised by a killer storm like the one that struck in 1996,” wrote Jon Krakauer, author of a book about a deadly 1996 storm event on Everest, in the New Yorker. “But the pronounced warming of the Himalayan climate in recent years has made the Icefall more unstable than ever, and there is still no way to predict when a serac is going to topple over. And Sherpas spend much, much more time in the Icefall than their Western employers.”   :(

Of this disaster, former British Gurkha officer and avid trekker General Sam Cowan said “no one should have ventured out to cross Thorung La with the weather as threatening as it was, nor should their trekking guides have allowed it.”  :emthup:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/10/17/3581110/unseasonal-blizzard-deadly-himalayan-avalanche/

Agelbert NOTE: Of course you KNOW I'm going to rant about global warming, Homo SAP stupidity, greed, shortsightedness (and so on    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp) ) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/bc3.gif). But you are WRONG today! (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif) So there!  ;D

I cede the floor to a fellow I have a few differences with in regard to people of color but, over all, I admit he was a very prudent and cautious individual with a scientific outlook on reality.  :emthup: 

Enjoy the following post and imagine what Ben would say (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)  ;D about Climate Change deniers with his inimitable, bitingly delicious and gentlemanly sarcastic irony if he were alive today as you observe what he said about the fine citizens of Philadelphia in his day in regard to fire "prevention".   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

The article itself is ALSO instructive in the light of the Ebola (avoidable if CFS has been used) tragedy when you consider the danger of spreading disease that our "modern" animal transport system now practically guarantees.   :P :emthdown:


BeefTalk: An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure 


Quote
What Franklin describes is not that different than the state of animal health and our response to dire situations.

By Kris Ringwall, Beef Specialist

NDSU Extension Service

The Benjamin Franklin axiom that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is as true today as it was when Franklin made the quote. Although many use the quote when referring to health, Franklin actually was addressing fire safety.

Franklin wrote this (courtesy of ushistory.org) under an assumed name.  ;D He said, "In the first Place, as an Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound of Cure, (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif)  I would advise 'em to take care how they suffer living Coals in a full Shovel,  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif) to be carried out of one Room into another, or up or down Stairs, unless in a Warmingpan shut; for Scraps of Fire may fall into Chinks and make no Appearance until Midnight;    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)  when your Stairs being in Flames, you may be forced, (as I once was)(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif) to leap out of your Windows, and hazard your Necks to avoid being oven-roasted." (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-036.gif)


We should all relate to Franklin. Regardless of the endeavor, our tendency is to be a bit sloppy at times. For the unfortunate few for whom the hands of chance all line up, disaster is the outcome.

Franklin also related the status quo response, at least as was the status quo in Philadelphia. "Soon after it [a fire] is seen and cry'd out, the Place is crowded by active Men of different Ages, Professions and Titles who, as of one Mind and Rank, apply themselves with all Vigilance and Resolution, according to their Abilities, to the hard Work of conquering the increasing fire."   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif) (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/4fvfcja.gif)

If one sits back and reflects, what Franklin describes is not that different than the state of animal health and our response to dire situations. Carrying lit coals up and down wood stairs in poorly designed or improperly used containers served to spread inconspicuous “scraps of fire” that later flare up into a major fire.

We transport livestock up and down many roads without properly designed or implemented biosecurity procedures. This can lay the seeds of disease that come out of dormancy later and bring a major disease outbreak. Our response, like Franklin's well- meaning entourage of well-intended but poorly trained and organized volunteers, may get the problem cleaned up but not very effectively and oftentimes at great public expense and personal loss.

Franklin, having been in other cities that were better prepared, encouraged "a club or society of active men belonging to each fire engine, whose business is to attend all fires with it whenever they happen." The process was adopted and Philadelphia's firefighters became more effective with good training and organization.

This preparation, "an Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound of Cure," resulted in not only the professional establishment of the Union Fire Company on Dec. 7, 1736, but also the subsequent education about fires to the general public. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)

Their equipment included "leather buckets, with strong bags and baskets (for packing and transporting goods), which were to be brought to every fire. The blaze battlers met monthly to talk about fire prevention and fire-fighting methods. Homeowners were mandated to have leather fire-fighting buckets in their houses."

This organized prevention transformed Philadelphia from an unsafe city to one of the safest cities in America for fire prevention. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714194256.bmp)

Perhaps today is one of those days that one needs to simply sit back and reflect a little bit.

The animal industry is not unique. We like to think it is, but survival in the modern world does not allow for resting on one's laurels.

The good old days are just that, old. We need to relate to the present, which runs faster and is more demanding.

While we bring much upon ourselves, we need to be prepared, organized and able to respond to a crisis. The best intentions do not alleviate disaster nor mitigate loss. Preparation does, so today "an Ounce of Prevention is worth a Pound of Cure." (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif)

May you find all your ear tags.  ;D

Your comments are always welcome at http://www.BeefTalk.com.

For more information, contact the NDBCIA Office, 1041 State Ave., Dickinson, ND 58601, or go to http://www.CHAPS2000.com on the Internet.

http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/news/columns/beeftalk/beeftalk-an-ounce-of-prevention-is-worth-a-pound-of-cure/

Please feel free to pass it on. Ya nevah know when a fossil fueler=climate denier will wake up and realize that Thelma and Louise is not a good survival strategy... (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-032.gif)

 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 20, 2014, 05:38:09 pm
Floridians Deliver 92,000-Signature Petition Urging Gov. Rick Scott To Cut State Emissions  ;D
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/10/20/3581775/rick-scott-power-plant-petition/
Title: The New York Times, 12 December 2027
Post by: AGelbert on October 22, 2014, 08:35:36 pm
Ocean heat storage: a particularly lousy policy target + Update    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//AR5-Fig-3.2-2.jpg)
Quote
Figure 1. Ocean heat content in the surface layer (top panel, various data sets) and the mid-depth (700-2000 m) and deep ocean (bottom panel), from the IPCC AR5 (Fig. 3.2 – see caption there for details). Note that uncertainties are larger than for global mean temperature, the data don’t go as far back (1850 for global mean temperature) and data from the deep ocean are particularly sparse, so that only a trend line is shown.

SNIPPET:
The New York Times, 12 December 2027:  (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif) After 12 years of debate and negotiation, kicked off in Paris in 2015, world leaders have finally agreed to ditch the goal of limiting global warming to below 2 °C. Instead, they have agreed to the new goal of limiting global ocean heat content to 1024 Joules.

The decision was widely welcomed by the science and policy communities as a great step forward. “In the past, the 2 °C goal has allowed some governments to pretend that they are taking serious action to mitigate global warming, when in reality they have achieved almost nothing. I’m sure that this can’t happen again with the new 1024 Joules goal”, said David Victor, a professor of international relations who originally proposed this change back in 2014. And an unnamed senior EU negotiator commented: “Perhaps I shouldn’t say this, but some heads of state had trouble understanding the implications of the 2 °C target; sometimes they even accidentally talked of limiting global warming to 2%.

I’m glad that we now have those 1024 Joules which are much easier to grasp for policy makers and the public.” This fictitious newspaper item  ;D  is of course absurd and will never become reality, because ocean heat content is unsuited as a climate policy target. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)
Here are three main reasons why.
1. Ocean heat content is extremely unresponsive to policy.
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//ocean_bottom.jpg)
2. Ocean heat content has no direct relation to any impacts.
3. Ocean heat content is difficult to measure.
The reason is that you have to measure tiny temperature changes over a huge volume, rather than much larger changes just over a surface.

Ocean heat content estimates have gone through a number of revisions, instrument calibration issues etc. If we were systematically off by just 0.05 °C throughout the oceans due to some instrument drift, the error would larger than the entire ocean heat uptake since 1970. :o  If the surface measurements were off by 0.05 °C, this would be a negligible correction compared to the 0.7 °C surface warming observed since 1950.

Article at link (for geeks only  ;D):

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/10/ocean-heat-storage-a-particularly-lousy-policy-target/comment-page-1/#comment-613097
Agelbert Comment:  ;D

I fully agree with the author of this article. Not only is the idea of using the ocean temperature as a target flawed from the point of view of a "hiatus" that never actually existed but it smacks of another, "long view" technique the fossil fuel industry can use to claim they can continue to burn massive amounts of fossil fuels without "undue" deleterious effects on our climate and biosphere.

I have two questions for climate scientists. The first one is about ocean temperatures with particular regard to heat exchange at the surface. It is a fact that the surface of two thirds of the planet is ocean and that part (on the average) is getting warmer.

Have the models incorporated the effect of salinity on ocean surface vapor pressure changes? It is a fact that fresh water has a higher specific heat than salt water. However, salt water, because of the molecular adhesive forces of the sodium and chloride ions, requires more energy, despite having a lower specific heat, to release (evaporate) H2O and heat into the atmosphere. Then there is the effect of more fresh water coming off of glaciers reducing salinity in some ocean surface areas which, in theory, would increase the heat storage capacity in the surface layers even while the evaporation rate is facilitated.

I ask all this because it seems logical that, if there is empirical evidence that the surface layers of the ocean are warming at a faster rate than the atmosphere, a punctuated equilibrium phenomenon could be building up where, at a certain point, a combination of reduced salinity and increased temperature could cause a large amount of heat exchange from the oceans into the atmosphere, thereby exacerbating atmospheric heating.

And all this is above and beyond he deleterious effects of decreased pH on the thousands of species of marine CaCo3 shelled organisms due to green House gases.

My second question is, considering there are billions of internal combustion engines running 24/7 on the surface of our planet and in constant and intimate contact with the atmosphere, do the models that predict the rate of atmospheric warming from green house gases also include the infrared radiation from all those internal combustion engines?

The green house gas pollution comes from engines that are only 18 to 22% efficient, except for the large turbines run by utilities that can reach up to 60%. My point is that we have nearly 80% of the energy produced from internal combustion engines being converted to heat that immediately enters the atmospheric mix. Is this not considered statistically significant in the light of the massive amount of IR heat per square meter that we have arriving on the planet from the sun?

If an estimate of that heat load and a scientific study to measure and quantify it has not been done, it should be done. We have alternatives. If it could be proven scientifically that the IR contribution by the internal combustion engines is deleterious to the biosphere, it would boost the transition to non thermal mechanical energy applications like solar powered electric vehicles or at least batteries charged exclusively by solar power for said vehicles.

About 157,000 vehicles are manufactured each day on this planet. Why should we allow our vehicles to get only 20% mechanical energy and release 80% heat into the atmosphere when an electric motor is at least 70% efficient?

We need scientists to speak loudly and clearly that fossil fuels are deleterious to the biosphere. The status quo is not healthy or sustainable. You know that. Can you help to end the fossil fuel age? It's high time we stopped digging our own graves on behalf of profit over planet.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on October 23, 2014, 09:16:14 pm
(https://grist.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/climatechanged_p112-113_1.jpg)

This graphic novelist tells the true story of climate change

By Sara Bernard

Excellent article with more graphics at link:   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)


http://grist.org/people/this-graphic-novelist-tells-the-true-story-of-climate-change/
Title: Filed under: Snowball's Chance in Fossil Fuel Fascist Court System HELL
Post by: AGelbert on October 23, 2014, 09:28:50 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-231014212330.jpeg)


If it weren't for those meddling kids ...
  ;)

These teens are taking their climate lawsuit all the way to the Supreme Court

By Sam Bliss

22 Oct 2014 8:00 AM     

Those feisty, litigious climate-hawk kids just won’t go away. Back in 2011, we wrote about a group of witty whippersnappers that filed a lawsuit against the federal government. The premise: The government must take action to protect the atmosphere for future generations.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)



Full laudable article on this worthy but quixotic effort here:
http://grist.org/climate-energy/these-teens-are-taking-their-climate-lawsuit-all-the-way-to-the-supreme-court/
Title: SOUTH Florida: The 51st STATE!
Post by: AGelbert on October 24, 2014, 06:21:02 pm
10/24/2014 11:50 AM            
South Miami Wants to Secede from Florida Over Climate Change  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/icare.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif)(http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)

SustainableBusiness.com News

I've said it jokingly: it's time for Blue and Red states to form their own countries and see which ideology performs better.

Perhaps South Miami will be our pilot, since they just voted to secede from Florida! Already under water from climate change, they want action, but that's not possible in a state run by Republicans.

If Governor Rick Scott wins his tight re-election campaign, Florida's leadership - including Senator Marco Rubio - will continue denying that climate change even exists. On the other hand, Scott's Democratic challenger for governor, Charlie Crist, fully acknowledges climate change and the threat it poses to Florida.
Introduced by Vice Mayer Walter Harris, the city council passed a resolution that calls for splitting Florida in two, so that South Florida can take climate change into their own hands.

Pretty amazing that the line is drawn over climate change.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241014180743.jpeg)

"South Florida's situation is very precarious and in need of immediate attention.... The creation of the 51st state, South Florida, is a necessity for the very survival of the entire southern region of the current state of Florida,"  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif) says the resolution.

Much of South Florida is just five feet above sea level and at high tide, it seeps up from the porous bedrock, bringing sea water dangerously close to fresh water supplies - and forcing people to walk in water up to their knees. Nuclear reactors there are 42 years old and 2.5 million pounds of nuclear waste is buried on-site.

A line would be drawn north of Orlando,  ;D giving the state of South Florida 24 counties, 67% of its population and 70% of the current state's revenue.
The resolution is a statement - it's not at likely to go through because it would have to approved by Florida's state legislature and then by Congress.
South Florida is doing what it can on its own, creating the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact and Regional Climate Action Plan.

Title of the Resolution:
Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, advocating the legal separation of Florida into two separate states, creating the 51st state in the Union and naming it "South Florida".  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)
Read about what Miami is dealing with:
Website: www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/11/miami-drowning-climate-change-deniers-sea-levels-rising
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25972

Agelbert NOTE: South Florida GETS IT!. Good for them!  8)


Quote
Robert F. Kennedy Jr: In the next decade there will be an epic battle for survival for humanity against the forces of ignorance and greed. It’s going to be Armageddon, represented by the oil industry on one side, versus the renewable industry on the other. And people are going to have to choose sides – including politically. They will have to choose sides because oil and coal, they will not be able to survive – they are not going to be able to burn their proven reserves. If they do, then we are all dead. And they are quite willing to burn it. We’re all going to be part of that battle. We are going to watch governments being buffeted by the whims of money and greed on one side, and idealism and hope on the other.

 http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/06/interview-with-robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-environmental-activism-democratization-of-energy-more/#JSW31ABzPkmZ6PTh.99


(http://www.dasolar.com/images/pages/alternative-energy-carbon-offsets2.jpg)

ONLY Renewable Energy AND its prudent use can get us from the Baked in left to the Biosphere Harmony right. I know what I want. How about YOU?
Title: A Vision After Venice
Post by: AGelbert on October 29, 2014, 06:46:11 pm
The Monthly Newsletter of the WOODS HOLE RESEARCH CENTER
A Vision After Venice

Dr.  Richard A. Houghton, Acting President
 
My reward for going to Venice to receive the ICCG award for the most influential think tank on climate change was not the motor launch ride through the canals of Venice at 8 o'clock in the morning or bringing home the graceful glass sculpture that came, surprisingly, with the award, but the question I was asked by a student at the end of my acceptance speech. The question seemed mild at the time of asking, and it wasn't until two sleepless travel days later that I knew the real answer.

The question/comment was, "Your idea for stabilizing the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere while transitioning from fossil to renewable forms of energy, is based on the assumption that the carbon sinks on land and in the ocean will continue." "Of course," I agreed, "and it's an assumption that I am not very confident about. I would expect those sinks to have declined already, when, in fact, they have only grown in proportion to the emissions of carbon to the atmosphere." 

But the real answer that I not only missed the opportunity to present, but didn't even have in my mind, is, "Of course. The assumption that the sinks will continue may not be valid, but what's the alternative?  ???

What is the alternative to reducing emissions of carbon from fossil fuels? In theory, we could capture the CO2 released from smoke stacks and tail pipes and sequester it in underground, geological formations (Carbon Capture and Storage), but geologists are far from united that such storage is feasible or long-term. The process is energetically expensive, and the CO2 might leak back out to the atmosphere. There are other geo-engineering schemes, as well, but the risks and our ignorance of the effects make them seem like science fiction, or worse, like flights of fancy that keep us from addressing the real problem: how to live sustainably within our means.

The other alternative to moving to a low-carbon economy is to let climatic disruption play out its course. That's the course we're on - continuing as usual. We're headed for a 4oC warming by the end of the century, and look at the storms, droughts, and floods we've had with a warming of less than 1oC.


No. The alternatives to moving to a low-carbon economy are not a burned-up planet or a planet with an ingenious fix for keeping our fossil fuel interests intact. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) There is no alternative. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif) And if past rates of carbon uptake by land and oceans don't continue into the future, we're fried anyway.

The idea of planting trees instead of cutting them down, which is, of course, the idea of managing ecosystems to take CO2 out of the atmosphere, may seem hokey and not very high-tech, but it is something we know how to do. It's part of the solution. It's the part that's essential for keeping the concentration of CO2 from continuing to increase while we're getting out of the fossil fuel business.

We can only pack so much carbon onto land in trees and soils before it's essentially full. Doing so while developing renewable technologies and infrastructure for replacing fossil with renewable energy is part of the solution for ending further climatic disruption. It may be hokey, but it's also cheap and something at which we've had centuries of practice. There are difficulties and risks (perhaps the subject of another e-newsletter), but the alternatives are worse. We have little to lose by restoring the Earth with trees and productive soils and much to gain.

Thank you, Venice and the International Center for Climate Governance, for recognizing the Woods Hole Research Center and for helping frame in my mind the importance of carbon management on land.

http://iccgov.org/newsletter/2014/events/international-lectures/invitation_lecture_2014-10-02-en.html
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 01, 2014, 05:56:40 pm
Watch Bill Nye Shred Climate Denying Congresswoman  ;D

Bill Nye the Science Guy has no patience with climate deniers like Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) , whom he faced off with on a recent segment of CBS’s Meet The Press. Blackburn blithely dismissed his contention that climate change is real, saying “Neither he nor I are a climate scientist … what we have to do is look at the information we get from climate scientists.”    (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)
Anastasia Pantsios | October 30, 2014 2:24 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkR3TI6xyzU&feature=player_embedded

“She did something which is very common in the climate denier community or whatever you want to call it, which is to talk about credentials,” noted Nye. “You don’t need to be a full-time climate scientist to understand it. As far as my credentials, I’m a mechanical engineer. I took a lot of physics. I get it. I can understand what’s going on. We’re putting carbon dioxide in the air at a prodigious rate and the world is getting warmer.”

“The world is getting warmer because of human activity—that’s a fact,” he continued. “If you have somebody who really strongly believes the Earth was flat, you wouldn’t have to have that person on a television show with the people who believe the earth is round. It’s not one person vs the other person. It’s 97 people vs. three people.”

He suggests that perhaps Blackburn  (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)  is getting her information from sources other than climate scientists.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)

“As far as Ms. Blackburn, it sounded like she’s been coached on denial bullet points or talking points,” he said. “I very much enjoy talking those people on but meanwhile it breaks my heart because we’ve got work to do. The fossil fuel industry has really gotten in their ears, and it’s really troublesome. We’re the world’s most technical advanced country—certainly in the top 10. To have a generation of science students brought up without awareness of climate change is just a formula for disaster.”  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/30/bill-nye-shred-climate-denier/

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080814212951.png)

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars   (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) and conscience free crooks ,    they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)





Title: Remember EARTH this way
Post by: AGelbert on November 02, 2014, 07:00:30 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T66tLRR9drY&feature=player_embedded
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif) Dear Earthlings, Remember me this way. I did the best I could for you. Too bad you can't stop doing what you do.    (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2953.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 03, 2014, 04:07:08 pm
(http://images.sciencedaily.com/2014/10/141029145617-large.jpg)
Donald Voigt from Penn State looks at an ice core in January 2012 during the WAIS Divide project.
Credit: Photo courtesy of Gifford Wong, Dartmouth


Three abrupt pulses of carbon dioxide during last deglaciation, study shows

October 29, 2014

Source: Oregon State University

Quote
Summary:

The rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide that contributed to the end of the last ice age more than 10,000 years ago did not occur gradually, but was characterized by three 'pulses' in which carbon dioxide rose abruptly. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)



A new study shows that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide that contributed to the end of the last ice age more than 10,000 years ago did not occur gradually, but was characterized by three "pulses" in which C02 rose abruptly.

Scientists are not sure what caused these abrupt increases, during which C02 levels rose about 10-15 parts per million -- or about 5 percent per episode -- over a period of 1-2 centuries. It likely was a combination of factors, they say, including ocean circulation, changing wind patterns, and terrestrial processes.

The finding is important, however, because it casts new light on the mechanisms that take Earth in and out of ice age regimes. Results of the study, which was funded by the National Science Foundation, appear this week in the journal Nature.

"We used to think that naturally occurring changes in carbon dioxide took place relatively slowly over the 10,000 years it took to move out of the last ice age," said Shaun Marcott, lead author on the article who conducted his study as a post-doctoral researcher at Oregon State University. "This abrupt, centennial-scale variability of CO2 appears to be a fundamental part of the global carbon cycle."

Some previous research has hinted at the possibility that spikes in atmospheric carbon dioxide may have accelerated the last deglaciation, but that hypothesis had not been resolved, the researchers say. The key to the new finding is the analysis of an ice core from the West Antarctic that provided the scientists with an unprecedented glimpse into the past.

Scientists studying past climate have been hampered by the limitations of previous ice cores. Cores from Greenland, for example, provide unique records of rapid climate events going back 120,000 years -- but high concentrations of impurities don't allow researchers to accurately determine atmospheric carbon dioxide records. Antarctic ice cores have fewer impurities, but generally have had lower "temporal resolution," providing less detailed information about atmospheric CO2.

However, a new core from West Antarctica, drilled to a depth of 3,405 meters in 2011 and spanning the last 68,000 years, has "extraordinary detail," said Oregon State paleoclimatologist Edward Brook, a co-author on the Nature study and an internationally recognized ice core expert. Because the area where the core was taken gets high annual snowfall, he said, the new ice core provides one of the most detailed records of atmospheric CO2.

"It is a remarkable ice core and it clearly shows distinct pulses of carbon dioxide increase that can be very reliably dated," Brook said. "These are some of the fastest natural changes in CO2 we have observed, and were probably big enough on their own to impact Earth's climate.

"The abrupt events did not end the ice age by themselves," Brook added. "That might be jumping the gun a bit. But it is fair to say that the natural carbon cycle can change a lot faster than was previously thought -- and we don't know all of the mechanisms that caused that rapid change."

The researchers say that the increase in atmospheric CO2 from the peak of the last ice age to complete deglaciation was about 80 parts per million, taking place over 10,000 years. Thus, the finding that 30-45 ppm of the increase happened in just a few centuries was significant.

The overall rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide during the last deglaciation was thought to have been triggered by the release of CO2 from the deep ocean -- especially the Southern Ocean. However, the researchers say that no obvious ocean mechanism is known that would trigger rises of 10-15 ppm over a time span as short as one to two centuries.

"The oceans are simply not thought to respond that fast," Brook said. "Either the cause of these pulses is at least part terrestrial, or there is some mechanism in the ocean system we don't yet know about."

One reason the researchers are reluctant to pin the end of the last ice age solely on CO2 increases is that other processes were taking place, according to Marcott, who recently joined the faculty of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

"At the same time CO2 was increasing, the rate of methane in the atmosphere was also increasing at the same or a slightly higher rate," Marcott said. "We also know that during at least two of these pulses, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation changed as well. Changes in the ocean circulation would have affected CO2 -- and indirectly methane, by impacting global rainfall patterns."

"Earth is a big coupled system," he added, "and there are many pieces to the puzzle. The discovery of these strong, rapid pulses of CO2 is an important piece."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141029145617.htm
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 03, 2014, 07:10:54 pm
Bill McKibben: IPCC Report Says Climate Change Is ‘Severe, Widespread and Irreversible’ (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif)

Full story here: (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)


http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/02/bill-mckibben-ipcc-report/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 07, 2014, 03:59:31 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-071114195508.png)

Watch Award-Winning ‘Mountains of the Moon’
Stefanie Spear | November 6, 2014 9:07 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HSbNpFiwyI&feature=player_embedded
The Rwenzori Mountains, “Mountains of the Moon,” rise nearly 17,000 feet from the heart of Africa.


http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/06/snows-nile-rwenzori-mountains/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 13, 2014, 08:31:08 pm
(http://dl10.glitter-graphics.net/pub/2491/2491210ovie015m90.gif)

I just signed this petition [http://bit.ly/EnergyIndependentVTPetition] for a new Vermont campaign to put a price on carbon pollution.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) I know that, like me, you are concerned about global warming. This is a really important chance for Vermont to do something real about it. I urge you to take action yourself and spread the word!  You can learn more about the Energy Independent Vermont campaign at www.energyindendependentvt.org.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 17, 2014, 03:55:21 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weA4gZBo9ho&feature=player_embedded

Climate Change Projected to Double Lightning Strikes by 2100


Anastasia Pantsios

http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/14/lightning-strikes-climate-change/

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2014, 03:06:37 pm
(https://spthumbnails.5min.com/10370399/518519919_c_570_411.jpg[)
5 to 6 feet of Lake Effect Snow in Buffalo is ANOTHER "Gift" from the fossil fuel industry thanks to Global Warming.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)

30 VERY DESCRIPTIVE (and prophetic as well) pictures about the NEW NORMAL:  :P

http://www.bostonglobe.com/2014/11/18/snow-pummels-parts-new-york/2AjgJVxR6dL5obDl5U7f1L/story.html?pic=1 (http://www.bostonglobe.com/2014/11/18/snow-pummels-parts-new-york/2AjgJVxR6dL5obDl5U7f1L/story.html?pic=1)

WHY is 5 to 6 feet of Lake Effect Snow in one shot ANOTHER "Gift" from the fossil fuel industry thanks to Global Warming? Because when those lakes DON'T FREEZE quickly, a cold front from the crazy wiggling jet stream we are now saddled with picks up GOBS of humidity and DUMPS them on the nearest land mass. I lived in Syracuse from 1979-1981. Syracuse got 155 inches of snow each year back then. Most of it was lake effect from a smallish lake called Onandaga. It didn't freeze quickly because it was "graced" with world class anti-freeze from factory chemical pollution (All those "progress through chemistry" goodies like paint and formica were never free, YA KNOW!).

Buffalo was just ahead of us in snowfall with the U.S. record back then. NOW it will be a bonanza growth industry for roof repair contractors. ANOTHER COST  :P that we-the-people must pay so fossil fuels can be "cheap". ::)    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

(http://media.fresnobee.com/smedia/2014/11/18/02/29/61-19tZSO.AuSt.55.jpeg)
A child in Buffalo ponders the future. I hope he learns soon that the fossil fuel industry must PAY (http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/exagerent/police/boulet.gif) for the present AND future damage that  their SO CALLED "cheap" fuel visited on him and his generation.
Younger Generation= (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181553.gif)                  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)=Fossil Fuelers
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/popcorn.gif)
Title: ]How global warming will cause more lake-effect snow By Tim Kovach
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2014, 03:35:00 pm
How global warming will cause more lake-effect snow

By Tim Kovach | March 20, 2014  - 9:29 AM |  Cleveland, Climate Change

SNIPPET:

Quote
The evidence

So what does the evidence say? Do we have research to backup this seemingly counterintuitive  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6656.gif) outcome? In a word, yes.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

In a 2003 study, Burnett et al examined long-term changes in lake-effect snowfall (paywall) and compared them with October-April snowfall totals and air temperatures from 1931-2001. According to the authors, lake-effect snowfall totals increased significantly at 11 of 15 sites studied. Their research also demonstrated that lake surface temperatures increased significantly at the majority of sites examined. Consequently, they concluded that


ncreased lake-effect snowfall is the result of changes in Great lakes whole-lake thermal characteristics that involve warmer lake surface waters and a decrease in lake ice cover.

While the Burnett et al piece is now more than a decade old, several additional studies have largely supported its findings. Vavrus, Notaro, and Zarrin examined how ice cover affected a subset of 10 heavy lake-effect snow (HLES) events in order to quantify the impact of the ice. They found that “the suppression of open water [i.e. expansion of ice cover] on the individual lakes causes over an 80% decline in downstream” HLES. Ice cover on Lake Erie lowered snowfall by 73%, while Lake Michigan saw a reduction of nearly 100%.

The authors note that ice cover reduces heat fluxes over the lakes, lowers atmospheric moisture, stymies cloud formation, and depresses near-surface air temperatures. All of these changes can suppress lake-effect. For all five lakes, complete ice cover reduces downstream snowfall by 85%. As a result,

The results of the current study suggest that this change toward more open water  :P should favor significantly greater lake-effect snowfall.

Wright, Posselt, and Steiner conducted a similar study, examining the relative amount and distribution of snowfall under four different models: a control (observed lake ice in mid-January 2009), complete ice cover, no ice cover, and warmer lake surface temperatures. The authors also show that moving from complete ice cover to no ice cover dramatically increases lake-effect totals. The total area seeing small (≤2mm) and large (≥10mm) lake-effect events increase by 28% and 93%, respectively. In contrast, while elevated lake surface temperatures do not increase the area affected by lake-effect, they do tend to increase the amount of heavy snowfall; areas that already experienced HLES saw 63% more snowfall.

It remains important to note that, while higher lake surface temperatures and reduced ice cover should lead to more lake-effect snow during the coming decades, a decrease in the number of cold-air outbreaks could work to counter this effect. But if lake-effect increases, as the preponderance of evidence suggests it will, it could carry major additional economic costs for Great Lakes states. According to a study of 16 states and two Canadian provinces from IHS Global Insight, snowstorms can costs states $66-700 million in direct and indirect losses per day if they render roads impassable. Great Lakes states had among the most significant losses, with Ohio forfeiting $300 million per day and New York leading the pack at $700 million.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/290.gif)

Additional major lake-effect events will only serve to drive up this price tag even more, further constraining limited state and municipal budgets well into the future. (http://images.zaazu.com/img/Incredible-Hulk-animated-animation-male-smiley-emoticon-000342-large.gif)


Full article WRITTEN IN MARCH of 2014  ;D at link below:
http://timkovach.com/wp/2014/03/20/global-warming-will-cause-lake-effect-snow/

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars   (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) and conscience free crooks ,    they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2014, 06:06:28 pm
11/19/2014 04:49 PM 
Watch NASA's Video: What Carbon Looks Like in the Atmosphere

SustainableBusiness.com News

In July, NASA launched the first satellite into space dedicated to measuring carbon levels in the atmosphere, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2).


 Every day, it takes a million high-resolution measurements  :o,
and scientists released the first video that displays how this invisible gas travels around the world.

 Their simulation shows plumes of carbon swirling and shifting as winds disperse the greenhouse gas away from its sources. It also illustrates differences in carbon levels in the northern and southern hemispheres and distinct swings in global carbon concentrations as the growth cycle of plants and trees changes with the seasons, says NASA.

For decades, scientists have been measuring carbon levels from the ground, but this is the first time it is being measured from space. The simulation is a product of a new computer model that is among the highest-resolution ever created - and the first to show in fine detail how carbon moves through the atmosphere.

The computer uses atmospheric measurements to create a simulation of the natural behavior of carbon in the Earth's atmosphere, which they call "Nature Run." It also simulates winds, clouds, water vapor and airborne particles such as dust, black carbon, sea salt and emissions from industry and volcanoes.

Much remains unknown about how carbon moves from an emissions source to the atmosphere or to carbon sinks such as oceans and forests. OCO-2 and computer modeling will help scientists better understand the processes that drive carbon concentrations and project future changes to our climate.

Watch the video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1SgmFa0r04&feature=player_embedded(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

The colors represent a range of carbon concentrations, from 375 parts per million (dark blue) to 385 (red) to 395 (light purple). White plumes represent carbon monoxide  :P  emissions.



 Also, watch NASA's regional videos which hone in on North America, Asia, and southern Africa:
 
Website: www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/a-closer-look-at-carbon-dioxide/ (http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/a-closer-look-at-carbon-dioxide/)


http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26015 (http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26015)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 19, 2014, 07:01:42 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSQsgNcDXjc&feature=player_embedded
The social cost of carbon.  >:(
http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/19/whitehouse-carbon-tax-bill/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 20, 2014, 07:27:48 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-201114194904.png)
Face in clouds nearly at the end of the following video (NOT photoshopped!  :o).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul8B7Y8a-3A&feature=player_embedded
The new normal is bad. But it WILL get worse. Without Divine intervention, you can Count on it. (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb050.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 20, 2014, 10:34:18 pm
(http://lh4.ggpht.com/RbaWJoa05JK_S4eGuSmP73gdWSCHiZu-Dryhifv614ZQ6b7l8yT2VpvRDde-YFYqitkvElCEKtQcBuHQ6XmyHS3Kmao=s552)
All those putrid fruits of profit over people and planet have been building since the Industrial Pollution Revolution. But now they are all coming to a massive and deadly crescendo. :(  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/custom/image/tongue%5E_%5Earial%5E_%5E0%5E_%5E0%5E_%5EBurning Fossil Fuels IS SUICIDE%5E_%5E.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-015.gif) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070814193155.png) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/desertsmile.gif) (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb050.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 27, 2014, 12:39:06 am
(http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/historical_emissions.png) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)



And now for more recent times...   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)


(http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/cumulative_emissions.png)
Article with several more graphics at link:

6 Graphs Explain the World’s Top 10 Emitters

by Mengpin Ge Mengpin Ge, Johannes Friedrich and Thomas Damassa - November 25, 2014

http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 27, 2014, 12:53:56 am
(http://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/rsz_screen_shot_2014-05-21_at_124937_pm.jpg)
This is analogous to tumor growth. This is NOT a benign tumor... (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kPgpV7rV3tE/Tuh3m1i31tI/AAAAAAAAFqM/F5NUAaWi7f4/s1600/earth+has+humans.jpg)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-271114005231.jpeg)

(http://images.medicaldaily.com/sites/medicaldaily.com/files/styles/large/public/2014/08/21/cancer-cells-may-outsmart-humans-long-time.jpg?itok=5lHYIbVw)
The Fossil Fueler Predatory Capitalist Profit over Planet mentality is a CANCER. IT CANNOT do ANYTHING but GROW. We kill it or it kills us, PERIOD.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif)

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/custom/image/tongue%5E_%5Earial%5E_%5E0%5E_%5E0%5E_%5EBurning Fossil Fuels IS SUICIDE%5E_%5E.gif)


CAN HUMANS CHANGE from paradigm of conscience free conquest a TO A PARADIGM of CARING? (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif)  We will soon find out...   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 28, 2014, 06:26:55 pm
Storm cuts power, lifts roofs in Brisbane

Updated: 2014-11-28 11:12


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/11/27/238BD77F00000578-2851451-image-25_1417084960091.jpg)
Golf ball-sized hail batters Brisbane, Australia, Nov 27, 2014

BRISBANE - Brisbane, Australia's third-largest city, was lashed by its worst storm in decades, with wind, rain and hail lifting roofs, cutting power lines, flooding streets and injuring a dozen people, officials said.

State-owned electricity supplier Energex said Friday that up to 90,000 homes had been without power, with trees and hundreds of power lines brought down by winds gusting at 140 kph (87 mph). By Friday morning, 68,000 homes remained blacked out.

The storm struck late Thursday afternoon, trapping commuters for hours in stalled electric trains. Television news broadcasts showed downtown high-rise windows smashed, light planes flipped upside down on an airfield and cars almost completely submerged in flooded streets.

Queensland state Premier Campbell Newman described the storm as the worst to hit the city of 2.2 million people since 1985. He said 12 people had been injured.

Australian Broadcasting Corp. reported that the convention center that hosted President Barack Obama and other world leaders at the G-20 summit two weeks ago had sustained hail and water damage.

The army was called in to help emergency crews remove fallen trees Friday morning.

http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2014-11/28/content_18992854.htm
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 30, 2014, 02:13:22 am
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)January-October 2014 temperatures highest on record  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

Quote

Date: November 29, 2014

Source: World Meteorological Organization

Summary: The global average temperature over land and ocean surfaces for January to October 2014 was the highest on record, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. It said October was the hottest since records began in 1880.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141129075729.htm

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-071114195508.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 30, 2014, 03:53:38 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301114152941.jpeg)
Kid, the outlook for our food supply is not encouraging. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301114154841.png)
  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025419.bmp)
http://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/3/22.13/118.19/ALL/satellite/loss,forestgain?begin=2001-01-01&end=2013-01-01&threshold=25
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on November 30, 2014, 04:17:42 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301114161124.jpeg)
WHY do these humans insist on destroying our home? Don't they know its their home too?  ???
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301114160603.png)
http://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/3/58.65/-158.91/ALL/satellite/loss,forestgain?begin=2001-01-01&end=2013-01-01&threshold=25
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 01, 2014, 04:04:54 pm
Gas and Coal To Replace Hydropower in Brazil, Pollution to Follow  >:(

Brazil, the world’s cleanest energy user, is getting dirtier  :(.

 Vanessa Dezem, Bloomberg 
 December 01, 2014 

Sao Paolo, Brazil — The Brazilian government is seeking to award contracts in an auction tomorrow for natural gas- and coal-fueled power plants, reversing a drive that previously favored renewable-energy projects. It would lead to the first new thermal plants in three years, after the government scaled back such projects and awarded wind contracts starting in 2009 and solar energy earlier this year.

The government is seeking to award contracts in an auction tomorrow for natural gas- and coal-fueled power plants, reversing a drive that previously favored renewable-energy projects. It would lead to the first new thermal plants in three years, after the government scaled back such projects and awarded wind contracts starting in 2009 and solar energy earlier this year.

Thermal plants, which are faster and easier to build and open than wind or hydroelectric facilities, will be used as a stopgap to ensure energy supplies after the worst drought in eight decades dried up reservoirs at hydro-dams that produce 70 percent of Brazil’s power. Without the extra energy supplies, Brazil may be forced to ration power as soon as next year if the drought continues, said BNP Paribas SA and consultant Thymos Energia.

“Coal and gas plants can meet an urgent need,” Bernardo Bezerra, a manager at the Rio de Janeiro-based energy consultant PSR, said in an interview. “The big question mark is: Is it worth contracting an expensive source of energy for so many years, when you have cheaper and cleaner sources available like wind simply because of a short-term need?”

Energy ‘Security’  ::)

Brazil’s energy research and planning agency, known as EPE, says it is.

“It’s important for the security of the system that we have more thermal energy — it was because of thermal that we avoided rationing last year,” Jose Carlos de Miranda Farias, EPE director of electric energy research, said in a telephone interview from Brasilia. “We need to guarantee supplies to Brazilian consumers who refuse to deal with energy shortages of even half an hour.”

Using fossil fuels at a time of need highlights tensions facing Brazilian policy makers as they join United Nations talks next week aimed at limiting global warming. While envoys from 190 nations are pushing for an agreement in 2015 to limit fossil-fuel emissions, Brazil may need to boost emissions to stabilize its power market and meet growing demand.

Brazil, the biggest polluter in Latin America, had a 6.7 percent jump in carbon emissions last year, according to data from BP Plc. That was the fastest increase worldwide after Qatar, Colombia and the Philippines. A spokesman for Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy wasn’t immediately available to comment.

For the world to meet its goals of limiting global warming, Brazil would have to cut carbon emissions an average of 0.9 percent a year until 2040, the International Energy Agency estimates. Current government policies put Brazil on course for annual increases of 1.8 percent over that period, the Paris- based institution estimates.

Idled Plants

Brazil restarted all of its idled thermal-power plants to make up an energy shortfall as hydroelectric output plummeted. Use of the costlier energy source boosted electricity spot prices to records.

Wind and solar developers including Renova Energia SA and Enel Brasil Participacoes Ltda were the only companies to win contracts in the last auction on Oct. 31.

Wind will still play a big role in tomorrow’s A-5 auction — the renewable source accounts for about 14 gigawatts of installed capacity on offer, or almost half of the projects that qualified to bid. In Brazil’s energy auctions, the government sets a ceiling price and developers bid down the price at which they are willing to sell the power. The lowest bid wins the contract.

Big Shift

The big shift in this auction is that thermal plants come with the best terms. In an effort to lure more projects, the nation’s energy regulator raised the cap on thermal-electricity rates to 209 reais ($83.51) a megawatt-hour from an initial proposal of 197 reais. The new price is more than twice that of the last gas project that was awarded in 2011.

And unlike the auction held last month, when the first federal contract was awarded for solar plants, the government is grouping all the projects together. That means gas and coal plants will compete head-to-head with clean-energy producers.

“The pressure is no longer on cleaning up the energy mix in Brazil — we already have a clean mix,” Rafael Brandao, co- owner of Rio Alto Energia, a renewable-energy developer, said in an interview in Sao Paulo. “This is a good excuse to dirty up that mix.”

Water Levels

Electric grid operator ONS says water levels at Brazil’s most important dams are averaging just 15 percent of total capacity   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp) , almost two months into Brazil’s rainy season. A year earlier, when the drought was starting, reservoirs were 41 percent full.

Tomorrow’s auction “is an intelligence test: Does the government understand that now is a good time to install more thermal-electric generation?” Joao Carlos de Oliveira Mello, president of consultant Thymos Energia, said in an interview at Bloomberg’s office in Sao Paulo. “Since 2009, we haven’t planned for any thermal-electricity. Brazil needs a cheap and stable thermal-electric complex.”

Copyright 2014 Bloomberg

A. G. Gelbert   December 1, 2014 

This is a huge mistake. The crisis of low rainfall should be accepted as a good reason to NOT build more hydro power projects that damage the biosphere and open up the current dams to normal biosphere friendly fish movements.

The shortfall in energy can be made up thus:

1. Install PV on rooftops to lower the electricity demand.

2. Massively subsidize Electric vehicle prices and put a large tax on internal combustion engine powered new vehicles.

3. Install GridBank super capictor/battery systems in giant PV arrays to provide power to homes, factories and vehicle charging stations at night.

4. Use the massive output of Brazil's ethanol production to generate electricity INSTEAD of fuel for cars and trucks.

The above is a permanent and sustainable solution, not a stopgap. It's time for governments to stop running around like chickens with their heads cut off. We know how to solve our energy problems. Only the unsustainable status quo is preventing us from doing that.

TINA to a Low Carbon Economy (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/global-warming-is-with-us/msg2114/#msg2114)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 03, 2014, 07:28:45 pm
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eFoR6R8fwCk/VHysXEhJBfI/AAAAAAABG1M/YVs4kZPNcWc/s1600/12-03-2014e.png)

Quote
The Climate Change Concern Index—a composite measure that combines perceptions about whether climate change is a crisis and whether it will have adverse personal effects—finds that
nearly 3-in-10 (29%) Americans are highly concerned about climate change,
21% are somewhat concerned,
29% are somewhat unconcerned,
and 21% are very unconcerned.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7WeUMFJJeHU/VHysVoLNhgI/AAAAAAABG08/6aLn7YHFpCo/s1600/12-03-2014b.png)

Full article at link:

Wednesday, December 03, 2014
 
TODAY’S STUDY: HOW RELIGION INFLUENCES PERCEPTIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Quote
Believers, Sympathizers, & Skeptics – Why Americans are Conflicted about Climate Change, Environmental Policy, and Science; Findings from the PRRI/AAR Religion, Values, and Climate Change Survey

Robert P. Jones, Daniel Cox, Juhem Navarro-Rivera, November 2014 (Public Religion Research Institute and American Academy of Religion)

Executive Summary


The Importance of and Concerns about Climate Change

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)
http://www.newenergynews.blogspot.com/


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 06, 2014, 03:13:34 pm
(http://ucmp.berkeley.edu/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/e-books.jpg)

Stanford Report, December 4, 2014
Stanford's Precourt Institute and KQED launch new e-book series on climate change (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/computer3.gif)

The new four-part iBooks Textbook series, Clue into Climate, and an accompanying iTunes U course can be downloaded for free on iPad.

By Mark Shwartz

Clue into Climate, an interactive e-book series on climate change, is now available free of charge on iPad. The four-part iBooks Textbook series was produced by KQED, public media for Northern California, in partnership with Stanford's Precourt Institute for Energy and the University of California Museum of Paleontology.

(http://science.kqed.org/quest/files/2014/12/Clue-into-Climate-image-640x360.jpg)
e-book series cover art

'Clue into Climate' is a four-part e-book series on climate change. The free, interactive volumes are designed primarily for middle- and high-school students.

Primarily developed for middle- and high-school students, but also relevant for lifelong learners  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif), the series explores the causes of climate change, its impacts on freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems, and innovative strategies for curbing and adapting to change.

The four iBooks Textbooks and an accompanying free iTunes U course can be downloaded through the iBooks Store. Infographics, videos and other media from the series will be available on KQED's QUEST website on Dec. 12.

"Responding to climate change involves many thousands of conversations around the world," said Michael Mastrandrea, a co-director of science for Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "The KQED books put the science in clear, vibrant terms, inviting dialogue on risks in a changing climate and the opportunities for response."

Here is a summary of the four-book series:

•Clue into Climate: Causes of Change (29 pages) investigates what climate change is, and explores its causes and how scientists make projections about future changes. The book features animations and videos on greenhouse gases and the carbon cycle.

•Clue into Climate: Changing Water (33 pages) explains how climate change influences rainfall patterns and the loss of glaciers. This book examines preparations for these changes, and features animations and videos about the water cycle and the cryosphere.

•Clue into Climate: Changing Ecosystems (32 pages) explores the impact global warming will have on plant and animal species, and how an increased level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is impacting our forests and oceans. Highlights include interactive animations and videos about Arctic animals, ocean acidification and redwood trees.

•Clue into Climate: Facing Our Future (39 pages) shows how communities can prepare for and adapt to climate-related issues, such as sea-level rise, increased wildfires and impacts to agriculture. Through audio reports, interactive graphics and videos, the book also examines California's Cap-and-Trade Program and alternative energy sources, such as biofuels and solar power.


"From California's severe drought to the United Nation's recent warning that the world must phase out fossil fuels completely by 2100, climate issues are in the news more than ever," said Robin Mencher, director of education and media learning for KQED. "KQED's climate iBooks Textbooks for iPad couldn't have been published at a better time for educators and students. The books offer a real-life, media-rich experience, exploring what climate change looks like on the ground and what can be done to stem its effects."

Each book in the series features a career spotlight video, highlighting people working on climate change issues.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

The books also include opportunities for students to engage in discussion through a social media activity called Do Now (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif), and to create and share their own media projects on climate-change topics.

The books and iTunes U course also align with the Next Generation Science Standards and Climate Literacy, a set of climate principles developed by scientists, educators and several federal agencies. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)

"Even though recent polls show that a majority of Americans now believe climate change is happening, climate change remains a controversial and divisive issue when it comes to policymaking," says Lisa White, director of education at the University of California Museum of Paleontology. "These new books offer a way for KQED's partners to bring relevant research to life, and promote greater access to information about climate and global environmental change in an easy-to-understand package for not only students but also the public." (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

Clue into Climate follows the release last June of the two-part e-book series, Energy, produced by KQED and Stanford's Precourt Institute for Energy. Volume 1, Energy: The Basics, investigates the nature of energy and energy resources. Volume 2, Energy: Use and Efficiency, explores how people use energy, from generating electricity to developing energy-efficient technologies. The Energy books and a companion iTunes U course can also be downloaded free of charge on iPad.

Clue into Climate is a project of KQED Science with support from KQED's Campaign 21. The series was developed by Andrea Aust, KQED science education manager, and produced by Lauren Farrar, KQED science interactive media producer, with contributions from KQED's David Pierce, Craig Miller and Molly Samuel.

Additional contributors to the iBooks Textbook series include Christopher Field, Robert Jackson, Katharine Mach, Michael Mastrandrea and Mark Shwartz from Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution at Stanford; Lisa White and Jessica Bean from the University of California Museum of Paleontology; and Minda Berbeco from the National Center for Science Education.

Media Contact

Mark Shwartz, Precourt Institute for Energy: (650) 723-9296, mshwartz@stanford.edu

Dan Stober, Stanford News Service: (650) 721-6965 dstober@stanford.edu

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/december/ebooks-climate-change-120414.html

Agelbert NOTE: The founder of the above institute, Dr. Franklin Orr, was just confirmed as Under Secretary for Science and Energy. So, hopefully, this will help the DOE get away from fossil and nuclear fuel nuttery.  (http://www.emofaces.com/png/200/emoticons/fingerscrossed.png)


Dr. Franklin Orr Confirmed as Under Secretary for Science and Energy
December 4, 2014 - 10:10am

Stanford Report, December 5, 2014
Stanford Professor Lynn Orr confirmed as head of DOE science and energy research

After a yearlong delay, the U.S. Senate has confirmed Lynn Orr as under secretary for science and energy in the U.S. Department of Energy.


By Mark Shwartz

(http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/november/images/13245-Orr_ff400_news.jpg)
Franklin 'Lynn' Orr

Professor Franklin "Lynn" Orr, founding director of the Precourt Institute for Energy at Stanford University, has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate as under secretary for science and energy in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Orr was nominated by President Obama in November 2013 and approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in January 2014. The full Senate finally approved his nomination on a voice vote Thursday morning.

"The science and energy research supported by DOE is a critical component of the energy transitions that lie ahead,"
Orr said. "I am looking forward to starting work with Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and his team to tackle those challenges."

Orr, 67, will oversee all of the DOE's science research programs, including a majority of the DOE's national labs. This position is part of the department's recent reorganization, which expanded the role of the under secretary for science to encompass both science and energy.

Orr's role will include oversight of research in the Office of Science, the Office of Fossil Energy, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, the Office of Indian Energy and the Office of Technology Transfer Coordinator.

"Lynn Orr is an outstanding scientist and has successfully led a major multidisciplinary program on energy sources, technology and analysis at one of the top research universities," Moniz said. "This experience will serve him well as the DOE under secretary for science and energy. I look forward to working closely with Lynn to shape the nation's clean energy agenda, and to sustain American leadership in science. I thank the Senate for approving his nomination."

SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory at Stanford will be one of the national laboratories to reside within the new organizational unit.

Earlier this year, Orr stepped down from his post as the director of the Precourt Institute for Energy, which he had led since the institute was created in 2009. Prior to leading the Precourt Institute, Orr served as the founding director of the Global Climate and Energy Project at Stanford from 2002 to 2008.

Since 1985, Orr has been an associate professor and professor in Stanford's Department of Energy Resources Engineering (formerly the Department of Petroleum Engineering  ;D). He was dean of the School of Earth Sciences at Stanford from 1994 to 2002 and chairman of the Department of Petroleum Engineering from 1991 to 1994.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp) Orr held several other research positions from 1970 to 1985 in New Mexico, Texas and Washington, D.C. He received his BS from Stanford University and PhD from the University of Minnesota.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/december/orr-doe-appt-120514.html

IF Dr. Orr is not a pro fracking sleeper agent for big oil, this is good news for we-the-people. Despite his PETROLEUM PIGGERY credentials, the fact that his confirmation was delayed a year means he GETS IT in regard to climate change and the FACT that dirty energy is the CAUSE.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)





Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 06, 2014, 04:17:12 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)THERE HAS BEEN NO HIATUS FROM TEMPERATURE INCREASE, PERIOD! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)

Quote
Random  (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif) says:  4 Dec 2014 at 11:21 PM

 I’m actually a bit frustrated how those elaborate statistical discussions fail to communicate the basic point to the layman, that all the talk about the ‘hiatus’ is just a product of looking at the wrong metrics. I had much better results in discussions with ‘skeptics’ by just stating that the *global* mean does not make for a good metrics in a situation, when three of four values go up and one goes down. Just look at figure 6 on page 4 in Jim Hansen’s paper from early 2013: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2014/20140121_Temperature2013.pdf

Can anybody spot a ‘hiatus’? No? I certainly can’t. Temperatures rise consistently on the southern hemisphere in summer and winter. Temperatures rise consistently on the northern hemisphere in summer. There’s no ‘hiatus’. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif) Only winter in the northern hemisphere has seen a decline in temperatures – which isn’t a ‘hiatus’ in my book either. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

I think it would actually be better to put away fancy statistics in this case and to even not argue about the length of the period the ‘skeptics’ choose to look at – and just tell them, that the global mean was a poor choice of metrics in a situation where three indicators go up and one goes down. Because it suggests a ‘hiatus’ where clearly there isn’t one. That’s simple arithmetics that average people can understand.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

I’m not saying that the statistical argument was unimportant. I’m just saying that – instead of being frustrated by laymen and the media, who “just don’t get it” – we should simply tell a story of “you’re relying on the wrong calculation” (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif) that is much easier to understand.

I for my part had very good success in discussions with “skeptics” here – no one has been able to counter that one yet. They either went mum or evasive.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)  - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/recent-global-warming-trends-significant-or-paused-or-what/#sthash.3AgHgStk.dpuf


Recent global warming trends: significant or paused or what?  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)

Filed under: Climate Science Communicating Climate Instrumental Record Reporting on climate skeptics — stefan @ 4 December 2014


(http://www.realclimate.org/images//trend1.png)
Fig. 1. Global temperature 1979 to present – monthly values (crosses), 12-months running mean (red line) and linear trend line with uncertainty (blue)

You clearly see a linear warming trend of 0.175 °C per decade, with confidence intervals of ±0.047 °C per decade.
That’s global warming – a measured fact.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif) - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/recent-global-warming-trends-significant-or-paused-or-what/#sthash.3AgHgStk.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 08, 2014, 07:30:34 pm
At Lima Talks, Nations Worst Hit by Global Warming Say Climate Aid Isn’t Charity, But Reparations  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RN6djR8_IgUE&feature=player_embedded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RN6djR8_IgU

http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/08/un-climate-summit-lima-peru/

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars   (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) and conscience free crooks ,    they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)


Quote
“We as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values… when machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”
-- Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 12, 2014, 02:16:14 pm
The most popular deceptive  (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)  climate graph

Filed under: Climate Science
 Communicating Climate
 Instrumental Record
 skeptics
 Sun-earth connections
 — stefan @ 8 December 2014

The “World Climate Widget” from Tony Watts’ blog is probably the most popular deceptive image among climate “skeptics”.   (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg) We’ll take it under the microscope and show what it would look like when done properly.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif) So called “climate skeptics” deploy an arsenal of misleading graphics, with which the human influence on the climate can be down played (here are two other  examples deconstructed at Realclimate).  The image below is especially widespread.  It is displayed on many “climate skeptic” websites and is regularly updated.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Watts_world_climate_widget1.jpg)
The “World Climate Widget” of US “climate skeptic” Anthony Watts  (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)with our explanations added.  The original can be found on Watts’ blog

What would a more honest display of temperature, CO2 and sunspots look like? (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014182447.gif)

1. It is better to plot the surface air temperature.  That is what is relevant for us humans: we do not live up in the troposphere, nor do natural ecosystems, nor do we grow our food up there. By the way, the satellite-based tropospheric temperatures shown by Watts show almost the same climatic warming trend as those measured by weather stations near ground level (in both cases 0.16 C per decade over the last 30 years).  However, variability in the tropospheric data is considerably larger, especially because of higher sensitivity to El Niño (as happened in 1998) and the solar cycle (we showed that in Foster and Rahmstorf ERL 2011 – when corrected for those factors the surface and troposphere data agree closely).  Because of increased noise, the trend is less obvious to the eye, especially if one shows monthly values which adds yet more noise.  Let us thus use the GISTEMP global annual temperature record from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Science (all surface data sets agree to better than 0.1 °C, see comparison graph).

2. One needs to scale the CO2 data correctly for an honest comparison with temperature, so that it can actually be used to evaluate climate scientists’ predictions of the CO2 effect.  You can calculate this with a complicated climate model, but one can also use a back-of-envelope estimate.  A CO2 increase from 280 to 400 ppm (equivalent to 2 Watts/meter2 radiative forcing) produces about 1 °C of global warming (at the time when 400 ppm is reached – some further warming will follow with delay). Thus, an increase of 100 ppm CO2 on the right hand side of the graph corresponds to a temperature increase of 0.8°C on the left hand side. That matches the IPCC’s estimate of the “transient climate response (TCR)” of ~2°C at the time of CO2 doubling (see Technical Summary of the IPCC WG1 report, p. 84). The TCR is smaller than the equilibrium climate sensitivity (about 3°C for doubled CO2) because it takes time to warm the oceans. The full equilibrium warming is thus only reached after a time delay. We are going to use the annual values from the famous CO2 measurements which began in 1958 on Mauna Loa in Hawaii.

3. And last but not least one should show honest sunspot data (annual time series), not just a snapshot of the number of spots on the sun today (which is completely uninformative for climate purposes – it’s apparently been added to the widget simply to insinuate an important role of the sun  ;)). Here also there is a question of the proper scaling (which is actually not that important because solar activity is cyclical and shows no significant trend over the period of the graph).  We will chose the scaling from the correlation analysis of Lean and Rind (2008) from which one can find a measurable effect on global temperature with an amplitude of 0.05°C.


When done this way the graph looks like this:
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//climate_widget_2013.jpg)

One of the readers of our German sister blog KlimaLounge, Bernd Herd, has programmed a widget for this graph so it can be added to any website at a size you like, automatically updated annually.  (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

The trends in the CO2 and temperature anomaly curves agree very well with each other.  This is surprising at first because CO2 is of course not the only factor that influences global temperature. There are two reasons for this agreement:

(1)  Of the other anthropogenic factors, some have a warming effect (other greenhouse gases such as methane) while others have a cooling effect (air pollution). These roughly balance in global average. The IPCC AR4 report found a radiative forcing of 1.7 W/m2 from the CO2 increase alone, while the total from all anthropogenic factors amounted to 1.6 W/m2.

(2)  Natural factors (volcanoes, solar cycle) influencing the trend are very small in comparison to anthropogenic CO2 (as e.g. standard correlation analyses show, see for example Lean and Rind 2008, Foster and Rahmstorf 2011). The IPCC AR5 found their contribution to global temperature change since 1951 to be in the range of −0.1°C to 0.1°C.

It requires quite some skill to produce a misleading graph like Watts’ global climate widget, which hides the actual connections between global temperature, CO2 and the sunspot cycle. Watts’ widget is quite a useful indicator though: whenever you see it on a website, you know they are trying to fool rather than inform you there. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif)

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/12/the-most-popular-deceptive-climate-graph/#sthash.gNUsKzLJ.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 13, 2014, 04:21:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F-M6Ly3Jqw&feature=player_embedded
Tornado in Oklahoma Los Angeles, CALIFORNIA!  :o
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 16, 2014, 07:07:22 pm
The mindset of a defender of a gradual transition to Renewable Energy while watching a documentary on climate change effects on the biosphere.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-161214183551.gif)
At least he is wearing the appropriate garb.  ;D
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 24, 2014, 07:30:30 pm
Greenland's Ice Loss Now Comes from Surface  :o

(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/o766ZiSjoUyRbAA8SyGnSg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTYzOTtpbD1wbGFuZTtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz05NjA-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2014-04-08T205856Z_723352661_GM1EA490DE801_RTRMADP_3_NASA.JPG)


SAN FRANCISCO — Greenland's disappearing ice shifted gears in the past decade, switching from shrinking glaciers to surface melting, researchers reported here last week at the American Geophysical Union's annual meeting.

Instead of losing ice where massive glaciers meet the sea, Greenland now sends meltwater rushing into the ocean via a vast network of lakes and rivers, according to several studies. The results do not mean that glaciers have stopped their speedy flow, only that surface melting now exerts a more powerful influence on ice loss, researchers said.

 "We no longer see giant icebergs calving" from glaciers, releasing ice into the sea, said Lora Koenig, a glaciologist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, who led one of the new studies. "The majority of water is coming from surface melt." [Photos: Under the Greenland Ice Sheet]

Koenig discovered that lakes in west Greenland now stay liquid through the frigid winter, as long as an insulating snow blanket keeps the water warm. These lakes get a head start on melting the next summer. "Water is not a good thing to have persisting year-round," Koenig said Dec. 15 at a news conference. "What this water is really doing is priming the pump [for melting] for the next season."

Full article:
http://news.yahoo.com/greenlands-ice-loss-now-comes-surface-141536542.html
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 27, 2014, 06:07:11 pm
Quote

Carl Dalton   
 December 26, 2014 



SIMPLE FACT

The Total Solar Heat Input” into the Biosphere of the Planet
+
The Total unnaturally generated mega trillions of watts, of “Heat Output” into the Biosphere of the Planet
+
The factors that Climate Scientists have not as yet recognized

COMBINED

Is subject to the same;

Overall Greenhouse Effect

Climate Scientists and Climate Change Activists have been, and are so focussed on solar input and GHG emissions, as to being the source of global warming;

They have failed to realize, that it is;

“Hundreds of millions of years” of fossilized energy, being “Converted” into hundreds of quadrillions of watts of HEAT;

Over a mere

“Two to three centuries”

That is the major source of the problem;

And the fact that;

Energy may be converted, but energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Is the major cause of the problem.

Therefore it follows, that as this excess heat energy which has not been able to escape, has instead been sequestered (as potential energy) into the only rapid up/intake medium available, the planets salt water oceans.

To the point that four fifths of the Earth’s total surface area, has increased in temperature to a depth of 700 metres; “and only to this temperature and depth”, because a great deal of this excess heat is being carried away by the oceanic currents, towards the cooling polar icecaps.

And as the polar icecaps are simultaneously being bombarded, with “multi quadrillions” of infinitesimally small hydrocarbon pollutants (which has also caused high levels of cancer in the Inuit people, and caribou reindeer); which both absorb solar radiation and re-radiate it as heat into the ice below; so they are being melted from above, and from below.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110814224725.png)

Therefore given these additional factors, taken in conjunction with the masses of scientific evidence that serve to confirm/prove, that the globe is actually and factually overheating; it follows, that all of the future predictions that have been made in regard to the rapidity of climate change, are in deficit to a great degree.

And given this poor state of climate affairs + the sub cerebral vacuity, and hence intransigence of “The Incorporated Parasitic Mass” of fossil fuel merchants and their quisling politicians; I feel that there is but small hope, that humanity at large can be persuaded, or will be prompted to take decisive action; before either it is, or it is almost too late to save the living planet.

Just another nutcase?

It does not need a Rocket Scientist to realize;

If instead of a single 3 prop vertically mounted wind rotor; wind towers are constructed incorporating “multiple level” (magnetic levitated/100% wind power delivery) lateral wind driven rotors (as with those rotating heat extractors on building roof’s), to drive a central vertical axle.

The amount of torque = power = electricity, generated over the same area of ground as that of one current type 3 prop wind turbine; is only limited by the towers height, and the number of lateral rotors incorporated into the structure of the tower.

Unlike vertical prop rotors which injure and kill birdlife, lateral rotors can also be surrounded by wire mesh preventing this; and as turbines are underground there is no health risk from its electromagnetic field.

For methods to naturally/cleanly generate unlimited amounts of electricity refer to;

www.fromthecircletothesphere.com and click on the Global Overheating tab

The above fact filled comment was in regard to other comments in the Story below:

Norway Utility Plans to Invest as Much as $8.1 Billion in Renewables

 Alex Morales, Bloomberg 
 December 24, 2014

 http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/12/norway-utility-plans-to-invest-as-much-as-8-1-billion-in-renewables#comment-138754
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 28, 2014, 05:42:03 pm
Pictorial metaphor:
Biosphere versus the 1% holding humanity hostage.

Nature doesn't just "bat last"; it BATS FIRST, in the MIDDLE, and LAST! Wall Street PUNKS "Lord of the Manor" thinking is an ABERRATION borne of arrogant, navel gazing, narcissistic MAGICAL THINKING.  8)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Nci-GVuHE&feature=player_embedded
Of course, the above scenario may sadly play out with BOTH the hostage and the bad guy getting offed...(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-281214175124.gif)
Comfort loving, but stupid, thinking.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/custom/image/tongue%5E_%5Earial%5E_%5E0%5E_%5E0%5E_%5EBurning Fossil Fuels IS SUICIDE%5E_%5E.gif)





Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on December 30, 2014, 12:44:25 am
Pope Francis to Issue ‘Unprecedented’ Edict on Climate Change


 Dec 28, 2014


In 2015, Pope Francis is expected to address the issue of climate change to a U.N. general assembly and the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics, and call a summit on the threat of the world’s main religions.

Vatican insiders say Francis will meet other faith leaders and lobby politicians at the U.N. general assembly in New York in September, when countries are scheduled to agree on new anti-poverty and environmental goals.

The Guardian reports:


Urging all Catholics to take action on moral and scientific grounds, [a rare encyclical on climate change and human ecology] will be sent to the world’s 5,000 Catholic bishops and 400,000 priests, who will distribute it to parishioners.

… In recent months, the pope has argued for a radical new financial and economic system to avoid human inequality and ecological devastation. In October he told a meeting of Latin American and Asian landless peasants and other social movements: “An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it.

“The system continues unchanged, since what dominates are the dynamics of an economy and a finance that are lacking in ethics. It is no longer man who commands, but money. Cash commands.

"The monopolising of lands, deforestation, the appropriation of water, inadequate agro-toxics are some of the evils that tear man from the land of his birth. Climate change, the loss of biodiversity and deforestation are already showing their devastating effects in the great cataclysms we witness,” he said. (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)

Observers expect Francis’ environmental radicalism to be resisted by Vatican conservatives and right-wing church circles, particularly in the United States.

Cardinal George Pell, for instance, is a former archbishop of Sydney who has been placed in charge of the Vatican’s budget and who has claimed that global warming has ended and that if carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere were doubled, “plants would love it.”

Dan Misleh, director of the Catholic climate covenant, said: “There will always be 5-10% of people who will take offense. They are very vocal and have political clout. This encyclical will threaten some people and bring joy to others. The arguments are around economics and science rather than morality.

“A papal encyclical is rare. It is among the highest levels of a pope’s authority. It will be 50 to 60 pages long; it’s a big deal. But there is a contingent of Catholics here who say he should not be getting involved in political issues, that he is outside his expertise.”

—Posted by Alexander Reed Kelly.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/pope_francis_to_issue_unprecedented_edict_on_climate_change_20141228
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 08, 2015, 10:21:49 pm
Not Leaving Carbon in the Ground is a Death Sentence (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif)

Quote
A new study published in the journal Nature argues that most of the remaining fossil fuel reserves on our planet will need to be left in the ground if we want to have any chance at preventing catastrophic climate change. The scientists behind the research argue that most Canadian tar sands oil, all Arctic oil and gas, and most shale gas has to stay buried underground if we want to avoid the 2 degrees Celsius warming benchmark.

Christophe McGlade, the lead researcher on the study, told The Guardian that, “We’ve now got tangible figures of the quantities and locations of fossil fuels that should remain unused in trying to keep within the 2C temperature limit.”So, what are the quantities and locations of the fossil fuels that need to stay underground?  ???

Well, McGlade and his team found that 82% of coal reserves globally need to stay underground to save our planet. That includes 92% of coal reserves right here in the U.S.

As for gas, 49% of global gas reserves can’t be burned, which includes 100% of gas reserves in the Arctic, 61% of gas reserves in the Middle East, and 63% of gas reserves in China and India.


Finally, the researchers found that 33% of the world’s oil reserves must stay underground, including 38% of reserves in the Middle East, 85% of reserves in Canada, and 100% of oil reserves in the Arctic.

Basically, if we want to have any chance at saving our planet from the greatest threat it’s ever faced, we have to leave fossil fuels and the carbon that comes with them in the ground.
It’s that simple.

Unfortunately, countries and companies are still spending billions on oil and gas exploration. A report by Oil Change International and the Overseas Development Institute found that collectively, the G20 nations and companies within them, which includes the United States, are spending a staggering $88 billion per year on fossil fuel exploration subsides to Big Oil. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/126fs2277341.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/minzdr.gif) The US alone spent a whopping $5.1 billion on oil and gas exploration subsidies to big energy companies in 2013 alone.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/custom/image/tongue%5E_%5Earial%5E_%5E0%5E_%5E0%5E_%5EBurning Fossil Fuels IS SUICIDE%5E_%5E.gif)


Full Article at link:  8)

 http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/01/why-carbon-should-be-left-ground#sthash.go4461DJ.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 11, 2015, 02:54:57 pm
(http://static.trunity.net/files/122601_122700/122650/620px-Figure6.38_vul_of_coasts_to_sea_level_change.JPG)

Agelbert NOTE: the STERIC contribution to SLR (Sea Level Rise) is defined as the volume increase due to an increase in average ocean temperature, which reduces average seawater density (yeah, I had to look it up.  :-[).
Hey, I don't do this for a livin' ya know! (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)

Diagnosing Causes of Sea Level Rise (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

Filed under: Climate Science
 Oceans
 — eric @ 8 January 2015

Guest post by Sarah G. Purkey and Gregory C. Johnson,
 University of Washington / NOAA


I solicited this post from colleagues at the University of Washington. I found their paper particularly interesting because it gets at the question of sea level rise from a combination of ocean altimetry and density (temperature + salinity) data. This kind of measurement and calculation has not really been possible — not at this level of detail — until quite recently. A key finding is that one can reconcile various different estimates of the contributions to observed sea level rise only if the significant warming of the deep ocean is accounted for.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) There was a good write-up in The Guardian back when the paper came out.– Eric Steig

Sea leave rise reveals a lot about our changing climate.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)

A rise in the mean sea level can be caused by decreases in ocean density, mostly reflecting an increase in ocean temperature — this is steric sea level rise.

It can also be caused by an increase in ocean mass, reflecting a gain of fresh water from land.

A third, and smaller, contribution to mean sea level is from glacial isostatic adjustment. The contribution of glacial isostatic adjustment, while small, has a range of possible values and can be a significant source of uncertainty in sea level budgets. Over recent decades, very roughly half of the observed mean sea level rise is owing to changes in ocean density with the other half owing to the increased in ocean mass, mostly from melting glaciers and polar ice sheets. The exact proportion has been difficult to pin down with great certainty.

Knowing the proportion of sea level rise (SLR) owing to mass addition
versus thermal expansion is not only important for quantifying total SLR. Each component also imparts information about the effects of climate change. First, the ocean absorbs over 90% of the excess heat from greenhouse gas forcing.

In order to monitor and model global warming accurately, we need to know where and how much heat is entering the ocean, and which is directly (although nonlinearly) related to steric SLR.

Sea level rise (SLR) is an important consequence of climate change, and quantifying rates of melting of land ice, including contributions from the massive Greenland and West Antarctica ice sheets is vital to understanding sea level rise. Knowing local rates of past SLR and what is driving those rates will help to improve global and local projections of SLR that are essential for informing adaptation strategies in coastal communities.

Over the past two decades, revolutionary advances in the global ocean observing system have made it possible to estimate the relative contributions of mass and thermal expansion with increasing certainty.

Since 1992
satellite altimetry has provided high-resolution measurements of sea surface height. These data are used to estimate local and global sea level variations.

Since 2002, monthly large-scale variations in ocean mass have been estimated using data from the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE), twin orbiting satellites capable of measuring very small changes in Earth’s gravitational field. GRACE data can be used to estimate variations in ocean mass either by measuring changes in gravity over the ocean or by measuring glacial retreat, melting of polar ice sheets, and changes in terrestrial reservoir storage.

Finally, starting around 2005 the international Argo Program’s array of autonomous profiling floats first achieved sparse near-global coverage, allowing estimates of steric sea level changes in the upper half of the ocean using in situ measurements of ocean temperature and salinity. Thus, since around 2005, satellite and in situ observation systems have allowed for direct estimates of the total change in SLR, that owing to changes in ocean mass, and that owing to temperature (and to a lesser extent salinity) changes in the upper half of the ocean volume.

Agelbert NOTE: This is REALLY important! Why? Because, since 2005, there is NO ROOM FOR ARGUMENT from those that DON'T DO THE MATH! These are not "models"; these are scientific instruments ACCURATELY measuring the real world. This is the kind of data that cannot be refuted with mathematician statistical fun and games. It also offers mathematicians in general, and climate scientists in particular, some HEAVY DUTY ammunition  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/cowboypistol.gif) to counter climate denier propaganda.

With these revolutionary developments in ocean observation, many researchers have been asking some obvious, but very important, questions. Does the total sea level change equal the sum of heating and mass changes within estimated instrumental error? If not, which measurement systems might be biased or incomplete? Is neglect of a deep steric contribution preventing the budget from closing?

In situ data deeper than the current 2000 m Argo sampling limit are the best way to address some of these questions. In the 1990s, for these purposes and others, international investigators working on the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (GO-SHIP) began to repeat a subset of these sections at decadal intervals.

With the first decadal re-survey recently completed, we have investigated changes in deep ocean temperature and salinity in the bottom half of the ocean volume, around the globe between the 1990s and the 2000s. In our most their paper, we combine these full depth measurements of ocean steric changes with satellite sea-surface height data to evaluate the SLR budget, including any deep steric expansion, and make an estimate of the global ocean mass changes independent of GRACE data.

First, we interpolate satellite sea surface height data to the times and locations of these repeat sections to look at the total sea-surface height changes between repeats. We then calculate the difference of this total sea-level change and the full-depth steric changes from the repeat section salinity and temperature data. The result is the change in ocean mass between section occupations.  ;D

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//purkey_fig1.png)
Figure 1: Mean ocean mass sea level rise (mm per year) in within each boundary (black lines) calculated using all full depth data available (gray lines). From their paper.

Despite the very limited spatial coverage compared to Argo (Fig. 1), this method allows for statistically significant global average and seven regional averages of ocean mass trends because ocean mass variations in most ocean regions are comparatively large in spatial scale since small-scale mass fluctuations are very quickly evened out by ocean surface gravity waves. Most small-scale variability in local sea level is related to steric changes that are captured in the steric SLR integration and removed from the total. Globally, our mass trend estimate, centered on 1996–2006, is 1.5 mm per year, with large spatial variability.

Our GRACE estimate of SLR trend (from an averaging kernel) is also 1.5 mm per year for 2003–2013, although this method may produce a slight underestimate of the actual trend. Nonetheless, the results from the two independent methods agree well within their uncertainties (both 0.4 mm per year), despite the fact that these two different decadal estimates only have 3 years of overlap. Furthermore, the spatial variability among the seven regions also shows good agreement, with most falling within error bars of each other.

Both methods find that the South Atlantic and North Pacific are gaining mass the fastest, while the North Atlantic and Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean are either gaining little or no mass (Fig. 1). This regional variability in ocean mass trends can be attributed to a number of factors.

In the North Pacific, the more rapid ocean mass addition has been attributed to large-scale changes in wind patterns over the ocean that affects the wind driven ocean circulation. These circulation changes will be reflected in sea surface topography, which is in part a reflection of shifts of mass from one region to another.

The relatively large mass gain in the South Atlantic is most likely also attributed to local changes in wind stress, possibly affecting the Weddell Gyre or the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.

The two regions with the smallest rates of mass increase are adjacent to Greenland or West Antarctica. These ice sheets are losing mass due to melt, thus losing some of their gravitational attraction, and causing an observable local decrease in sea level there as these waters are redistributed elsewhere.

Because we are using full-depth steric data, we can estimate the contribution of deep ocean warming (hence expansion) to the sea level rise. If deep-ocean warming below 2000 m is ignored, it introduces 13% error into the estimate of the global ocean mass trend. Furthermore, if ocean warming below 1000 m is ignored, the ocean mass trend estimate using our method no longer agrees with that from GRACE within error bars.  8)

This work highlights the importance of the deep ocean warming contribution to SLR. At the moment, the best direct estimates of these changes are using the spatially and temporally sparse but high quality and full-depth WOCE and GO-SHIP data sets to get basin-scale and global trends over decadal time-scales. To estimate regional evolution of deep-ocean warming and its contribution to SLR over shorter space and time scales requires an improved deep monitoring system.

Currently, prototype profiling floats capable of measuring temperature and salinity all the way to 6000 m are being tested for a Deep Argo array  (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif)  (Figure 2). If enough of these floats are deployed, this new Deep Argo array, capable of measuring all but about 2% of the entire ocean volume, together with the current 0–2000 m Argo array, would allow for continuous monitoring of full-depth ocean heat uptake and hence steric sea level rise, both regionally and globally.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//purkey_figure2.png)
Figure 2. Deep Argo Float (a SOLO model from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography) being deployed from the R/V Tangaroa in the deep Southwest Pacific Basin in June 2014. Photo: LEARNZ  www.learnz.org.nz part of CORE Education www.core‐ed.org

References

1. S.G. Purkey, G.C. Johnson, and D.P. Chambers, "Relative contributions of ocean mass and deep steric changes to sea level rise between 1993 and 2013", Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, vol. 119, pp. 7509-7522, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2014JC010180

2. I. Joughin, B.E. Smith, and B. Medley, "Marine Ice Sheet Collapse Potentially Under Way for the Thwaites Glacier Basin, West Antarctica", Science, vol. 344, pp. 735-738, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1249055

3. W. Llovel, J.K. Willis, F.W. Landerer, and I. Fukumori, "Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade", Nature Climate change, vol. 4, pp. 1031-1035, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2387

4. K.E. Trenberth, J.T. Fasullo, and M.A. Balmaseda, "Earth’s Energy Imbalance", Journal of Climate, vol. 27, pp.
3129-3144, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00294.1

5. D.P. Chambers, and J.K. Willis, "Analysis of large-scale ocean bottom pressure variability in the North Pacific", J. Geophys. Res., vol. 113, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JC004930

6. J. Bamber, and R. Riva, "The sea level fingerprint of recent ice mass fluxes", The Cryosphere, vol. 4, pp. 621-627, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-621-2010

Article with all links to papers and studies: (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)  http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/01/diagnosing-causes-of-sea-level-rise/#sthash.Vqc9Qfvx.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 15, 2015, 06:58:50 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz_XfjvMpmA&feature=player_embedded
UNNATURAL SELECTION by TPTB (DEMOCRACY, MY ASS!) WILL subtract human DNA from the biosphere gene pool (along with thousands of other species  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png)). Just like natural selection, the process WILL NOT produce MORE complex life forms; it will SUBTRACT from biosphere diversity and complexity. Only the extremely hardy, and simple, extremophiles will survive.

Have a nice day.  8)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080814212951.png)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080814213050.png)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 17, 2015, 09:04:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxABO84gol8&feature=player_embedded
The Methane Monster is Real.  :(
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 23, 2015, 12:08:48 am
(http://www.realclimate.org/images/hiatus.png)

Thoughts on 2014 and ongoing temperature trends   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

Filed under: Climate Science El Nino Instrumental Record Reporting on climate — gavin @ 22 January 2015

Full peer reviewed article with eye opening graphics:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/01/thoughts-on-2014-and-ongoing-temperature-trends/#sthash.SsfON4ei.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on January 30, 2015, 02:28:59 pm
Fossil Fuelers Cashing in on (http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)  INSTEAD OF PAYING FOR (AGAIN  :P) Global Warming! Happy days are here again for MKing's pals! (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil12.gif)

Brazil’s Drought Brings Water Supply to Near Zero Capacity at Hydroelectric Facilities

 Gregory B. Poindexter 
 January 29, 2015

BRASILIA, Brazil Brazil is experiencing a debilitating drought as the nation endures the driest period since South America’s most populous country began keeping records in the 1930s. As a result of the arid conditions, reservoir levels and lake water flow to hydroelectric facilities that supply power to Brazil’s most densely populated city of Sao Paulo are nearing zero capacity.

According to the federal government, hydroelectric power facilities in the country’s southeastern region that supply power to close to 20 million people in the metropolitan region of Sao Paulo (MRSP) are being deactivated. A list of the deactivated facilities is not immediately available, but Brazil normally receives about 70% of its electricity from hydroelectric plants, according to energy officials.

The Billings Reservoir, in MRSP, supplies the 889-MW Henry Borden hydroelectric facility as part of the Cantareira water system. Local media outlets report Billings Reservoir is nearly dry.

Greater Sao Paulo, according to the World Bank, is the most important industrial producer of the country. Sao Paulo City, the world's ninth-largest city according to available 2012 census data, is located on the southeastern end of the Alto-Tiete River Basin. The city relies heavily on the Cantareia water system for hydroelectric energy to power industry, sanitation and drinking water.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300115140015.jpeg)

Cantareia water system is formed by six reservoirs in five basins located in the Serra da Cantareira to the north of Greater Sao Pauloin the states of Sao Paulo and Minas Gerais. The system covers twelve municipalities, as well as the Guaru water treatment plant.

According to information from the state owned water utility, Companhia de Agua e Esgoto do estado de Sao Paulo (SABESP), the four-lake Cantareira water system is the largest of six reservoir systems that provide water to some 10 million of the 20 million people living in MRSP.

The six-reservoir system is linked by 48 km of tunnels and canals that provide flow for hydroelectric power and drinking water to MRSP and combined, the system is at or below 3% of its of its 264 billion gallon capacity.

SABESP is the largest water and sanitation company in South America. In the Alto-Tiete basin, the company provides urban water supply and sanitation services to São Paulo City and most municipalities of the basin, operating 195 water treatment plants and 350 wastewater treatment plants.

Because of the extreme water shortage brought on by the drought, SABESP has been forced to pump dead water -- water from reserves below the intake pipes of several reservoirs -- to use as drinking water.  :P

For the Alto-Tiete system, water level stands at 10.5% against the 46.9% observed a year ago. Water reserves have plunged dramatically in the past 12 months, causing capacity in several reservoirs to reach all-time lows: Guarapiranga, from 77.3% to 46.9%; Alto Cotia saw the greatest decline, going from 86.3% to 32.8%; Rio Grande went from 93.7% to 74.3%; and Rio Claro diminished from 90.8% to 54.3%, according to the latest SABESP estimates.

On Jan. 19, Brazil’s national grid operator, Operador Nacional do Sistema Eletrico (ONS), cut power to several major Brazilian cities, including Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

The drought is also having an impact on energy supplies. Officials said with reduced generation from hydroelectric dams, demand for electricity generated from fossil fuel-fired plants will continue to peak  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) as people turn up the air conditioning through the hot summer.

Original article posted at http://www.hydroworld.com/articles/2015/01/brazil-s-drought-brings-water-supply-to-near-zero-capacity-at-hydroelectric-facilities.html.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/01/brazils-drought-brings-water-supply-to-near-zero-capacity-at-hydroelectric-facilities#comment-139565
 
Comments:

 A. G. Gelbert   
 January 30, 2015 

Brazil needs mega amounts of PV. They have super quality sun in that latitude. they can get about 10 to 20% more efficiency from PV down there than we can up here. The hydroelectric problem s a wakeup call. I hope they do the right thing.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/01/brazils-drought-brings-water-supply-to-near-zero-capacity-at-hydroelectric-facilities

Agelbert NOTE: Expect the fine fossil fuel profit over planet folks who CONNED Brazilians into believing energy was "Cheap" and having gobs of air conditioners running was a great idea to claim, "No one is putting a gun to the head of Brazilians to turn on their air conditioners... (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/bc3.gif)".    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif)

Ah yes, those Fossil fuelers are just our loyal servants doing what we have "forced" them to do.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/tissue.gif)(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/shame.gif)
 
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 04, 2015, 10:02:24 pm
Now for the news from Bangladesh: "Anybody that can't swim, HANG ON TO THE CHANDELERS!"  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040215213035.gif)


2/04/2015 04:49 PM     
Threatened By Rising Water, Bangladesh Turns to Floating Schools & Farms

SustainableBusiness.com News

When we wrote about the surge of small solar in Bangladesh last May, we were astounded that 2667 solar systems were being added every day.

 Since then, the numbers have grown to 50,000-60,000 a day, bringing the government's goal into reach - a solar nation by 2021, where every household has solar.

 Solar has now reached 3.5 million homes - 10% of the population - up from 1 million in 2012, according to government's Infrastructure Development Company, which runs the program with funding from the World Bank and other development partners.

 In addition to low cost financing for small, home solar systems, the government has plans for 50 mini-solar grids across the country by 2017, part of its plan to replace all diesel-powered irrigation pumps with solar in five years. Five large solar farms are also in the works, adding 143 megawatts of capacity.

And that's not the only way Bangladesh is stepping up to meet its challenges. 

Floating Schools & Farms

Bangladesh - a country of waterways - is one of the most threatened by rising sea levels. About a third of the country is covered by water during monsoon time, but with climate change, water can soak two-thirds of the country.

 An amazing nonprofit, Shidhulai Swanirvar Sangstha, has developed solutions that can be used in many parts of the world.

 When there's too much rain, students take classes aboard solar-powered boats, often for four months a year. There are now 22 floating schools, five floating health clinics and 10 libraries. A new two-tiered school has classrooms on the lower level and a playground on top.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040215211653.jpeg)
Bangladesh floating school

And in the watery world that's taking over, they are even helping people create floating farms. The nonprofit provides training, seeds, feed and the entire structure for farms that include ducks, fish and even a vegetable garden.

 The structure, will is moored to shore, is large enough for 5-10 people who can earn about $1700 a year selling eggs, fish and vegetables. So far, there are 40 floating farms, with plans for 400 in the next few years.

Made from a simple bamboo platform, floating farms are 56 feet long and 16 feet wide, and float on empty oil drums or plastic containers, moored to the shore.

These adaptations are crucial, because the only alternative to flooded farms is for people to move into overcrowded cities. Bangladesh is one of the most densely populated countries with 156 million people living in an area the size of Iowa.

 Learn more about Shidhulai Swanirvar Sangstha:

 
Website: www.shidhulai.org/ (http://www.shidhulai.org/)

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26137 (http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26137)
Title: Landslides 101
Post by: AGelbert on February 05, 2015, 07:49:58 pm
Landslides 101 

They can happen suddenly, ripping homes from their foundations, turning roads into rubble, and killing almost everything in its path. The powerful force of a landslide leaves only destruction in its wake.
(http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/4550894413_010f3bbdbc_z-1.jpg)
Landslide cuts off No.3 freeway in Taiwan

Landslide is term used to describe the movement of rock, debris and soil down a slope. Gravity is the primary cause of landslides. But other factors contribute to landslide danger by weakening slopes to the point of failure:

Erosion of rock and soil by rivers, glaciers, or ocean waves

Saturation of rock and soil slopes by snowmelt or heavy rains

Movement caused by earthquakes, especially those with magnitude 4.0 and greater

Volcanic eruptions producing loose ash deposits, heavy rain, and debris flows

Deforestation and construction in fragile areas.

Excess weight from accumulated rain or snow, or from man-made structures

(http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/14940813327_c32c422127_z.jpg)
Coastal Landslides

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, landslides are a serious geologic hazard common in almost every U.S. state. It is estimated that in the U.S., landslides cause in excess of $1 billion in damages and about 25 to 50 deaths each year.

Globally, landslides destroy far more, causing hundreds of billions in damages and hundreds of thousands of deaths and injuries each year.

(http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/4008601585_816b479ec8_z.jpg)
Washington State Dept of Transportation
SR 410 Nile Valley Landslide (west of Naches)
Aerial view of west end of the landslide burying the highway and damming the Naches River.


Know These Landslide Warning Signs

Springs, seeps, or saturated ground in areas that have not typically been wet before.

New cracks or unusual bulges
in the ground, street pavements or sidewalks.

Soil moving away from foundations.

Ancillary structures such as decks and patios tilting and/or moving relative to the main house or tilting or cracking of concrete floors and foundations.

Broken water lines and other underground utilities.

Leaning telephone poles, trees, retaining walls or fences.

Sunken or down-dropped road beds.

Rapid increase in creek water levels, possibly accompanied by increased turbidity (soil content). Or a sudden decrease in creek water levels though rain is still falling or just recently stopped.

A faint rumbling sound that increases in volume  :o is noticeable as the landslide nears.

Unusual sounds, such as trees cracking or boulders knocking together, might indicate land movement.

(http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/4035339506_ff8ea947d0_z.jpg)
Washington State Dept of Transportation
SR 410 Nile Valley Landslide - Oct. 2009
Aerial view of the Nile Valley slide


What To Do During a Landslide

(http://www.balicarrent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/DontPanic.jpg)

Stay alert and awake. Many debris-flow fatalities occur when people are sleeping! Stay tuned to weather news and heed alerts.

If you are in areas susceptible to landslides and debris flows, consider leaving if it is safe to do so. Remember that driving during an intense storm can be hazardous. If you remain at home, move to a second story if possible.

Staying out of the path of a landslide or debris flow saves lives.  ::)

Listen for any unusual sounds that might indicate moving debris, such as trees cracking or boulders knocking together. A trickle of flowing or falling mud or debris may precede larger landslides.

If you are near a stream or channel, be alert for any sudden increase or decrease in water flow and for a change from clear to muddy water. Such changes may indicate landslide activity upstream, so be prepared to move quickly. Don’t delay!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif) Save yourself, not your belongings.

Be especially alert when driving
. Bridges may be washed out, and culverts overtopped. Do not cross flooding streams! Turn Around, Don’t Drown!

Embankments along roadsides are particularly susceptible to landslides. Watch the road for collapsed pavement, mud, fallen rocks, and other indications of possible debris flows.

(http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/13715203823_165cd8ec5b_z.jpg)
2104 Washington Landslide
A photo from an aerial survey showing the upper parts of the landslide that occurred in northwest Washington state, near Oso, on March 22, 2014. USGS landslide specialists, in collaboration with seismologists and state agencies, are still working to interpret the complex sequence of events that led to the landslide.
To get a perspective on the size of the landslide, look toward the bottom-left of this photo and you'll see, what appears to be, a tiny house just inside the tree line.
You can read the latest updates on the science and how the USGS is contributing to the understanding of this event at on.doi.gov/OsoLandslide.
Credit: Jonathan Godt, USGS.


What To Do After a Landslide (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-052.gif)(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-020.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-032.gif)  ;D 
(http://i1.cpcache.com/product_zoom/1186560297/cheated_death_again_ornament.jpg?height=250&width=250&padToSquare=true)

Stay away from the slide area. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif) There may be danger of additional slides.

Listen to local radio or television stations for the latest emergency information.

Watch for flooding, which may occur after a landslide or debris flow. Floods sometimes follow landslides and debris flows because they may both be started by the same event.

Check for injured and trapped persons near the slide, without entering the direct slide area (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif). Direct rescuers to their locations.

Help a neighbor who may require special assistance – infants, elderly people, and people with disabilities. Elderly people and people with disabilities may require additional assistance. People who care for them or who have large families may need additional assistance in emergency situations.

Look for and report broken utility lines and damaged roadways and railways to appropriate authorities. Reporting potential hazards will get the utilities turned off as quickly as possible, preventing further hazard and injury. Agelbert NOTE: Remember that ruptured gas pipelines have a strong tendency to do this:  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-034.gif) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

Check the building foundation
, chimney, and surrounding land for damage. Damage to foundations, chimneys, or surrounding land may help you assess the safety of the area.

Replant damaged ground as soon as possible since erosion caused by loss of ground cover can lead to flash flooding and additional landslides in the near future.

Seek advice from a geotechnical expert for evaluating landslide hazards or designing corrective techniques to reduce landslide risk. A professional will be able to advise you of the best ways to prevent or reduce landslide risk, without creating further hazard.

Be Prepared! Know Before™.
The WeatherBug – Earth Networks Team

http://knowbefore.weatherbug.com/2014/12/09/landslides-101/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 17, 2015, 01:38:52 pm
A new sea level curve

Filed under: Climate Science
 Instrumental Record
 Oceans
 — stefan @ 14 January 2015


The “zoo” of global sea level curves calculated from tide gauge data has grown – tomorrow a new reconstruction of our US colleagues around Carling Hay from Harvard University will appear in Nature (Hay et al. 2015). That is a good opportunity for an overview over the available data curves. The differences are really in the details, the “big picture” of sea-level rise does not change. In all curves, the current rates of rise are the highest since records began.

The following graph shows the new sea level curve as compared to six known ones.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//haysl13.jpg)

Fig 1 Sea level curves calculated by different research groups with various methods. The curves show the sea level relative to the satellite era (since 1992). Graph: Klaus Bittermann.


All curves show the well-known modern sea level rise, but the exact extent and time evolution of the rise differ somewhat. Up to about 1970, the new reconstruction of Hay et al. runs at the top of the existing uncertainty range. For the period from 1880 AD, however, it shows the same total increase as the current favorites by Church & White. Starting from 1900 AD it is about 25 mm less. This difference is at the margins of significance: the uncertainty ranges overlap.

It is also interesting to compare the rates of sea-level rise.


(http://www.realclimate.org/images//haysl21.jpg)

Fig 2 Rates of sea-level rise calculated from the curves in Fig. 1. To calculate the rate of increase, sea level curves were first smoothed with a filter of half-width 15 years and then differentiated. Graph: Klaus Bittermann.


The graph shows that the rates vary over time and also differ between the curves. All reconstructions agree on one point: the rate of rise in the last two decades (about 3 cm per decade) is the highest on record. Hay et al. find that the acceleration of sea-level rise since 1900 AD is larger than in previous reconstructions, but it has been generally questioned whether the quadratic acceleration (derived from a parabolic fit) is a useful number in cases where a parabola doesn’t fit the data well (Rahmstorf and Vermeer 2011, Foster and Brown 2014). Taking a step back, in my view the “big picture” on acceleration is that we have moved from a stable preindustrial sea level to one now rising at 3 mm/year (see Fig. 1 here). The differences between the quadratic acceleration numbers come from differences in the decadal to multidecadal variability in the curves which I don’t consider very robust (we have shown in Rahmstorf et al. 2012 how strongly these can be affected by a small amount of “noise” in the sea-level data).

Why are there at all different reconstructions of the global sea level history? The reason lies in the challenge to calculate global sea level as accurately as possible from a suboptimal data base. Different research groups have developed different approaches for this.

The data problem looks like this:
•Tide gauge measurements are not available in sufficient number (especially in earlier times) and not distributed evenly over the oceans: the Northern Hemisphere, for example, is strongly over-represented and tide gauge stations are located along the coasts.
•Many of the time series have data gaps.
•Tide gauges (unlike satellites) measure sea level relative to the land, so these data are ‘contaminated’ by land uplift or subsidence.

A particular challenge is posed by the positioning of the gauges along the coasts, because coastal sea level can be affected by local effects such as the wind piling up water against the shore. Variability in the prevailing winds (which can extend over decades, England et al. 2014) will therefore lead to variability in the water level along the coasts – but of course we know that the wind cannot change global sea level at all as it merely redistributes the water. Nevertheless such variability induced by winds or currents may give a false impression of global sea level fluctuations in analyses of tide gauge data.

The new reconstruction of Hay et al. is an important addition to the body of sea-level work, coming from top experts. But is it better than previous ones? Which of the curves shown is “the best” is not easy to assess. No one knows the exact true sea-level evolution – so we have to consider what methodology is likely to be the most appropriate to cope with the challenges mentioned. I hope that the authors and other experts might stop by here at Realclimate for a discussion of the advantages and drawbacks of the different methods.

The until now widely favored method of reconstruction is that of Church & White (2006 and updated 2011). It uses the satellite data of sea level to determine the typical variability patterns of the sea surface and thus to establish the link between the locally measured tide gauge values and the global sea level. The big advantage is that one does not need questionable assumptions to extrapolate from the measurements on the coasts into the open ocean, but that empirical data on the actual relationship are used. The disadvantage is that unfortunately the satellite data exist only for about twenty years. This method thus relies on the relationship between sea level on the coast and in the rest of the ocean having remained essentially unchanged.

The new reconstruction of Hay et al. uses statistical methods for dealing with incomplete data which have already proven their worth in other applications. In addition, it also uses knowledge about the physics of sea level rise: it determines the components of the global sea-level rise (e.g. the contribution from ice melt in Greenland and Antarctica) taking into account the knowledge about the spatial pattern, the so-called ‘fingerprint’ associated with each of these components. On the other hand, it does not explicitly take into account the specific patterns of natural variability caused by winds or currents that can masquerade as a false global signal (as described above).

Hay et al perform a test in which they take their reconstruction as “truth” and see how well the method of Church & White performs in reproducing it. They find it to be biased high, although the obtained sea level trend in this case is lower than in the real Church & White reconstruction and fully encompasses the hypothetical “true” range. Although this is an important test, it is thus not entirely conclusive, also considering that it was performed just on one particular sea level pattern (that reconstructed by Hay et al.) so it would be premature to conclude that the method is biased high in general.

To sum up, in my view the strength of the method of Hay et al. is that it uses the expected “fingerprints” of the global warming signal, while the strength of Church & White is to take into account the empirical patterns of natural variability. Ideal would of course be a combination of both, and this could be the next step for further research. Ultimately, it is not clear down to what level of accuracy we will ever know the sea level evolution over the past hundred years or so. But for practical purposes, I don’t think it matters whether the rise from 1900 AD has been 3 centimetres more or less. I do not think this changes our outlook for future sea-level rise in any significant way.

 http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/01/a-new-sea-level-curve/#sthash.9rWYeLNv.dpuf

Agelbert NOTE:
But you can count on the fossil fuelers concluding with much fanfare, puffery and whining   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/165fs373950.gif), as usual, that any and all methods "bias high".   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/bc3.gif)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-291014182422.png)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 18, 2015, 12:15:35 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTsjOH_HJYc&feature=player_embedded
Must see NASA image studio video! Absolutely mesmerizing!
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 23, 2015, 08:36:27 pm
Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:34 PM EST.

Mother Earth weeps as Arctic Circle ice cap slides into the sea.

by Pakalolo.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-230215203210.jpeg)
 
Image credit:Jason Roberts, BBC-**** surface: The largest ice cap in the Eurasian Arctic - Austfonna in Svalbard -

The Austfonna ice cap is located in northeastern Svalbard within the arctic circle north of Scandinavia. "Roughly  28% of the ice cap bed lies below sea level and over 200 km of its southern and eastern margin terminates in the ocean [Dowdeswell, 1986; Dowdeswell et al., 2008], with parts resting on a retrograde slope."

Like most glaciers that terminate at the sea, warm water from the Atlantic is making its way north to the Arctic ocean (including Berants sea) where the warmth helps to melt the underside of the glacier which in turn causes thinning resulting in rapid retreat. This process is also exacerbated by melt water and bedrock warming.  This is changing the flow dynamics of the glacier.

The Earth Story describes the dynamic change as follows:

This glacier appears to have come ungrounded,
flowing out to sea at a rapid pace and draining ice from the ice cap in the process. The ice cap is now thinning by an average of 25 meters per year.

The waters of the Arctic Ocean have warmed at a rapid pace relative to the rest of the world over recent years, and 2012 in particular was a year of exceptional melting and warmth in the arctic due to some extreme storms. The sudden movement in this glacier suggests that this pulse of heat has helped destabilize glaciers in the surrounding territory and it is happening at an exceptionally rapid pace.
The technical study concludes:

To date, the observed dynamical imbalance has propagated 50 km inland to within 8 km of the ice cap summit, producing widespread ice loss to the ocean. Currently, the glacier terminus rests on a broadly undulating bed; however, farther inland the bed deepens, providing the potential for future instability if further ungrounding occurs [Schoof, 2007]. The imbalance could have been triggered by a number of processes, including an internally generated surge, increased meltwater availability at the bed [Dunse et al., 2014], or enhanced ocean- or atmosphere-driven melting at the terminus; indeed, a combination of factors may have contributed [Nick et al., 2009; Jenkins, 2011].

Across Austfonna, however, there is a coherent pattern of ice margin thinning at all marine-based sectors, which is not apparent at land-terminating basins (Figure 1). This may suggest either a common ocean forcing or the influence of bed conditions specific to marine settings. Additional evidence of anomalously warm waters offshore [Polyakov et al., 2005, 2013] and insignificantly increased atmospheric melting in recent years leads us to favor the former mechanism, rather than one linked to increased melt water delivery to the bed, although a definitive link would require dynamical modeling and measurements at the calving front.

Until then, it is unclear whether the moderate rates of thinning of other marine ice sectors are a prelude to similar widespread mass loss in these areas, or whether the large dynamical imbalance at basin 3 will be sustained over time. Nonetheless, the behavior recorded here demonstrates that slow-flowing ice caps can enter states of significant imbalance over very short timescales and highlights their capacity for increased ice loss in the future.

This video is from Chasing Ice where Adam LeWinter and Director Jeff Orlowski filmed a historic breakup at the Ilulissat Glacier in Western Greenland. Though not Austfonna, we get the idea of what is happening to our glaciers worldwide. 
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif)               (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2953.gif)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC3VTgIPoGU&feature=player_embedded

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/19/1365572/-Mother-Earth-weeps-as-Arctic-Circle-Ice-Cap-slides-into-the-Sea   
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 23, 2015, 08:56:02 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKQW-kQxcm8&feature=player_embedded
Global Warming Impacts EVERYONE!  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 24, 2015, 02:56:20 pm
(http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/Site/graphics/graphics/xdate.gif)
  teph·ra Geology noun: tephra; plural noun: tephras rock fragments and particles ejected by a volcanic eruption.   
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-69CRuGW-xTI/Tb0hRMkaTeI/AAAAAAAACHs/vvKq_h6jAqM/s1600/dendrochronology-2.gif)

The mystery of the offset chronologies: Tree rings and the volcanic record of the 1st millennium
Filed under: Aerosols,  Climate Science,  Paleoclimate
Guest commentary by Jonny McAneney
Volcanism can have an important impact on climate. When a large volcano erupts it can inject vast amounts of dust and sulphur compounds into the stratosphere, where they alter the radiation balance. While the suspended dust can temporarily block sunlight, the dominant effect in volcanic forcing is the sulphur, which combines with water to form sulphuric acid droplets. These stratospheric aerosols dramatically change the reflectivity, and absorption profile of the upper atmosphere, causing the stratosphere to heat, and the surface to cool; resulting in climatic changes on hemispheric and global scales.
Interrogating tree rings and ice cores
Annually-resolved ice core and tree-ring chronologies provide opportunities for understanding past volcanic forcing and the consequent climatic effects and impacts on human populations. It is common knowledge that you can tell the age of a tree by counting its rings, but it is also interesting to note that the size and physiology of each ring provides information on growing conditions when the ring formed. By constructing long tree ring chronologies, using suitable species of trees, it is possible to reconstruct a precisely-dated annual record of climatic conditions.
Ice cores can provide a similar annual record of the chemical and isotopic composition of the atmosphere, in particular volcanic markers such as layers of volcanic acid and tephra. However, ice cores can suffer from ambiguous layers that introduce errors into the dating of these layers of volcanic acid. To short-circuit this, attempts have been made to identify know historical eruptions within the ice records, such as Öraefajökull (1362) and Vesuvius (AD 79). This can become difficult since the ice chronologies can only be checked by finding and definitively identifying tephra (volcanic glass shards) that can be attributed to these key eruptions; sulphate peaks in the ice are not volcano specific.
Thus, it is fundamentally important to have chronological agreement between historical, tree-ring and ice core chronologies: The ice cores record the magnitude and frequency of volcanic eruptions, with the trees recording the climatic response, and historical records evidencing human responses to these events.
But they don’t quite line up…

The importance of frost rings
An additional piece of evidence is the existence and dating of “frost ring” phenomena observed in bristlecone pines growing at high altitude in Western North America. These rings form when temperatures drop well below freezing for extended periods during the tree’s growing season, and are evidenced by physical scarring of that year’s growth ring that can be caused by volcanically induced climate dislocation – an idea first suggested by LaMarche and Hirschboeck in 1984.
 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240215142115.jpeg)
figure 1: Dates of large historical eruptions (Siebert et al., 2011) within the last 600 years that likely caused significant Northern Hemisphere negative temperature anomalies as noted and ranked by Briffa et al. (1998). Bristlecone pine frost rings as recorded by LaMarche and Hirschboeck (1984)(†) and Salzer and Hughes (2007)(‡), are also listed, as are the start years of large ice acid signals (deposition SO42- in units of Kg/km2 are given in parentheses) observed in the NEEM S1 and WDC06A ice cores Sigl et al. (2013). Space analysis between successive phenomena (highlighted in bold) shows high consistency, and that large volcanoes can induce frost damage in bristlecone pines.
If we take some notable volcanoes in the past 600 years (Figure 1), we can confirm that frost rings in bristlecone pines are good indicators of large explosive volcanic eruptions, similar to the known coincidence of hemispheric cooling evidenced in growth rings of European trees in the years around historically dated eruptions. For this period, dates for large volcanic acid signals in ice cores are consistent with both historical and tree ring observations. However, this consistent linkage breaks down in the 1st millennium when frost ring dates and ice core acidity dates are compared. So if frost rings are indicative of large explosive volcanism in recent centuries, is it that the ice cores may be misdated in the 1st millennium? This is the question we explore in a recent paper (Baillie and McAneney, 2015).
Re-dating the ice cores?
  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240215142215.jpeg)
figure 2: Temperature sensitive Swedish pine chronology showing synchronisms with bristlecone pine frost rings (Baillie, 2010). Ice acid dates (o) original (Clausen et al. 1997); (m) moved 2.5 years (Larsen et al. 2008); (B) moved 7 years (Baillie 2008).

In 2008 and 2010, Baillie used bristlecone pine frost rings as well as temperature sensitive Swedish pine tree ring chronologies to propose that the dating of the Greenland ice cores was too old by approximately 7 years in the period before the 7th century AD, see Figure (2). In our current paper, we reinforce this proposed re-dating by looking at ice core data published since 2010, from both Greenland (NEEM S1 (Sigl et al., 2013)) and Antarctica (WDC06A (Sigl et al., 2013), Law Dome (Plummer et al., 2012)) as well as the Antarctic DML core (Traufetter et al., 2004). We consider the space intervals between frost rings, and compare them to space intervals between ice acid layers in each core during the 6th and 7th centuries, noting that there is a similarity in the event intervals. The similar space intervals in each data set would appear to suggest that trees and ice cores are recording the same volcanic events, but that the ice cores are offset from tree rings. (See tables 1-3 in our paper for more details). All cores except DML appear to be too old with respect to tree-ring dates, with the latter being slightly too young.
Why should we listen to the trees?
At this point one might quite rightly stop and ask whether it is realistic that a large set of independently replicated ice cores could be misdated? Might the problem instead lie with the dendrochronology? Fortunately, dendrochronological replication is often provided by comparing chronologies produced by independent workers in independent laboratories. In this respect, it is extremely unlikely that any of the tree ring data used in this exercise is incorrectly dated. Though see this post  (at article link) discussing this exact issue – Ed.

  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240215142255.jpeg)
figure 3: Historical dust veil events as noted by Stothers and Rampino (1983) in the period from 100 BC to AD 700, compared with bristlecone pine frost rings as recorded by LaMarche and Hirschboeck (1984)(†) and Salzer and Hughes (2007)(‡) and observation of ice acid in the GICC05 (Vinther et al. 2006) and NEEM S1 timescales (Sigl et al., 2013). Space analysis demonstrates that while there is a high consistency between phenomena spacing (highlighted in bold), ice core dates are offset by approximately 7 years.

One could also re-examine the hypothesis that frost rings are useful volcanic markers. In fact, it is possible to have some frost rings without any evidence of explosive volcanism, presumably occurring due to extremes in local weather, but, as shown above, they do seem to record large volcanic eruptions in recent times very well indeed. Why would that change in the 1st millennium? Furthermore, when a space analysis is performed between historically-dated severe dust veils between the 1st century BC and the 7th century AD, these compare well with frost rings, but again volcanic horizons in Greenland ice appear to be too old by 7-years (see Figure 3). Accepting, of course, that historical documentation is correct, the dated bristlecone pine frost rings agree perfectly as a response to the volcanically induced climatic events. We conclude then that these early ice core chronologies are at odds with both history and dendrochronology.
Implications
The implications of an ice core misdating are important. Global tree rings show that there was a major climatic event beginning in AD 536 lasting to at least AD 545, which may have been a catalyst for the Justinian plague in the 540s [This was discussed in a previous post in 2008 – Ed.]. Tree-rings suggest that this was a two stage event, with an initial abrupt reduction of tree growth at AD 536, a recovery over the next couple of years, followed by another abrupt reduction in tree growth following AD 540. This agrees extremely well with the frost rings at AD 536 and AD 541, and with the widely documented prolonged dust veil in Europe of AD 536. Current ice core chronologies conversely suggest that there was only one massive volcano in AD 536 which was responsible for the decade long climatic event (Larsen et al. 2008). They showed large volcanic signals in the ice at AD 529 and AD 533.5 and proposed that the latter related to AD 536 (see Figure 4). With the proposed re-dating of the ice cores, it now appears that the two massive volcanoes occurred in AD 536 and 540.5, which fits better with a two-stage event.
 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240215142346.jpeg)
figure 4: Greenland ice cores suggesting two large eruptions in AD 529 +/- 2 and AD 533.5 +/- 2. Moving these acid dates by approximately 7 years would explain the two stage environmental event recorded in trees in AD 536 and AD 540 (Larsen et al., 2008).

The suggested ice dating offset would have other implications. It would imply that the identification of Vesuvius tephra in Greenland ice dating to AD 79 (Barbante et al, 2013) is in error, and it would also bring to prominence a major eruption in 44 BC, the year of Caesar’s death; the acidity associated with this eruption currently having an ice-acid date around 50 BC.
  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240215142427.jpeg)
figure 5: Swedish pine temperature reconstruction showing sudden cooling at AD 800, which may be volcanically induced. The nearest acid layer in NEEM is dated to AD 793 (Grudd, 2010).

With the proposed dating revision, it is possible to tease out other potential candidates for unrecognised historical eruptions. Writing around AD 810-15 the chronicler Theophanes the Confessor records that after the capture and blinding of Byzantine emperor Constantine VI in August AD 797:
“The sun was darkened for seventeen days and did not emit its rays so that ships
lost course and drifted about. Everyone acknowledged that the sun withheld its rays
because the emperor had been blinded”
(Mango and Scott, 1997).
Such an event is suggestive of a volcanic dust veil or ash cloud observed from Constantinople, possibly from a Mediterranean eruption. The nearest acid signal in the NEEM S1 ice core occurs at 793.0 (Sigl et al., 2013), and is the only acid within +/-14 years of AD 797. Note that we are told Constantine’s blinding occurred after August 797, but we cannot know how long after. It is conceivable that the obscuration event could have been as much as a few years after the Constantine’s capture and blinding, but that the two events were associated as direct cause and effect by the popular psyche at the time, and recorded as such. It is thus tempting to link this event with the sudden cooling observed in Swedish pine that occurred in AD 800 (see Figure 5).
Another consequence might be that the current ice dating of the Icelandic Eldgjá eruption may need to be moved from around AD 933 to around AD 939/940. Sun et al. (2014) have identified stratigraphical evidence of Changbaishan eruption tephra in NEEM S1 lying 7 annual layers above Eldgjá tephra. Changbaishan can be dated to AD 946 by historical documents of local ash fall and unseasonably cold weather. This implies any ice dating offset occurs above this horizon. How far above is uncertain, though it is likely below the mid 13th century.
Conclusion
Tree rings cannot prove that ice cores are misdated; but the offset identified here should prompt a re-examination of the ice core chronology. If the dating revision proposed here is correct, it would rewrite the volcanic history of the 1st millennium. In particular, it would definitively show that the mid-6th century was not dominated by a single massive volcanic event in AD 536, but was also influenced by an important eruption in AD 540-541 – an event currently missing from all ice core and historical literature. The mystery deepens…
Article and Scientic References: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/the-mystery-of-the-offset-chronologies-tree-rings-and-the-volcanic-record-of-the-1st-millennium/#sthash.vNTXTbxa.dpuf

A.G. Gelbert comment:

I think the evidence for erroneous ice core dating is irrefutable. In fact, a rate of dating error inducement may be a function of hydraulic forces with increased age. That is, the older the ice core date, the greater the error. If a formula could be computed by a scrupulous comparison of dendrochronology data and historical human culture written and oral eye witness accounts of eruptions and cooling events, this would clear up the dating discrepancies, including the issue of diseased flora false signals.

Although ice core dating specialists may claim, with vigor, that they already factor in hydraulic forces, the new data suggests they are in error. 

I realize only historical eruptions have are being considered here, but would not pre-historic eruptions, as observed in ice cores and dendrochronology, help eliminate the ice core errors?

We have access to dendrochronology back to at least 6000 years. About 7,000 ago, the eruption of Mount Mazama—now Crater Lake—in southern Oregon was would have been spectacular to any one viewing it and would certainly have affected the tree rings within thousands of miles.

Also, the Mount Gambier volcano eruption 5,000 years ago in Australia would provide dating synchronization data.
http://monash.edu/news/show/new-clues-to-prehistoric-eruption

To the ice core specialists claiming their dating is accurate: Science is not about prideful turf protection. You made and honest mistake. Now correct it.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 25, 2015, 01:45:06 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)
Huge New Methane Blowholes in Siberia Have Scientists Worried Climate Change Is to Blame
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)


Anastasia Pantsios | February 25, 2015 10:20 am

The large methane-filled blowholes that were discovered in Siberia last summer seem to be more numerous than originally thought, with four giant new craters, along with clusters of smaller ones, found in the permafrost in northern Russia. The new holes were discovered in the same general vicinity as the original three, on the Yamal Peninsula.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/CraterMap.jpg)
This map shows the locations of some of the craters scientists are discovering in Siberia. Image credit: Vasily Bogoyavlensky

“We know now of seven craters in the Arctic area,” professor Vasily Bogoyavlensky of the Moscow-based Oil and Gas Research Institutes and the Russian Academy of Sciences told the Siberian Times. “Five are directly on the Yamal peninsula, one in Yamal Autonomous district, and one is on the north of the Krasnoyarsk region, near the Taimyr peninsula. We have exact locations for only four of them. The other three were spotted by reindeer herders. But I am sure that there are more craters on Yamal, we just need to search for them. I would compare this with mushrooms: when you find one mushroom, be sure there are few more around. I suppose there could be 20 to 30 craters more.”


(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Crater.jpg)
One of the first blowholes was discovered by helicopter. Image credit: Marya Zulinova, Yamal government press service

The cause of the blowholes is not entirely clear, although probable explanations have been coming into focus as Russian scientists have continued to study them. The most prominent theory is that exceptionally warm temperatures caused by climate change have released methane stored in the permafrost, causing a sort of explosion that creates the craters.

Bogoyavlensky says two of the craters have turned into lakes, as examination of satellite images has allowed scientists to learn more about them, their location and how numerous they are. It complements the exploration inside the craters undertaken late last year. Bogoyavlensky has urged further exploration but has warned about the risks involved, saying that leaking methane could cause new explosions at any time.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SatelliteImages.jpg)
Satellite images reveal more craters than previously thought. Photo credit: Vasily Bogoyavlensky

“We know that there can occur a series of gas emissions over an extended period of time, but we do not know exactly when they might happen,” he said. “For example, you all remember the magnificent shots of the Yamal crater in winter, made during the latest expedition in November 2014. But do you know that Vladimir Pushkarev, director of the Russian Centre of Arctic Exploration, was the first man in the world who went down the crater of gas emission? More than this, it was very risky, because no one could guarantee there would not be new emissions.” 

http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/25/new-methane-blowholes-climate-change/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on February 26, 2015, 02:05:02 pm
Berkeley study directly IDs climate change culprit (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-005.gif)
 
By David Perlman
 
Updated 9:43 pm, Wednesday, February 25, 2015


 http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Berkeley-experts-study-strengthens-human-link-6101054.php
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 01, 2015, 05:21:21 pm
3 Connections Between Climate Change and Extreme Weather
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/01/connections-climate-change-extreme-weather/

Agelbert Comment:


There is a LOT more. The deadly elephant in the temperature and weather extremes room is GEO-ENGINEERING.

A fellow in Boston asked my why he was so cold if global warming is going on.

GO said,
Quote

Still waiting for a dissertation on Global Warming, and it better be good, no BS or Charts. My ice blue testicles and over a grand in oil bills so far demand an explanation.

GO,

The extreme cold (and by the way, it's a LOT WORSE where I am in Vermont than where you are (Boston) or where RE (Alaska) is as well!) is a DIRECT consequence of GLOBAL WARMING. (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)

If you will recall, we went through this subject last year around this time when I said 2014 promised to be hotter than hell (never been there but ya get the idea  ;D). You scoffed. 2014 was the hottest year on record.

Based on my track record of accuracy and integrity (see the numerous times I took Snowleopard to task for pushing fossil fueler mendacity and propaganda - something that always seemed to upset you for some reason.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp)), I am going to explain to you what our FOSSIL FUEL OWNED GOVERNMENT is DOING to further fu ck things up with their desperate attempt to put a DR. Strangelove Geo-engineered "heat shield" on the planet.

This is a quote from a recent discussion with Eddie.

QUOTE

February 16, 2015, 01:00:38 PM

 Eddie,

I believe geo engineering is quite advanced even though they (quote from our government "we will own the weather by 2025"  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) ) don't "own" the weather yet. The reflective aluminum particles being sprayed routinely for over a decade now to keep our climate from over heating (see stretching the profits of fossil fuel oligarchs that OWN our government) are having several unexpected results.

1) the temperature extreme ranges have increased in degree span and rapidity of switching from normal to extreme heat or extreme cold is killing wildlife.

2) Vitamin D deficiency is now common in the USA when it was RARE just two decades ago. As a medical professional, you know that Vitamin D deficiency can lead to a plethora of deleterious health issues, including giving you lots of dental problems, never mind the weaker bones in growing children, early osteoporosis in adults and less immune system defense of several types of cancers.



3) Allergic reactions to the new toxins in the air for thousands of different species, including Homo SAPs.




4) There is a lot more
but that has to do with government media and medical profession CORKING of the reporting of, medical recognition of and proper treatment of humans experiencing harmful side effects from this profit preserving scheme for fossil fuelers trying to prevent or/and delay global warming.

Anecdotally, I have something to report that has me absolutely raging mad. The temperature is way too low for normal in Vermont. It's been that way for a couple of weeks. That long of a period with temperatures hovering just above or below zero (even in daylight) is NOT Vermont weather and, except for the little ice age centuries ago, never has been.

Even when it gets real cold, the animals survive BECAUSE the longer sunlight period in late February and early March enables them to warm their nests in the day. But when you **** with the sunlight by putting reflective particles in the air, this VITAL buffer that enables animal life to make it to the spring is gone. This is a DEATH SENTENCE for much of Vermont wildlife that doesn't hibernate.

Today I found an uninjured adult squirrel frozen to death. It was laying on our driveway. It's just another debt the MKing's of this world do not own up to with their profit over planet murderous irresponsibility. (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Bzb-1rVB8pc/UfXxBekcYVI/AAAAAAAAEm4/hXUkGCzFIPg/s1600/giveafuckometer-gif)

F UCKING BASTARDS!

UNQUOTE

GO,

YOU and I are experiencing this SH IT because of people like YOU KNOW WHO. No Vermont town has EVER publicly broadcast over the TV and radio that people MUST leave their faucets RUNNING at pencil width of water. Winooski (just south of Colchester and slightly LESS Norh Pole Fu cking Cold than Colchester) is telling Vermonters to do this in order to avoid huge expenses in road and frozen pipe repairs UNRELATED to the frozen pipes in homes. CLEAN water is being WASTED because of this COLD. People's water bills will not be raised but YOU KNOW we-the-people will end up paying for it somehow! They want us to leave the faucets running THROUGH March!!! Water pipes in homes are bursting from here all the way to ATLANTA, Georgia!

Do you think Mking (a fossil fueler propagandist climate denier) and his pals are willing to foot the bill, or do you think, PERHAPS, that they will, ONCE AGAIN, disingenuously ask, "Uh, what happened to global Warming?".

 You, as a keen listener, do not need a lot of words to figure this out.

The Geo-Engineering Techno-Fix that the governemnt has been orchestrating for about 20 years will go down in history as the most colossal mistake mankind has ever made (see below).

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070115205550.bmp)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 05, 2015, 03:07:55 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)
Phil Rasch is a liar. Every single documented case of cooling caused by volcanic eruption aerosols from 537 A.D. eruption two decade "cooling" to this day HAS BEEN TEMPORARY and HAS NOT slowed down the overall heating trend after Younger Dryas.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)

THAT heating trend has been accelerated far beyond the planet's natural thermostatic control mechanism by the burning of fossil fuels. Phil Rasch knows that. However, he has a job to do  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg) for the fossil fuel government. So science must, ONCE AGAIN, take a back seat to fossil fuel profits.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)


Since a "How to stop the planet's atmosphere from threatening fossil fuel profits  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)" meeting in 1997, that we-the-people WERE NOT TOLD ABOUT, decided that the DOE and the DOD would GeoEngineer a "heat shield" with aerosols  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mocantina.gif), BOTH the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD) have studiously denied that they are actively engaged in this THEFT of taxpayer dollars to MASK Global Warming for the sake of fossil fuel profits.

NASA and NOAA have been gagged to say NOTHING about the FAILURE of aerosols to cool the planet as a whole.   >:(

The deleterious side effects of the sprayed chemicals (like the FACT that just ONE of the chemicals used contributes to DROUGHT) are also taboo subjects in the medical community and the news media.  >:(

ANY pro-aerosol baloney said by Phil Rasch, Chief Scientist for Climate Science at the DOE's Pacific Northwest Lab,  must be viewed in the appropriate context.  ;D

 You KNOW that good old Phil has a nice package of graphics and 24/7 data plot of exactly where the tankers are dumping the aerosols so he can DIRECT more dumping here or less there. This FOSSIL FUEL TOOL is as "objective" about aerosols spraying as Mking.

A word about the propaganda front that attempts to capitalize on "we can stop global warming" baloney.
(https://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1780/632/original.jpg)

WHERE do you think the talk about the "pause" in global warming SINCE THE YEAR 2000 came from. HUH!!!? These bought and paid for greedballs KNEW what they were doing with those aerosols and, true to there mens rea modus operandi, began their propaganda campaign by tracking cherry picked temperatures DIRECTLY related to the aerosol spraying we were NOT being told about. These evil predators are crafty bastards, aren't they?

Too bad for them that volcanic aerosols, although they did create local cooling periods, NEVER DID slow global heating overall BEFORE fossil fuel massive burning began with the industrial revolution pollution.

At present, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that they will actually slow global warming. Please keep that in mind when you read news reports about erupting volcanoes like the following marvel of half truths:


 
03/04/2015 01:42 PM         
Could This Volcanic Eruption Slow Climate Change? (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif)
SustainableBusiness.com News
 
At around 3AM this morning, one of Chile's most active volcanoes began erupting, forcing evacuations of 4000 people.

Villarrica is one of the few permanently active volcanoes in the world, and this latest eruption - the strongest in 20 years - could give humans a hand in slowing climate change.
When volcanoes erupt, they spew sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere (where it turns into aerosols), which gradually make its way around the earth, reflecting heat into space - thus, cooling down our planet for several years until it finally dissipates.

"Yes, this can be the planet's own form of climate engineering," (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)   Phil Rasch (http://www.whydidyouwearthat.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/tumblr_l7j9nik8Wf1qaxxwjo1_5001.jpeg), Chief Scientist for Climate Science at the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest Lab, told Christian Science Monitor.

Indeed, this is one of the more promising forms of human geoengineering that scientists are working on . They would seed clouds with sulfur dioxide, mimicking volcanoes.  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)  (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TzWpwHzCvCI/T_sBEnhCCpI/AAAAAAAAME8/IsLpuU8HYxc/s1600/nooo-way-smiley.gif)

Is this eruption big enough to make a dent in global warming? Scientists don't know yet, they are taking measurements, but blow-outs over the centuries have cooled the earth as much as 0.3 degree C.  *

9000-foot high Villarrica through an ash plume up another few kilometers high, and although the eruption ceased by morning, seismic ratings are still high, which could mean more action.  ::)

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26182

Agelbert NOTE: RIGHT... Notice that neato key word, "action" and key phrases like "mimicking volcanoes" and "volcanoes + sulphur dioxide =  global cooling" fascinating bits of doubletalk. WHY? Because Sulphur dioxide AIN'T ENOUGH  to do the job for starters.

The aerosols they are charging we-the-people to spray (without telling us about it until they can, hopefully, claim it worked stop warming! Then, like Mking, regardless of the externalized costs to fauna and flora, they will claim they were NOT doing it for fossil fuel profits, but for our own good. LOL!) have a plethora of toxic substances (sorry, no sulfur dioxide) that are KNOWN carcinogens and KNOWN drought inducing chemicals and KNOWN endocrine disrupters.  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-015.gif)

These types of articles are designed to do exactly what corporations do with GMOs. They first tell you about how it's "NATURAL" (looky here, volcanoes are natural planet coolers!).

The next step, in a subsequent article published when they want to claim victory, is to tell us they were/are "mimicking NATURE" (by adding a few totally unnatural chemicals made by a chemical corporation at taxpayer expense) FOR OUR OWN GOOD! (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)
Believe this crap at your pocketbook's expense and your peril.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil12.gif)

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)
* This is a HALF TRUTH. The fact is that the temperature TREND continued going UP after a LOCAL pause. They DO NOT have historical access to data on a planetary scale beyond ice cores and dendrochronology. BOTH tree rings and ice cores are LOCAL phenomenon from which scientists have EXTRAPOLATED assumptions about global average temperature conditions.

ONLY at present, with the global temperature monitoring sensors in place, can scientists state unequivocally whether the globe is warming or cooling. And the hard data says it is warming with an accelerating trend, PERIOD.   (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)

Quote
QUOTE No, climate change is not experiencing a hiatus. No, there is not currently a “pause” in global warming. UNQUOTE

Climate Oscillations and the Global Warming Faux Pause Filed under: Climate Science — mike @ 26 February 2015 - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/climate-oscillations-and-the-global-warming-faux-pause/#sthash.r8nREqGU.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 05, 2015, 06:04:33 pm
There are MILLIONS of angry moma bear moms out there raising cain about the aerosol geo-engineering going on  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif). They will be heard. No more pus sy for the Phil Rasches of this world! img]http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif[/img]   ;D

And if that doesn't work, dual orchiectomies can be performed while they sleep! Forget the Orkin man; here comes the Orchi WOMAN!
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050315175442.gif)
I am the Orchi Woman and I know where you sleep.

Quote
Orchiectomy (also named orchidectomy, and sometimes shortened as orchi  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)) is a surgical procedure in which one or both testicles are removed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchiectomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchiectomy)


(http://lrd.buffalohair-jage.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/420221_332553013532598_931701938_n.jpg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100115191314.jpeg)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 06, 2015, 10:56:00 pm
Quote
Defense Attorney Jonathan Wallace successfully argued that the Constitution protects Americans’ rights to “express political speech within proximity to the target of the protest.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)

In this case, the NYPD  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) first prevented protesters from entering Wall Street before later ordering them to leave the area altogether.” This method of policing proved to be unlawful. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)


Anybody taking bets on how long before this LAWFUL interpretation of our Constitution will be REVERSED by the handmaiden of our Fascist Government (the Corrupt Court System)?   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)


10 People Found Not Guilty in Flood Wall Street Protest, Judge Takes Judicial Notice of Climate Change
  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-098.gif)

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/polarbear.jpg)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/06/found-not-guilty-flood-wall-street/



 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 07, 2015, 10:00:53 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIVSJYazE9s&feature=player_embedded

Robert Swan Leads Antarctic Expedition to Show Firsthand Effects of Climate Change
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/04/robert-swan-antarctic-climate-change/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 10, 2015, 01:01:33 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfmhrwbJt6I&feature=player_embedded

Watch Sen. Bernie Sanders Drill Alaskan Leaders on Failing to Address Climate Change


http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/09/sanders-drill-alaskan-leaders-climate-change/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 14, 2015, 08:07:10 pm
EPA  (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif)  "debunks" 'chemtrails,' further fueling conspiracy theories    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif)

See Agnotology. The EPA is the SAME agency that RAISED the radionuclide "acceptable" levels in the air, ground and water after Fukushima.  :P


Quote
We are often unaware of the scope and structure of our ignorance. Ignorance
is not just a blank space on a person’s mental map. It has contours and coherence,
and for all I know rules of operation as well. So as a corollary to writing
about what we know, maybe we should add getting familiar with our ignorance.

Thomas Pynchon, 1984

Doubt is our product.
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, internal memo, 1969

http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/Agnotology%20Intro%20Chapter,%20Robert%20Proctor_0.pdf (http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/Agnotology%20Intro%20Chapter,%20Robert%20Proctor_0.pdf)

THIS is what is going on in our government since the Manhattan Project in EVERY area of science considered important to Nation (predatory corporate) Security.  :P

ag notol og y : a mi s s i ng t e r m

Snippet:

Military Secrecy

Tobacco duplicity is notorious, but deliberate ignorance also comes from numerous other sources, such as military classification. Estimates are that a quarter of the world’s technical personnel have some kind of military clearance; there are secret scientific facts, secret scientific methods, secret scientific societies, secret scientific journals, and (probably) secret laws of nature. Military men don’t always want to keep secrets from themselves, so firewalls are established to allow a community of cognoscenti with “clearance” to meet in private to discuss classified matters.

The National Security Agency, for example, maintains an Internet firewalled from the outside world, as do some of our larger private corporations. The Manhattan Project in World War II (to make an atomic bomb) set the stage for much of America’s postwar secret research; the project diverted much of the country’s scientific talent and the name itself was a deception, as was Britain’s comparable “Tube Alloys Project.” Nuclear technologies have been clothed in secrecy from quite early on: the very existence of plutonium, for example, was classified for several years after its discovery, and words like “radiation” and “radioisotope” were not supposed to be bandied about. Neither word was mentioned in the first 200 articles written on the atom bomb.48

Atomic secrecy was also the rationale for entire scientific disciplines going underground, with code names devised for sensitive topics.
The field of “Health Physics,” for example, has its origins in the need to explore the novel hazards of atomic radiation, with the name being deliberately kept vague to disguise the fact that projects were underway to explore health and safety in the nuclear workplace.

The whole point of secrecy in this realm is to hide, to feint, to distract, to deny access, and to monopolize information.
Global positioning system locations are tweaked to keep “sensitive” locations (for example, the White House) unknowable—and so untargetable—and entire cities have been erased from maps or never drawn in. The National Security Agency is larger and more secretive even than the Central Intelligence Agency (NSA = “No Such Agency”)49 and the National Reconnaissance Office is more shadowy still, and even better funded. Most secret would be those offices and operations “we” in the outside world know nothing about. Classified research in the United States is hidden in the so-called Black Budget, which currently exceeds the amounts funded for education and many other social services. In November of 2005, Mary Margaret Graham, deputy director of National Intelligence at the CIA, revealed the total U.S. intelligence budget to be $ 44 billion per annum.50

The impact of military secrecy on science has been profound, affecting nearly every branch of knowledge.


There are many examples of military agnogenesis. Military-sponsored research in the 1940s led to early predictions of global warming and the melting of the polar ice caps; the guardians of military secrecy kept this quiet, however, and the topic was not widely and openly discussed.52

Climate science has suffered new kinds of agnotology in recent years, as Bush administration strategists have tried to keep the question of anthropogenic global warming “open.”53 As with tobacco industry apologetics, out as prevarication.


Military research has more often generated ignorance by passive agnogenesis: we have many examples where military funding has pushed certain areas, leaving others to languish. Carbon-14 research, for example, was heavily supported by the military as part of nuclear isotope research (Libby’s work), whereas oxygen isotope analysis languished underfunded. Science responds to funding opportunities, which means that ignorance can be maintained or created in certain areas simply by “defunding.”

When Ronald Reagan took office in 1980, federal funding for solar energy research was zeroed out. Semiconductor studies that could have pushed forth knowledge in this realm were transferred to areas such as the “hardening” of silicon chips to resist the neutron flux from an atomic blast. Solar technology “know-how” suffered from this loss of funding; ignorance here resulted from a decision to emphasize fossil fuels over renewable energy sources.

http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/Agnotology%20Intro%20Chapter,%20Robert%20Proctor_0.pdf

If you think the EPA is telling the truth about the 24/7 aerosol spraying, SINCE the year 2000, being done for the SOLE PURPOSE of preserving Fossil Fuel Profits on the TAXPAYER DIME, You are a either a naïve fool or a cynical opportunist.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif)




Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 24, 2015, 05:57:32 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCauqUoQy-w&feature=player_embedded
Save this so your grandkids can see what Greenland was like before the ice melted.  :(
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 27, 2015, 09:40:28 pm
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Rahmstorf_2015_1rc.jpg)
Fig. 1 Linear temperature trend from 1900 to 2013. The cooling in the subpolar North Atlantic is remarkable and well documented by numerous measurements unlike the cold spot in central Africa, which on closer inspection apparently is an artifact of incomplete and inhomogeneous weather station data.


What’s going on in the North Atlantic?  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6656.gif)

Filed under: Climate Science
 — stefan @ 23 March 2015

The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years.

Full article at link.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/?wpmp_tp=1
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on March 30, 2015, 02:53:10 pm
 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)Antarctica Records Hottest Day Ever, New Study Finds Rapid Acceleration of Ice Melt

Cole Mellino | March 30, 2015 10:08 am

The warmest temperature ever recorded in Antarctica may have occurred last Tuesday with a thermometer reading 63.5 degrees Fahrenheit at Argentina’s Esperanza Base on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, according to Weather Underground. The previous record was set the day before at 63.3 degrees at Argentina’s Marambio Base on a small islet just off the coast of the Antarctic Peninsula.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/rapidicemelt.jpg)
The Antarctic Peninsula experienced record heat last week. Photo credit: Shutterstock

Prior to this week’s record heat wave for the icy continent, the hottest known temperature in Antarctica was 62.8 degrees Fahrenheit, recorded at Esperanza Base on April 24, 1961. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has not officially declared last week’s temperatures as all-time weather records for Antarctica, but “the Argentinian weather service has verified that the temperatures measured at Esperanza Base and Marambio Base were the highest ever measured at each site,” said Weather Underground.

The WMO has traditionally had a more narrow definition of Antarctica, which only include sites south of the Antarctic Circle and not the Esperanza and Marambio bases. But even if the WMO doesn’t officially recognize the recordings, the message is clear. The Antarctic peninsula is one of the fastest warming spots on the planet.

The record heat coincides with the release of a new study from Science that finds “ice shelves in West Antarctica have lost as much as 18 percent of their volume over the last two decades, with rapid acceleration occurring over the last decade. The study found that from 1994 to 2003, the overall loss of ice shelf volume across the continent was negligible, but over the last decade West Antarctic losses increased by 70 percent,” says Think Progress.

The heat wave also coincides with Robert Swan and his 2041 team’s Antarctic Expedition, which wrapped up last week. The point of the trip was to document the firsthand effects of climate change, which was obviously very apparent.
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/30/antarctica-hottest-day-ever/

Agelbert NOTE: Be sure to click on the link to enjoy the comments I made to the propagandists that showed up to peddle Agonotology based LIES and unscientific DOUBT.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)


The climate denier friends of fossil fuelers (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/165fs373950.gif)
 have difficulties with the truth.


(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Rahmstorf_2015_1rc.jpg)
Fig. 1 Linear temperature trend from 1900 to 2013. The cooling in the subpolar North Atlantic is remarkable and well documented by numerous measurements unlike the cold spot in central Africa, which on closer inspection apparently is an artifact of incomplete and inhomogeneous weather station data.
What’s going on in the North Atlantic?  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6656.gif)

Filed under: Climate Science
 — stefan @ 23 March 2015
The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years.  :o

Full article by a credentialed climate scientist at link.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/?wpmp_tp=1
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 01, 2015, 07:56:15 pm
Quote
This is one of the first studies to accurately document the amount of water being contributed by melting glaciers, which add about 57 cubic kilometers of water a year to the estimated 792 cubic kilometers produced by annual precipitation in this region. The combination of glacial melt and precipitation produce an amount of water that’s larger than many of the world’s great rivers, such as the Ganges, Nile, Volga, Niger, Columbia, Danube or Yellow River  :P.

(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff250/MantisOahu/copperriver_oli_2013148_zpsuwsadntg.jpg)
The copper river in the Gulf of Alaska-NASA

Tue Mar 31, 2015 at 02:44 AM PDT.

Massive Glacier Melt and Fresh Water are Pouring into the Gulf of Alaska
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/31/1373930/-Massive-Glacier-Melt-and-Fresh-Water-are-Pouring-into-the-Gulf-of-Alaska

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 03, 2015, 06:48:12 pm
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_EF7CEGIbIKc/TPnyMTzT51I/AAAAAAAAD_g/202x5cTiMjE/s1600/COLD+WINTER+MORNING.png)
It was a BITTER cold winter in Vermont.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp) How can that be?  ???     (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp)

Is the "Global Warming" claimed by all those "sneaky", temperature record statistics and data  "distorting", "double talking" (see MKing or Gail Tverberg for details on this heinous plot to attack the altruistic fossil fuel industry that has provided us with cheap energy, jobs, money to buy our favorite foods like veal and foi gras   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp), better living through chemistry, pharmaceuticals, plastics, civilization, democracy and heaven on earth  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-291014182422.png) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png) )  a massive hoax?   :o Is it a huge scam?   :P Is it a trick to provide grant money to nerds while we all freeze to death?  >:( Will these scientists come clean or will we be, mercilessly and cruelly, required to give up our predatory capitalist benefiting oil wars, fossil fuel powered transportation and the All American Tradition of exploitation of planetary resources without reflection? (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)

Reflection is for wimps!  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif) Aren't we supposed to be APEX PREDATORS? Aren't we the CROWN of EVOLUTION? (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/pirates5B15D_th.gif)

Who are these pesky scientists to tell the fabulous fossil fuel industry that it has a suicidal "business" model?  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/fly.gif)

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)
They are scientists. They have made the objective observation that what WE are doing IS suicidal.  (http://www.mrwallpaper.com/wallpapers/Sad-Sunflower.jpg)

The fossil fuel industry resents being called suicidal whackos. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/290.gif)  But the fact is, not only is their fathomless greed and power lust in a FINITE WORLD BIOSPHERE  a mark of insanity, all their bribed politicians, shills and pseudo-scientists that claim we aren't destroying our seed corn for profit over planet ARE SUICIDAL WHACKOS too.


If you live in Eastern North America and do not understand why, with a warming globe, you froze your derriere off this past winter, then you should read what real climate scientists say before you swallow Inhofe snowballs on behalf of the fossil fuel fascists. IOW, we are experiencing bitter winters in Eastern North America BECAUSE of Global Warming, not IN SPITE of it!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/snapoutofit.gif)

This was predicted several years ago (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/ocean-link-to-hurricanes-bitter-winters-18846), as a matter of fact. So don't let the propagandists  (http://www.u.arizona.edu/~patricia/cute-collection/smileys/lying-smiley.gif) carrying water for the dirty energy industries pull the Agnotology  (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/who-can-you-trust/resisting-brainwashing-propaganda/msg2867/#msg2867)wool over your eyes.

Agelbert NOTE: Before diving into  the article titled "A hypothesis about the cold winter in eastern North America + Update", please read the following comments and the correct apologetic response form the climate scientist that wrote the article.

Stefan responds like a true scientist. Notice the lack of puffery or arrogance.  (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)  Notice no attempt to talk down to or denigrate the commenters as MKing, the self proclaimed "geochemist" scientist does routinely. MKing misleads, Stefan does good science, period.


climatehawk1 says:
30 Mar 2015 at 9:29 AM

One very modest step that can be taken on this post and all other scientific writings in order to help educate interested readers: always first give the full name of something and its acronym in parentheses following, prior to using the acronym alone, e.g.: “Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)”. This is something that new reporters are trained to do–because all readers are assumed to be newbies–and it would be an excellent discipline for scientific communicators as well.

[Response: Thanks, good point! I’ve added a glossary at the bottom.]

Chuck Larlham says:
30 Mar 2015 at 11:14 AM

And you’ve just perfectly demonstrated the problem the climatology scientists have… Your jargon is unintelligible, nor could most of them do any better with the biological jargon in which my research work was soaked, and the general public can’t read either of them. Too much prior understanding is assumed. I, for instance, having read the first part three times (I’m almost ready to start diagramming sentences), still do not understand why you reversed the signs in the warming cooling gyres (at least I know what a gyre is). Granted I hold only a Master of Science in Ecology and Environmental Science (from USU’s School of Wildlife Biology), but I am nonetheless a scientist, and I am made to feel utterly ignorant.

Now, if I become frustrated enough, I can dig this stuff apart and figure out the details, or I can say, “Well, I trust the methodology used by competent scientists,” which is my more likely response. And I have valid reason for that. Unfortunately, the general public, and that includes the lawyers who make up the vast majority of our State and federal Representatives and Senators, does not. They just get lost in this stuff.

[Response: Agreed – this post was written too quickly as a follow-up and assumed prior knowledge of the key terms from my previous post. Btw. – you don’t need to understand why in some cases the temperature pattern is plotted for an increase and in some cases for a decrease in the AMOC, as long as you get the point that the colours in some plots are just the other way round although they show the same thing. -stefan]



NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the USA – an agency that e.g. publishes climate data

AMOC – Atlantic Meriodional Overturning Circulation (for lay people the Gulf Stream System as mentioned in my previous post)

SST – Sea surface temperature

HadISST – a particular sea surface temperature data product from the British Met Office

EOF – Empirical Orthogonal Function – you don’t need to understand how this works, just a statistical method to derive patterns of change



A hypothesis about the cold winter in eastern North America + Update


Filed under:
Climate impacts
Climate Science
Oceans

— stefan @ 30 March 2015

The past winter was globally the warmest on record. At the same time it set a new cold record in the subpolar North Atlantic – and it was very cold in the eastern parts of North America. Are these things related?  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)

Two weeks ago NOAA published the following map of temperature anomalies for the past December-January-February (i.e. the Northern Hemisphere winter). One week ago, we published a paper in Nature Climate Change (which had been in the works for a few years) arguing that the cold in the subpolar North Atlantic is indicative of an AMOC slowdown (as discussed in my last post). Immediately our readers started to ask (as we indeed had been asking ourselves): does the cold winter in eastern North America (culminating in the Inhofe snowball incident) have anything to do with what is going on in the Atlantic?
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Winter15NOAA.jpg)
Fig. 1 Temperature anomaly map for the past december-january-february, from NOAA.

Here is a hypothesis for how they may indeed be linked. This is somewhat speculative – I have not investigated this with any special data analysis, I am just connecting the dots of some articles in the published literature, hoping this post might stimulate further investigation. The proposed mechanism has three simple steps, as follows.

1. The AMOC slows down – see my previous post (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/global-warming-is-with-us/msg2895/#msg2895).

2. The slowdown not only leads to a cold patch out in the Atlantic subpolar gyre, but also to warm sea surface temperature anomalies along the east coast of North America. This dipole response was found in the EOF analysis of observed sea surface temperatures by Dima and Lohmann (2011) (Fig.2). An EOF analysis is a standard statistical tool to decompose changes in space and time into a set of characteristic fixed spatial patterns, each of which follows a particular time evolution. That makes sense when a particular physical mechanism of change (such as an AMOC slowdown) has a characteristic spatial pattern. The pattern shown in Fig. 2 is the one identified by Dima and Lohman with the gradual AMOC decline over the 20th Century. (Note you have to reverse colours – as shown in the graph it corresponds to an AMOC increase, because this pattern is then multiplied with a negative time evolution).

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Dima_Lohmann_Fig2d.jpg)
Fig. 2 Temperature pattern EOF2 in the HadISST data set, as analysed by Dima and Lohmann and identified with a gradual AMOC decline. Note that in this (and the following) graph the sign is reversed; an AMOC weakening comes with a cold patch south of Greenland and warming along the North American east coast.

Dima and Lohmann also show a second pattern (Fig. 3) associated with the sudden AMOC decline in the 1970s which we also see in the AMOC index in our paper.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Dima_Lohmann_Fig3b.jpg)
Fig. 3 Temperature pattern derived from a correlation analysis and identified by Dima and Lohmann with a rapid 1970s AMOC weakening.

In either case the anomaly in the subpolar North Atlantic is associated with an opposite anomaly along the North American east coast.

This dipole response to an AMOC slowdown is also found in models, as shown by Zhang (2008) – in her paper she presented the schematic shown in Fig. 4. Note you also need to reverse the colors in the diagram of Zhang – she chose to show the effect of an increase, not a slowdown of the AMOC, because she was looking at the increase after 1990 which we also find in our index. Zhang derived this pattern for the subsurface temperatures, so I asked her whether she also found a similar dipole in sea surface temperatures. She responded: “The dipole pattern shown in the subsurface is indeed also expressed in the SST, I use subsurface temperature because it is less noisy than SST.”

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Zhang08_1.jpg)
Fig. 4 Dipole induced by strengthening the AMOC – for a weakening of the AMOC the reverse response is expected. From Zhang 2008.

Was this warm anomaly along the American east coast present last winter? Definitely – I happen to have saved two snapshots of SST anomalies on my hard disk, shown below.
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//GFS-025deg_NH-SAT1_SST_anom_11Feb15.png)
Fig. 5 SST anomalies for 12 December and 11 February. Note the cold patch in the subpolar Atlantic and the very warm SSTs along the North American east coast. Source: Climate Reanalyzer.

3. Warm SST along the American east coast creates a cold anomaly in the eastern parts of North America by radiating groups of Rossby waves. This was shown in a very elegant paper by Kaspi and Schneider (2011). They set out to explain why the eastern parts of the northern continents are in general much colder than the rest of the hemisphere. They took an idealized climate model, with no continents or other distractions (an “aquaplanet”), and simply pumped a heat anomaly into one small ocean region to mimic the effect of the Gulf Stream. Voila: upstream of this heat anomaly they got a big cold anomaly.

They also performed a clever, fun experiment: they increased the rotation rate of their planet and showed that the size of that cold patch increases in proportion. The theory of Rossby wave propagation explains this.

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Kaspi-fig-2.jpg)
Fig. 6 Temperature anomalies that result from adding an ocean heat anomaly in the triangular region on an aquaplanet.

This triangular heating region is to mimic warm sea surface temperatures (which provide a strong heat source to the atmosphere) along the North American coast. Note the cold anomaly that develops upstream. Left panel shows normal, right panel doubled rotation rate of the Earth.

They conclude in their paper:
The anomalous winter cold of eastern continental boundaries can result at least in part from radiation of nearly stationary Rossby wave groups off the regions of large surface heat fluxes over the warm waters in oceanic western boundary currents.
(They say “in part” because there are other factors like topography – but these don’t change over time, so don’t come into play when explaining why the last winter was colder than usual.)

Of course we need to be cautious – theirs is an idealised experiment which isolates and demonstrates this mechanisms in principle, but does not prove how strong it is in the real world. Certainly, changes in heating from the Gulf Stream will not be the only thing that influences winter weather along the Atlantic seaboard of North America, so we can’t expect a one-to-one relation. But I think this connection is worthy of further investigation.

By the way, this 3-step explanation of the cold of the past winter is not an alternative to the “jet stream meander” or “polar vortex” explanations – rather, it may simply help to explain why there was this persistent strong southward inflow of polar air into the eastern parts of North America. It might just have been helped along by the very warm waters along the coast – and those may well be related to the AMOC slowdown.

p.s. Sorry about the jargon in this post, which was a quick follow-up to my better-prepared previous one. Here a glossary:


NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the USA – an agency that e.g. publishes climate data
AMOC – Atlantic Meriodional Overturning Circulation (for lay people the Gulf Stream System as mentioned in my previous post)
SST – Sea surface temperature
HadISST – a particular sea surface temperature data product from the British Met Office
EOF – Empirical Orthogonal Function – you don’t need to understand how this works, just a statistical method to derive patterns of change


Update 1 April: I just read another related paper which I thought would be worth sharing here. Zhang et al. (Journal of Climate 2011) ran a high-resolution climate model with eddy-permitting ocean – the main point here is that the narrow overflows from the Nordic Seas into the Atlantic can be represented in a much better way at such a high resolution. They perturbed the AMOC by altering the overflow so that it increased, which then had the effect of strengthening the entire AMOC. The change in sea surface temperature looks like this:

(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Zhang-2011.jpg)
Note they get a warming due to the stronger AMOC just in the area where we find a cooling in the data (which we interpret as indicator of a weakened AMOC). And they get a cooling along the North American coast north of Hatteras. The arrows show the change in currents and reveal the reason for that cooling: the northern recirculation gyre, located to the north of the Gulf Stream, increases in strength and brings colder waters from the north down along the US/Canadian coast (as sketched in Fig. 4). Thus this connection described above (point 2 in my argument) is also supported by this high-resolution climate model. This experiment is quite neat in that there is no change to the surface forcing; it is pure isolated effect of the AMOC, triggered by a change way below the surface in the deep overflow.

Weblink: Ocean Changes Linked to 2010 Hurricanes, Bitter Winters (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/ocean-link-to-hurricanes-bitter-winters-18846)


References
S. Rahmstorf, J.E. Box, G. Feulner, M.E. Mann, A. Robinson, S. Rutherford, and E.J. Schaffernicht, "Exceptional twentieth-century slowdown in Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation", Nature Climate change, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2554

M. Dima, and G. Lohmann, "Evidence for Two Distinct Modes of Large-Scale Ocean Circulation Changes over the Last Century", Journal of Climate, vol. 23, pp. 5-16, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2867.1

R. Zhang, "Coherent surface-subsurface fingerprint of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation", Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 35, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008GL035463

Y. Kaspi, and T. Schneider, "Winter cold of eastern continental boundaries induced by warm ocean waters", Nature, vol. 471, pp. 621-624, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature09924

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/a-hypothesis-about-the-cold-winter-in-eastern-north-america/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 14, 2015, 10:07:32 pm
9 States Report Record Low Snowpack Amid Epic Drought

Cole Mellino | April 14, 2015 10:10 am

California gets most of the attention in drought news coverage because so much of the state is in exceptional drought—the highest level—but 72 percent of the Western U.S. is experiencing drought conditions, according to the latest U.S. Drought Monitor data.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/usdrought.jpg)
72 percent of the West is experiencing drought conditions and 25 percent is in extreme or exceptional drought. Photo credit: U.S. Drought Monitor

When California’s snowpack assessment showed that the state’s snowpack levels were 6 percent of normal—the lowest ever recorded—it spurred Gov. Brown’s administration to order the first-ever mandatory water restrictions. California’s snowpack levels might be the lowest, but the Golden State is not the only one setting records. A new report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) finds that nine states reported record low snowpack. The report states:

The largest snowpack deficits are in record territory for many basins, especially in the Cascades and Sierra Nevada where single-digit percent of normal conditions prevail. Very low snowpacks are reported in most of Washington, all of Oregon, Nevada, California, parts of Arizona, much of Idaho, parts of New Mexico, three basins in Wyoming, one basin in Montana and most of Utah.

Only high elevation areas in the Rocky Mountains and Interior Alaska had normal or close to normal snowpack levels. “The only holdouts are higher elevations in the Rockies,” said Garen. “Look at the map and you’ll see that almost everywhere else is red.” Red indicates less than half of the normal snowpack remains. Dark red indicates snowpack levels are less than 25 percent of normal.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/droughtWEST.gif)
Much of the West is in dark red, which indicates snowpack levels are below 25 percent of normal. Photo credit: USDA NCRS

And not only is the snowpack drastically reduced in many states, but it’s melting earlier now, too. “Almost all of the West Coast continues to have record low snowpack,” said David Garen, a hydrologist for USDA’s National Resources Conservation Service. “March was warm and dry in most of the West; as a result, snow is melting earlier than usual.”

Historically, April 1 is the peak snowpack. But this year, the peak came earlier because there was very little snow accumulation in March and much of the existing snow had already melted. Streamflow will be reduced even sooner in spring and summer, leaving reservoirs—already well below average in many areas—that much more depleted, the report finds. As of April 1, reservoir levels are below average in at least five western states: Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon and Utah,” according to Reuters. That doesn’t include California, which NASA scientist Jay Famiglietti said has about a year’s supply of water in its reservoirs.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/14/record-low-snowpack-drought/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/14/record-low-snowpack-drought/)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 15, 2015, 08:24:00 pm
Ka, that was an excellent outline of GLS. Sign me up  :emthup:

Quote
This system must incorporate a transcendent principle(s). Something which remains true regardless of any specific circumstances at any given time. I think a good place to start is to recognize that our ethical values (often expressed in laws) are not rules we conjure up as we please in response to sociocultural circumstances. They are based on fundamental guiding principles and they must be respected. The existing system needs a shock for sure, but any system which replaces it must continue to respect the values which inspired it.

I agree, but since what I am really talking about is a dictatorship of the intellectual class, and since one finds more atheism and fuzzy moral thinking there than anywhere, the fundamental guiding principles will need to be put in more or less secular terms. At the same time, though, one can and should relate such terms to religious principles.

Agreed. I'm basically thinking of the principles we already have in the US Constitution, which are in secular terms. Also, federal legislation dealing with the environment and state legislation for the indigent. At the same time, the overzealous "separation of church and state" can be scaled back. Right now, people who have any association with the state cannot even relate policy goals to religious principles without worrying about being shut down.


Ka,
Rather than a "no growth economy" being the target, I believe that the growth of the biosphere (i.e. increase in viability, not stasis) should be the target AND the overriding principle.

Ashvin,
The U.S. Constitution barely scratches the surface of what is required to preserve and promote a healthy biosphere. To begin with, it is anthropocentric as well as nationalistic, which by definition is at odds with the GLS world view that Ka espouses. I think GLS, if it worked as advertised, would weigh every INaction humans take as well as every action they take to undermine the viability of the biosphere.

Human ethical behavior MUST be redefined to include any and all life forms we share the biosphere with, period. Human ethical behavior DOES NOT DO THAT now, according to our laws, traditions and mores EXCEPT if some land owning Homo SAP "suffers damages". We ARE NOT going to survive extinction with that kind of limited thinking.

But there is more. All this STUFF and legal tradition that came from the Romans and the English, and so on, is PROPERTY based. Even people are considered a type of property. All the tort STUFF out there hair splits about what "damages" are and what they aren't.

In doing so, by invariably IGNORING the biosphere damages UNLESS they occur on somebody's property, it is so anthropocentric (and elite property defending as well :emthdown:) that it ultimately fails to address the overall damage of an anthropocentric world view.

The system must be LIFE based, not PROPERTY based. And Humans MUST be looked at as just one of hundreds of thousands of species level stomachs within the biosphere that must be kept from behaving unethically.

This really isn't all that hard. The problem is that human institutions and pecking order have created an absolutely deadly travesty of logic which consists of self serving, elite ass kissing, biosphere destroying baloney. Those people will fight the OBVIOUS biosphere math that REQUIRES they submit to a biosphere viability level playing field of multi-species rights. Thomas Jefferson would get a great laugh out of that!

The sad part is that ANYTHING LESS than total submission to the preservation of, and promotion of, LIFE is SUICIDAL. Yes, it's THAT BAD NOW, thanks to our massive stupidity and arrogance.

We are NOT in a situation where we can just preserve what we've got and everything is going to be hunky Jake. We are IN THE HOLE, biosphere wise. WE NEED TO GROW a severely depleted multi-species community in order to AVOID EXTINCTION.

This is what James Hansen said recently. He is right.
Quote

My talk, “Our Golden Opportunity”, includes several strong criticisms, beginning with scientists. We scientists are certain that humanity faces an emergency, right now.  Yet as Naomi Oreskes points out in “Playing Dumb” (NY Times, 03/01/2015), we don’t make that clear enough.

We face obstacles in communication with the public, but many are self-imposed.  It took over a year to publish our paper that provides the scientific basis for the legal cases, in part because an anonymous editorial board member (a scientist) insisted we remove “normative” statements.  When he stated that “dangerous” was a normative word, I withdrew the paper from that journal.  Yet when I read the Abstract of the paper now, I am disappointed that we did not make a more crystal clear statement that 2°C global warming is a disaster scenario that must be avoided.

The above is an example of the hair splitting baloney that status quo defenders, along with those who WRONGLY think the "enlightenment" was actually good for mankind, continue to spew out when honorable people, like Hansen, that DO understand our precarious position, try to state the biosphere FACTS to the human community.

We are committing slow suicide. Our institutions, our legal traditions, our pecking order, our government and our "apex predator" wishful thinking are all helping.

Biosphere math is somewhat complicated. But it isn't hard. The impediment is human arrogance.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 15, 2015, 08:54:35 pm
04/15/2015 01:26 PM   
Dutch Citizens Sue Over Climate Inaction, A Sign of Things to Come (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)

SustainableBusiness.com News

As a sign of things to come, a class action lawsuit is in front of a Netherlands court this week to force the government to take stronger action on climate change.

 900 citizens are involved, led by the Urgenda Foundation, which asked citizens to join as co-plaintiffs through ‘crowd pleading.' The lawsuit was filed in late 2013 and this week, a district court heard the case.

They are asking the court to:

1. Declare that global warming of more than 2 degrees Celsius will lead to a violation of fundamental human rights worldwide.

2. Declare that the Dutch State is acting unlawfully by not contributing its proportional share to preventing a global warming of more than 2 degrees Celsius.

3. Order the Dutch State to reduce carbon emissions 40% by 2020 (below 1990 levels), the level scientists have determined is necessary to keep temperature rise below 2C. 


Can Courts Help on This?
  ???

 While it might seem unrealistic for courts to weigh in on this, Jaap Spier, Advocate-General to the Dutch Supreme Court, says that courts actually can force countries to adopt "effective climate policies" and they are "perhaps the only way to break through the political apathy about climate change."

 He says: "Does a judge need to be an activist in order to make a statement about climate change? "No, it is just a matter of applying existing law, although undoubtedly not all judges will be open to this. Judges with the courage to give a ruling on this will one day be applauded, whereas those who don't will eventually be tarred and feathered."

 Indeed, the case coincides with the March launch of the "Oslo Principles on Global Climate Change Obligations," developed by High Court judges, law professors and advocates from the Netherlands, US, Brazil, China, India and other countries.

 The Oslo principles say that governments have a legal obligation to avert climate change under existing international human rights law, environmental law and tort law.

In a letter to Urgenda, the Dutch government acknowledged that its actions are not sufficient to prevent dangerous climate change
. In legal terms, this is a wrongful act of the State, says Urgenda. "The Dutch Supreme Court has consistently upheld the principle that the government can be held legally accountable for not taking sufficient action to prevent foreseeable harm."

Already, lawyers are following suit with legal proceedings against the Belgian government, supported by 8500 citizens.


Urgenda's case is inspired by attorney Roger Cox's book,  Revolution Justified, which argues that the courts can play a pivotal role on climate change.

Cox, who is the lawyer on the case, says: "We're now 23 years down the road of the climate change treaty and it's obvious that international politics has not brought much good to the world. The power of politics, fossil fuel companies and the banks are so large but there is one other powerful system with a lot of wisdom and that is the law."

"There is a parallel here with the situation in the 1950s in the United States. It was the courts that decided that segregation in schools was not constitutional. It wasn't a big issue in society and it wasn't political but it was a few people fighting and the courts following up that created a huge change in American society.

In the US, children are leading the charge to force action on climate change, with legal actions filed in every state. The case got all the way to the Supreme Court, which sadly decided not to take it up. It was heard last week in an Oregon court.

Climate Silence

They want the atmosphere to be declared a "public trust" that deserves protection. The concept has previously been used to clean up polluted rivers and coastlines. In 2012, a Texas judge ruled the state IS responsible for the atmosphere.

Last year, a letter was sent to fossil fuel, mining, insurance and carbon-intensive manufacturers. It warned them that the day is drawing near when they will be held responsible for crimes against nature and society by fueling climate change and misinforming the public on this emergency.

Read the Oslo Principles:

 
Website: www.yale.edu/macmillan/globaljustice/Oslo%20Principles.pdf

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26248
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 18, 2015, 12:02:48 am
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) Divest From Fossil Fuels Movement Explodes Across the U.S. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-034.gif)

Cole Mellino | April 17, 2015 9:49 am

Many students have vowed to ramp up their divestment campaigns at universities across America this spring. One group who has garnered much media attention is Divest Harvard, which is wrapping up a week-long campaign known as “Harvard Heat Week.” Harvard has the largest endowment of any university in the world at $36.4 billion, and hundreds of alumni including Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, and former Colorado Senator Tim Wirth are participating in the group’s efforts this week.

After a week of sit-ins that have shut down administration offices at Massachusetts Hall, President Faust finally reached out directly to students with Divest Harvard. ”I would be happy to meet with you and a representative group of your student colleagues when you have ceased disrupting university operations,” wrote President Faust in an email.

The students however were not pleased with the offer for another closed door meeting and called for a more open process on divestment that schools like MIT have convened. Divest Harvard has made multiple requests for a more transparent process involving the entire student body, faculty and alumni.

The group knows there is strong support for divestment because the student body voted 72 percent in favor of divestment and hundreds of faculty and thousands of alumni signed a letter supporting the initiative. (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif) 


Divest Harvard has agreed to the meeting with the president, but explained that they would not stop protesting as long as Harvard continued to invest in fossil fuel companies. “Recent SEC filings revealed that the university septupled its investments in oil and gas companies last fall  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp),” says Divest Harvard.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/rachel650.jpg)

Last two pages of article:
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)
http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/17/harvard-heat-week-divest-fossil-fuels/2/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 18, 2015, 12:12:00 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2y8_UDrGjQ&feature=player_embedded

6 Year Old Gets President Obama’s Attention With This Climate Change Video

http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/15/noah-gue-climate-change-video/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 21, 2015, 09:30:39 pm
This is place to get the latest objective information about Climate Science Research and Results from Working Climate Scientists:
http://www.realclimate.org/ (http://www.realclimate.org/)

It has won science and technology web awards.  : (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

About

Quote
RealClimate is a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists for the interested public and journalists. We aim to provide a quick response to developing stories and provide the context sometimes missing in mainstream commentary. The discussion here is restricted to scientific topics and will not get involved in any political or economic implications of the science. All posts are signed by the author(s), except ‘group’ posts which are collective efforts from the whole team. This is a moderated forum.

Technical details

The header banner is constructed from a 1992 photograph from the Space Shuttle (mission STS-50) of clouds and fog over the Indian subcontinent, a 1999 photograph of the sun taken with the Extreme UV Imaging Telescope onboard the SOHO satellite and a stock picture of power station cooling towers (of unknown provenance), all put together using The Gimp.

We use WordPress blogging software and are hosted at webfaction.com. Site design is by Gavin, with some elements inspired by the setup at Cosmic Variance.

Google Custom Search results are from a subset of the web that we consider provide quality information on climate science. This includes scientific agencies, mainstream climate centres and universities around the world. If you would like us to include more sites, email us the details and we’ll consider it.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 25, 2015, 11:07:47 pm
Quote
When carbon dioxide was at these levels previously in history, polar ice melted and flooded the oceans, raising sea level up to 130 feet higher than today's levels.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250415230236.jpeg)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)

Time to Brace for Serious Temperature Rise, Say Scientists

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26191
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 26, 2015, 07:14:04 pm
Quote
I really believe earthquakes are electromagnetically related to pressure … that the pressure is created by electromagnetic differentials caused by earth/solar activity.  :o

Too much positive charge, or too much negative could cause an earthquake.. also excessive human induced frequency could be playing a role.

If electromagnetics are involved, then it logically follows that certain people and animals (and plants) could respond to the pre-earthquake electromagnetic distortions.

http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/i-really-believe-earthquakes-are-electromagnetically-related-to-pressure-that-the-pressure-is-created-by-electromagnetic-differentials-caused-by-earthsolar-activity/ (http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/i-really-believe-earthquakes-are-electromagnetically-related-to-pressure-that-the-pressure-is-created-by-electromagnetic-differentials-caused-by-earthsolar-activity/)

(http://i0.wp.com/dutchsinse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/6.8m-nepal-april-26-2015.jpg)

(http://i0.wp.com/dutchsinse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/a-week-of-unrest1.jpg)


(http://i2.wp.com/dutchsinse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/halema-uma-u-april-26-2015.jpg)
Quote
The lava lake at Kilauea volcano is about to reach its top for the first time since it formed. http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/ (http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/) Above: April 26 2015 339am CDT — The lava lake inside Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii has filled to record levels, and is nearing the top of the caldera which contains the lake.

This rise in lava a month ago led me to make a video telling people to keep an eye on the situation.   No one else was making note or saying anything publicly at the time, and people came to my video telling me that it was “normal”.

The levels started to rise in earnest a few days after I posted my first video.  I then recorded another video on March 28, 2015, showing the rise picking up speed.  :o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIhU2e30X60&feature=player_embedded
Mezmerizing video!

http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/ (http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/)

Agelbert NOTE: I just went to Google Earth to measure the Kilauea Volcano caldera depth BEFORE it started the fill up sequence. In a mere two or three months it has risen nearly 383 FEET! This is A LOT of LAVA when you consider that the caldera is  about one half of mile in diameter.
Kilauea Summit Cam Overlook
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/panorama.php?cam=HMcam
Kilauea Summit Cam Thermal Overlook
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/panorama.php?cam=HTcam
Quote
Rising Kilauea lava lake puts on show for visitors
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/28887839/rising-kilauea-lava-lake-puts-on-show-for-visitors

BIG ISLAND (HawaiiNewsNow) –

“The lava lake is rising in Halema’uma’u Crater and it’s putting on quite the show for visitors who have been able to see spattering above the crater rim and the loud popping of rocks as the crater walls expand with heat.
USGS geologists with the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory say the Kilauea summit lava lake is at its highest level since it was formed in 2008. Experts say it began steadily rising Wednesday afternoon and measured at 90 feet below the rim of the Overlook crater Wednesday evening. But Thursday morning, the lava climbed a few more yards and was measuring only about 70 feet from the rim.

“There was a lot of spattering that visitors are able to see from the Jagger Museum observation deck and also a lot of rumbling sounds as the crater walls heat up and the rocks fall into that roiling lava lake below. After the sun sets and the darkness starts to come in, that dramatic glow from the lava lake casting it’s reflection on the clouds and on the plume of gas and ash coming out of there — it is just super dramatic and beautiful. Everybody is just super happy to see this. The action isn’t always like this so the people who are lucky enough to be here right now are really in for a treat this evening,” said Jessica Ferracane, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park spokesperson.

More than 50 people, many of them local residents, gathered at the Jagger Museum overlook Thursday night to catch the breathtaking show.
HVO scientists say it’s unclear whether the lake will continue to rise. They say it cycles through filling and falling.

In the meantime, Kilauea Volcano’s East Rift Zone lava flow continues to feed widespread breakouts northeast of Pu’u ‘O’o. The front of the breakout that is farthest downslope is about five miles from the vent and doesn’t pose any immediate threat to any area communities.”

http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/4262015-lava-lake-in-hawaii-at-record-levels-locals-come-from-miles-around-to-see-rare-event/

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 26, 2015, 07:14:44 pm
(http://i1.wp.com/dutchsinse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/new-land-sea-rise-japan-april-2015aaaa.jpg)
Quote
Land rising out of the sea in Hokkaido Japan — Rose 50 feet (over 1,000 feet long) OVERNIGHT

April 25, 2015 tatoott@yahoo.com

A massive sudden (1 day) rise of land has occurred along the coast of Hokkaido Japan.

Major global earthquake activity is taking place, and serious crustal movement is obviously underway in the region around North Japan.

Quote
The new land began rising from the sea yesterday morning (April 24, 2015) with just a 1 meter rise  (3 feet), then began rising rapidly, the event is still ongoing as of April 25th into 26th 2015.

The new land mass has now risen over 300 meters high (near 1,000 feet), and near 10 meters wide (30 feet)!  Not ‘small’ by any means, and a very rare occurrence to top it off.

This is being attributed to crustal movement in the area.

VIDEO (in Japanese) at link and several excellent pictures: (http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/2thumbs.gif) 

http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/4252015-land-rising-out-of-the-sea-in-hokkaido-japan-rose-300-meters-near-1000-feet-overnight/

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 27, 2015, 02:37:42 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JC_wIWUC2U&feature=player_embedded
 :o

http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/27/avalanche-nepal-earthquake-everest/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 27, 2015, 03:19:24 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFRPFMGptJE&feature=player_embedded
Drone video (no sound) of Katmandu EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 28, 2015, 05:45:21 pm
Nenana Ice Classic 2015

Filed under: Climate Science
 Instrumental Record
 — gavin @ 25 April 2015


Unsurprisingly to anyone looking at the exceptionally warm winter on the West Coast of North America, the Nenana Ice Classic had another near-record early breakup on Friday, netting some lucky winner(s) around $300,000 in prizes.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280415171058.jpeg)

As I’ve discussed previously (last year and an update), the Ice Classic is a lottery that has been run every year since 1917, based on the time and date of the break up of the ice on the Nenana river, some 50 miles from Fairbanks, AK. There has been a historically good correlation with seasonal temperatures in the region, and the long term trend (earlier break-up by about 6.6 days/century) is in line with expectations of overall warming in the region.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280415171346.png)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280415171154.png)

2015 was the fourth earliest break-up date based on the nominal calendar date, but actually the 5th earliest if you time it from the vernal equinox (which accounts for leap years and other calendrical oddities). There was an ‘almost’ break up, on Thursday which would not have made much difference, though 2015 would have just edged out 2012 in the time-from-vernal-equinox ranking.

On a year-to-year basis, there is clearly a lot of variability (like the weather itself), and so a near-record break-up date this year isn’t particularly meaningful (just as 2013’s record late date wasn’t either (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)). But I find this data set an useful example of how one can discuss trends and variability and, occasionally, make interesting predictions:  ;D  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)

Gavin Schmidt ‎@ClimateOfGavin

FYI, Nenana Ice Classic betting for AK residents open until April 5. Current ice is thinnest since at least 89… http://www.nenanaakiceclassic.com/ice.htm

PS. I have a little side bet going based on whether this year’s result gets mentioned in the contraro-sphere  ;D. As might be expected, late years (2001, 2008 and the real outlier, 2013) get substantial coverage (originally on the late John Daly’s website, and more recently at WUWT).

But last year there was no mention anywhere  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/290.gif) ;), and the long term trend, which is the most relevant for climate change, never gets mentioned at all (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/237.gif) ;).

Of course, this year will be different. Oh yes.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-291014182422.png)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/04/nenana-ice-classic-2015/

Agelbert NOTE: UNLIKE the MKing dues paying member of the contraro-sphere, Gavin Schmidt is an objective scientist that doesn't try to twist hard data  to fit the fossil fuel industry agnotology. I use the term "agnotology" because the deliberate parading of outlier years with late thaws coupled with the TOTAL SILENCE when the years have early thaws along with the TOTAL SILENCE about what the data says about the warming trends is TEXTBOOK AGNOTOLOGY (Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance - Part one of six parts  (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/who-can-you-trust/resisting-brainwashing-propaganda/msg2849/#msg2849)).
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on April 29, 2015, 10:25:02 pm
Change you had better believe in.  :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jPAcTkX5Ew&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 04, 2015, 01:26:54 am
Storms of My Grandchildren - Hansen


Quote
One implication is that if we should "succeed" in digging up and burning all fossil fuels, some parts of the planet would become literally uninhabitable, with some time in the year having wet bulb temperature exceeding 35°C (950F).

At such temperatures, for reasons of physiology and physics, humans cannot survive, because even under ideal conditions of rest and ventilation, it is physically impossible for the environment to carry away the 100 W of metabolic heat that a human body generates when it is at rest14.

Thus even a person lying quietly naked in hurricane force winds would be unable to survive. Temperatures even several degrees below this extreme limit would be sufficient to make a region practically uninhabitable for living and working.

The picture that emerges for Earth sometime in the distant future, if we should dig up and burn every fossil fuel, is thus consistent with that depicted in "Storms" -- an ice-free Antarctica and a desolate planet without human inhabitants.

Although temperatures in the Himalayas may have become seductive, it is doubtful that the many would allow the wealthy few to appropriate 6 this territory to themselves or that humans would survive with the extermination of most other species on the planet.

At least one sentence in "Storms" will need to be corrected in the next edition: even with burning of all fossil fuels the tropical ocean does not "boil". But it is not an exaggeration to suggest, based on best available scientific evidence, that burning all fossil fuels could result in the planet being not only ice-free but human-free.  :o

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130415_Exaggerations.pdf (http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130415_Exaggerations.pdf)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 07, 2015, 03:07:58 pm
This unheard of here! Especially in May. Never mind the fact that the temperatures in the 80's in early May is NOT Vermont weather, FOR THE LAST WEEK the relative humidity has been between 20 and 30%! It is 89 degrees right now and the relative humidity is 23%.  (http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)


This is TERRRIBLE for the plant life. Also there WILL BE a lot of fires. I only had two daffodils flower of over 20 and, although the flowers normally hold up for a couple of weeks, these two flowers wilted in just a couple of days. 

We are now Phoenix north.  :P(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)

IF THIS CONTINUES... (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/desertsmile.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 07, 2015, 05:35:49 pm
This unheard of here! Especially in May. Never mind the fact that the temperatures in the 80's in early May is NOT Vermont weather, FOR THE LAST WEEK the relative humidity has been between 20 and 30%! It is 89 degrees right now and the relative humidity is 23%.  (http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)


This is TERRRIBLE for the plant life. Also there WILL BE a lot of fires. I only had two daffodils flower of over 20 and, although the flowers normally hold up for a couple of weeks, these two flowers wilted in just a couple of days. 

We are now Phoenix north.  :P(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)

IF THIS CONTINUES... (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/desertsmile.gif)


UPDATE. The temperature is now 86 (the high was 90  :o) and the relative humidity is now at 16%.  I have lived here almost 20 years and have NEVER seen the relative humidity below 40% unless it is the dead of winter.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)


 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 11, 2015, 09:29:29 pm
AG we might be able to agree on a few things here.

TPTB own the major banks.

The banks own or control:

The politicians (all significant western political parties)
All major media.  (Fox, CNN, BBC, NPR, Al Jezeera, WSJ, WP NYT etc) 
The major oil companies, (BP, Chevron, Exxon, Shell)
Hundreds of major corporations, ie. most of the Fortune 500

They also control through their politicians, foundations and funds most scientific research,  most significant NGOs and activist groups.  If a significant social issue is in play that they have an interest in, they are almost certainly controlling both sides of the debate.

If we can agree here it might be possible to hold a discussion.

We do agree that the banksters and their corps are stealing like there is no tomorrow.  I'm not sure you agree that governments are basically their agents in a large part of this theft.  Our major disagreement seems to be that you cannot believe that AGW is just another of their psyops, and I am certain that it is.  That might be tedious to prove but the money trail is there.  It was Peter that first clued me to this.

Likely part of the plan was to structure carbon sequestration and/or taxation in such a way that small and mid cap oils would lose money and be vulnerable to takeover by the large cap oils.  I think they have given up on this.  I could be wrong.

Part of the agenda seems to just be anti US/EU survival.  What is the point of closing a few coal fired plants in US/UK if Chindia is building more than one a week?  And they are very quiet about the Chinese CTL plants.

Yes, FWIW, the Potomac did freeze this year, to within sight of the Capitol. I didn't notice anyone skating yet though, give them a few years to get used to it.

You can pretend it is getting hotter but (for one example of many) as of today my red maples and yellow birches still haven't leafed out! 

As for moving south, we did look into it some,  but my partner wishes to remain employed, and there are no career opportunities for her in southern Appalachia or eastern Texas.  Unsurprisingly, Atlanta, Raleigh, Houston and Dallas (where career opportunities do exist) just do not attract.

Great to see you back Snowleopard.  What a winter that was, am I glad it's over.  ::) ;D

Thanks GO

Winter seems to be done here too, with any luck.   Six months of winter is a little much!

Temps switched from mostly below "normal" to mostly above.  Most of the trees (except yellow birches and some red maples that are usually early) are leafing out and my plums are blooming.

The last of my snowpiles melted away last week.  I'll wait until next week to swap off  the winter tires though.

It is not at all controversial geologically that we are headed into full glaciation.  The cycle will continue, the question is when we get there. 

I guess that's why you can sail through the Northwest Passage now, for the first time in recorded history?

http://www.livescience.com/48105-cargo-ship-solos-northwest-passage.html (http://www.livescience.com/48105-cargo-ship-solos-northwest-passage.html)

 So this captain got lucky.  One can Google up multiple accounts of ships attempting the passage that needed rescue. 

Arctic ocean ice thickness and coverage is mostly controlled by wind velocity and direction, then by ocean currents and lastly by temperature.  Most of Alaska was not glaciated at the Last Glacial Maximum and the Arctic ocean was open several times during that glaciation.  .




Guess that's why the ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctic are melting?

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html (https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html)

http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/shrinking-ice-shelves/ice-shelves/ (http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/shrinking-ice-shelves/ice-shelves/)

Currently the average annual ice accumulation on Greenland runs about 400 GigaTons.  This year is slightly above the average.

http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/ (http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/)

Antarctic sea ice is currently running 2-3 standard deviations above normal and has broken many all time extent records this year:

https://sunshinehours.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2015_day_128_1981-2010.png (https://sunshinehours.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2015_day_128_1981-2010.png)


There is also the interesting story of the "climate scientists"  in the 2013 Antarctic summer who tried to duplicate the 1913 Mawson expedition with a modern ice strengthened vessel, got stuck in the ice and had to be rescued.  The much less capable vessel of 1913 had no serious trouble.  They were trying to show how much the ice had melted!

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17277-global-warming-alarmists-stuck-in-antarctic-sea-ice (http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17277-global-warming-alarmists-stuck-in-antarctic-sea-ice)



Send us a little ice age glaciation down our way, we could use the water.

If only I had that power, I'd be happy to oblige!  ::)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090315203150.png)

Snowleapard,
With your 24/7 evidence free Propaganda laced with "scientific" remarks like "The captain got lucky", you have earned a permanent sign (mendacity expert) painted on your back by Eddie, UB and myself.

As to you "agreeing" with me on corruption in government, the point of my post is that  ANYTHING that rankles the feathers of the fossil fuel industry is something YOU refuse to bring up. Spare me the "China is doing this and Russia is doing that" PROPAGANDA pro-war hysteria while you "tactfully" ignore the destruction of our finances for the benefit of the fossil fuel industry.

Your SILENCE is the issue, pal! And that stack of agonotology based graphs you just presented are a perfect example of your disingenuous double talk.

GO, when your are ROASTING in Boston this summer and your power bill GOES THROUGH THE ROOF TO PROVE IT, try to remember last winter and everything I have posted here calmly explaining why the more extreme winter is an EFFECT of global Warming. The hotter than blazes summer will be something ALSO expected but, OF COURSE, something Snowleopard will "tactfully" ignore while he (pretends to) order another pair of ice skates.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

Go ahead, GO, play kissy face with Snowleopard. And be sure and IGNORE what the scientists at the following web site, staffed EXCLUSIVELY BY CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, say. No need to strain yourself, after all.

But if you REALLY want to know how Snowleopard TICKS, this article points to an online brief course on the Climate Denial MO.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

An Online University Course on the Science of Climate Science Denial Filed under: Climate Science — mike @ 22 April 2015

Guest post from John Cook, University of Queensland

For many years, RealClimate has been educating the public about climate science. The value of climate scientists patiently explaining the science and rebutting misinformation directly with the public cannot be overestimated. When I began investigating this issue, my initial searches led me here, which was invaluable in increasing my understanding of our climate and making sense of misinformation. RealClimate has inspired and empowered a host of climate communicators such as myself to step forward and help make climate science more accessible to the general public.

To further the work of educating the public, and empowering people to communicate the realities of climate change, the Skeptical Science team has collaborated with The University of Queensland to develop a MOOC, Making Sense of Climate Science Denial. MOOC stands for Massive (we’ve already had thousands of students sign up from over 130 countries) Open (available for free to everyone) Online (web-based, no software required) Course.


The course examines the science of climate science denial. Why do a small but vocal minority reject the scientific evidence for climate change? What techniques do they use to cast doubt on the science?

And we examine the all-important questionbased on scientific research, how should we respond to science denial?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RedrutZ_G3Q&feature=player_embedded

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/04/an-online-university-course-on-the-science-of-climate-science-denial/ (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/04/an-online-university-course-on-the-science-of-climate-science-denial/)

Agelbert NOTE: One of the techniques, used BOTH by Snowleopard and Mking, is the resolution reduction trick used in graphing in order to give the appearance of a gradient in the direction of COOLING   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png). What they do is bring in several million years, something that is irrelevant to what has happened in the last 200 years, but it looks good on paper.  :evil4: 

They also go in the opposite direction to narrowly focus on a temperature record at exactly the spot following a temperature spike. WHY? Because, after the spike is chopped off the graph  :evil4:, the slight reversion to mean, regardless of the FACT that the mean rate IS climbing, gives the FALSE and MISLEADING appearance of a pause. This is pure and unadulterated malice and aforethought (mens rea) disinformation in the servie of the fossil fuel industry. People like this should be imprisoned for life as enemies of humanity and the biosphere. Have a nice day.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 11, 2015, 09:51:08 pm
(http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/ (http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/)

Brave Climate Deniers everywhere, please ignore the above silly graph by NASA.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/fly.gif)

Within a thousand years or so we are going to get cooler with lots of BRRRR glaciation! (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif) Hurry, buy a big oil fired furnace now! Snowleopard, Mking and your great-great-great-great (you get the idea  ;)) grandchildren will thank you.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 11, 2015, 10:39:45 pm
WHY Free Marketers RESIST accepting the FACTS about Global Climate Change.
(http://www.myinterestingfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Nile-River-Travel-Routes.jpg)
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/290.gif)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTQldGEpcNk&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 12, 2015, 12:24:21 am
UB debunks Snowleopard (sl)! (http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb029.gif)

What a joke to present a graph of the last 18 years to say no warming in that period debunks global warming when those same years contai n all the hottest in history. Since 96. Now go ahead and expand those last 18 years back  the 50 million u say are relevant to show the real picture. And while u r at it lets see the ocean temps in the same period since 96 . Then tell the truth about who has conceded anything.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp)


So again u ignore ocean temp talk about temp instead of climate. And tell us that the 50 million year trend is dOwn. But u got to leave out that 50 million downward turning sharply up since we started burning fossil fuels. So sl wtf is the skijump shape of the trend?  Why in the last 1oo yrs the trend ends. Why do u  have to present false graph claiming it goes to yr 2ooo when its only to 1950. Because  the steep climb upwards in the last 65 yrs would put the lie to it. As for your alternative explanation for wandering jetstream it ignores alaska and siberia shorts and t shirt winter weather.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 14, 2015, 03:23:38 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-140515152155.png)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_aguo7V0Q4&feature=player_embedded

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 14, 2015, 10:23:38 pm
A Map Of How Far The Earthquake In Nepal Moved The Earth
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--giy3M6SO--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/1251970088080646573.png)

http://io9.com/a-map-of-how-far-the-earthquake-in-nepal-moved-the-eart-1704446580 (http://io9.com/a-map-of-how-far-the-earthquake-in-nepal-moved-the-eart-1704446580)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 16, 2015, 04:06:36 pm
Permafrost Thaw Would Have Runaway Effect on Carbon Release

Posted on May 15, 2015

By Tim Radford, Climate News Network

This Creative Commons-licensed piece first appeared at Climate News Network
.

LONDON—An international team of scientists has settled one puzzle of the Arctic permafrost and confirmed one long-standing fear: the vast amounts of carbon now preserved in the frozen soils could one day all get back into the atmosphere.

Since the Arctic is the fastest-warming place on the planet, such a release of greenhouse gas could only accelerate global warming and precipitate catastrophic climate change.

That the circumpolar regions of the northern hemisphere hold vast amounts of deep-frozen carbon is not in question.

The latest estimate is 17 billion tonnes, which is twice the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and perhaps 10 times the quantity put into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels since the start of the Industrial Revolution.

Hazard underlined

In recent weeks, researchers have already underlined the potential hazard. But the big question has been that if some of the trapped carbon must be escaping now, where is it going?

Researchers have checked the mouths of the Arctic rivers for the telltale evidence of ancient dissolved organic carbon—partly-rotted vegetable matter deep-frozen more than 20,000 years ago—and found surprisingly little.

Now Robert Spencer, an oceanographer at Florida State University, and colleagues from the US, UK, Russia, Switzerland and Germany report in Geophysical Research Letters that the answer lies in the soil—and in the headwater streams of the terrestrial Arctic regions.

Instead of flowing down towards the sea, the thawing peat and ancient leaf litter of the warming permafrost is being metabolised by microbes and released swiftly into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.

“We found that decomposition converted 60% of the carbon
 in the thawed permafrost to carbon dioxide in two weeks”



The scientists conclude that the microbes, once they get a chance to work at all, act so fast that half of all the soil carbon they can get at is turned into carbon dioxide within a week. It gets into the atmosphere before it has much chance to flow downstream with the soil meltwater.

The researchers centred their study on Duvanny Yar in Siberia, where the Kolyma River sluices through a bank of permafrost to expose the frozen organic carbon.

They worked at 19 different sites—including places where the permafrost was more than 30 metres deep—and they found tributary streams made entirely of thawed permafrost.

Measurement of the carbon concentration confirmed that it was indeed ancient. The researchers analysed its form in the meltwater, then they bottled it with a selection of local microbes, and waited.

Used by microbes

“We found that decomposition converted 60% of the carbon in the thawed permafrost to carbon dioxide in two weeks,” says Aron Stubbins, assistant professor at the University of Georgia’s Skidaway Institute of Oceanography. “This shows that permafrost carbon is definitely in a form that can be used by the microbes.”

The finding raises a new—and not yet considered—aspect of the carbon cycle jigsaw puzzle, because what happens to atmospheric and soil carbon is a huge element in all climate simulations.

At he moment, permafrost carbon is not a big factor in projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Dr Spencer says: “When you have a huge frozen store of carbon and it’s thawing, we have some big questions. The primary question is, when it thaws, what happens to it?

“Our research shows that this ancient carbon is rapidly utilised by microbes and transferred to the atmosphere, leading to further warming in the region, and therefore more thawing. So we get into a runaway effect.”
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/permafrost_thaws_runaway_effect_on_carbon_release_20150515
(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2955.gif) (http://www.mrwallpaper.com/wallpapers/Sad-Sunflower.jpg) (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2953.gif)

 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-021114150033.png)

 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-260914180633.png)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 17, 2015, 02:51:15 pm
Droughts, Floods and Heatwaves: Blame It on Climate Change

Tim Radford, Climate News Network | May 17, 2015 11:21 am

As temperatures soar to record heights, blame it on global warming—but only about three-quarters of the time. And when the rain comes down by the bucketful, you can attribute one downpour in five to climate change.
Yet another team of research scientists has looked at the probabilities, and has linked extremes of weather with global warming.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/dryres650.jpg)
A dried-out reservoir in California, which is already in the grip of ongoing severe drought. Photo credit: Ian Abbott / Flickr

Extremes have always happened and are, by definition, rare events. So, for the last 30 years, climate scientists have carefully explained that no particular climate event could be identified as the consequence of a rise in global average temperatures driven by the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels.

But some events that were once improbable have now become statistically more probable because of global warming, according to Erich Fischer and Reno Knutti, climate scientists at ETH Zurich—the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.

They report in Nature Climate Change that they looked at simulations of probabilities and climate records for the period 1901 to 2005, and projections for the period 2006 to 2100.

Rise in temperatures

Then they settled down to calculate the likelihood that a proportion of past heatwaves or floods could be linked to a measured average rise in planetary temperatures so far of 0.85°C.

They worked out how these proportions would change if the average planetary temperatures reach 2°C above the “normal” of the pre-industrial world, and they found that human-induced global warming could already be responsible for 18 percent of extremes of rain or snow, and 75 percent of heatwaves
worldwide.

If the temperatures go up to the 2°C that nations have agreed should be the limit, then the probability of precipitation extremes that could be blamed on global warming rises to 40 percent. They are less precise about heatwaves, but any rise could be sharp.

“If temperatures rise globally by 2°C, we would expect twice as many extreme heat events worldwide than we would with a 1.5 percent increase,” Dr Fischer says.

“These global warming targets, which are discussed in climate negotiations and which differ little at first glance, therefore have a great influence on the frequency of extremes.”

The researchers are talking about probabilities: it will still be difficult ever to say that one event was a random happening, and another a result of climate change. In such research, there are definition problems. What counts as extreme heat in northern England would not be extreme in India or Saudi Arabia.

But such distinctions could become increasingly academic for people who live in the path of unusual heat and extended drought, or flash floods and catastrophic hailstorms.

A scientist recently told the European Geosciences Union that some regions of the planet will see unprecedented drought, driven once again by climate change, before 2050.

Ignored warnings
   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/fly.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/126fs2277341.gif)

Yusuke Satoh, of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, warned that under the notorious business-as-usual scenario −where nations ignore such warnings and just go on burning fossil fuels—13 of 26 global regions would see “unprecedented hydrological drought levels” by 2050. Some would see this parching much earlier—the Mediterranean by 2027, and the western U.S. as early as 2017.

Such studies are calculated to help provoke governments, states and water authorities into preparing for climate change, but it just may be that the western U.S. is already feeling the heat. California, in particular, has been in the grip of unprecedented drought, and researchers have already linked this to
climate change.

Reservoirs and irrigation systems are built on historical data. “But in the next few decades, these historical data may no longer give us accurate information about current conditions,” Dr Satoh says. “The earlier we take this seriously, the better we will be able to adapt.”

http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/17/droughts-floods-heatwaves-climate-change/

 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-140515152155.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 18, 2015, 12:39:22 am
Quote
Just as we were watching for, now professionals are saying publicly…… we could be looking a new eruption in Hawaii along the lines of what occurred 5 days before the 2011 Japan 9.0M mega-earthquake.  :o  :P

(http://i2.wp.com/dutchsinse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/hawaii-swarm-may-16-2015-earthquakes.jpg)

http://dutchsinse.tatoott1009.com/5162015-professionals-warn-a-new-eruption-of-kilauea-volcano-in-hawaii-may-be-coming-soon/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 20, 2015, 03:48:16 pm
(http://images.whiteflowerfarm.com/Crocus-bulbs.jpg)
Crocus

(http://newfs.s3.amazonaws.com/taxon-images-1000s1000/Hyacinthaceae/chionodoxa-luciliae-fl-azinovjev.jpg)
Chionodoxa Boiss (glory of the snow)
(http://www.list-of-birthstones.com/birth%20flowers/Pictures%20of%20birth%20flowers/Daffodils.jpg)
Daffodil

(http://www.alpinegardensociety.net/image_files/diary/sizednarcis%20jetfire5976.JPG)
Jetfire

(http://www.gardensablaze.com/Bulbs/Hyacinth15.jpg)
Hyacinth

(http://fichas.infojardin.com/foto-arbusto/azalea-japonica.jpg)
 
Azalea

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)Annual Agelbert Colchester, Vermont Plant Flowering Report
Despite the bitter cold winter 2014-2015 delaying the early flowering plants, I see a warming pattern that is rather obvious and blatent. Also the sudden shift from below freezing well above freezing is destroying the male sugaring season in Vermont, which requires above and below freezing temperatures to keep the sap pumping. The radical, and sudden shift to high temperatures severely shortens the flowering time of early flowering plants like crocus, glory of the snow, hyacinth and daffodils. This, in turn, harms the insects that pollinate these flowers and need the flower nectar. And all because the fossil fuelers want to keep their profit over planet suicidal "gravy train" going.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183312.bmp)

There is an old saying in Vermont that you should not plant frost sensitive plants until after Memorial day. I think that can pretty well be laid to rest now.

Also this AVERAGE of ONLY one day earlier spring claimed by the bean counter scientists (don't forget the later fall as well) since the 50's is bad science. Yes, the math is correct, but it doesn't take into account positive feedback warming effects which are accelerating the trend. If the last five years is any indication, spring coming ONE DAY earlier each year is no longer a reasonable expectation. I suspect 3 or 4 days a year is probably more accurate.
FLOWER   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015   
Crocus  April 2March 19April 15April 13April 28 less than a tenth flowered and wilted in a few days
Chionodoxa Boiss (glory of the snow)  April 13March 31April 15April 20May 1
Daffodil   April 23April 10April 22May 2May 5 and  they wilted in a few days instead of lasting a couple of weeks
Jetfire   April 22April 9 April 24DiedNo data
Hyacinth   April 23April 9April 25May 5no flowers
Azalea   May 11 April 24May 8May 11May 9
Columbine    May 15April 30May 19May 23May 17
Mayflower    No dataNo dataNo dataNo dataMay 19

(http://freetiiupixflwrs.cwahi.net/Image_Pages/Nature/Plants/Garden_Flowers/Spring_Flowers/allium-1.jpg)
Allium (Mayflower) record begins in 2015
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 21, 2015, 03:30:18 pm
SNIPPET from Thom Hartmann article plus many EXCELLENT comments:

Quote
In other words, if you commit a crime that HELPS corporations, nothing will happen to you. But if you commit a crime that HURTS a corporation, there'll be hell to pay. Just look at what happened to tech activist Aaron Swartz before he so sadly took his own life.

All Swartz did was download a few articles off a private internet database - an action that could have hurt a corporation - and the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts slapped him with charges that could have resulted in 35 years in prison!

This is a culture-wide problem. It’s why Lindsey Lohan, for example, goes to jail for stealing a necklace while Jamie Dimon gets to stay in charge of the biggest bank in the country even though he oversaw a multi-billion dollar theft from millions of average Americans.

Americans are starting to figure out that we now have separate and different rules for criminal behavior that helps versus crimes that hurt corporations, and that’s just wrong. For our democracy to function, our criminal justice system must punish all people who break the law in serious ways, instead of imprisoning shoplifters and pot smokers, while letting criminals in banks get off scott free.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708


patrick H.T. paine •

But the value system HASN'T changed, it was slightly hindered by the "depression" and the WAR, but began reasserting itself immediately after......using the available loopholes.
Reagan simply represented a demarcation point where "corporations" could become international having used up the advantages of being the only intact manufacturing economy in the world after the war.....now they could exploit the entire world in the same manner with which they played off various states for tax breaks and concessions within the U.S. ( as they are still doing.)
You can and will continue repeating yourself because you "love your job", but that won't solve the problem.
Now the concept of the "corporate death penalty" expanded to include its enablers? -
 http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708


Cheerful Clips • May 20


There are so many "crimes" that human being people can accomplish that harm and injure Corporations that the Cops and DAs will go after. CHICKEN & PIG photography. It is unlawful to take a photograph of a factory farm. A woman recorded video clips of Horses being abused at a Corporation in Weld County, Colorado.

 She was tried / convicted / jailed cuz the WELD DA said she failed to immediately file a complaint of Animal Abuse against the Corporation and turn over the video clips as evidence. Her delay was deemed to be Animal Abuse.

The Corporation activity of abusing Hoses had no legal consequences. In the view of the law, you need not "shoplift" to harm and injure a Corporation. There are 1000s of activities a human being may achieve with respect to a Corporation that are unlawful.

The truth of the matter is that all our long efforts to improve can be undone in an afternoon. The Auto Works Union improved stuff for over 80 years. The State of Michagan reversed all those improvements in one afternoon.

The guys that run stuff get their way. They have an A-Team / Republicans and a B-Team / Demcrates. The guys that run stuff have got all the voters in America covered. Sure the human being people can improve stuff, but the improvements will be reversed in an afternoon at the whim of the guys that run stuff.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708


ddanl •


Get Out Of Jail Cards;

1-Wealth, OR, how MUCH are you worth

2-Fame, not always guaranteed (OJ Simpson)

3-Job Title, Mayor Blah is NOT going to Jail...COPs or,

4-Related to a COP, self explanatory

5-Politics, and those associated with Politics, Ambassadors, Lobbyists, any1 with influence

6-if you're a White Man with a Gun
http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708

Aliceinwonderland

Reading Thom’s introductory post, I’m reminded yet again, the regulatory policies on corporations were more enlightened and more robust in the 1870s than they are today. And that’s pretty damn depressing.

Now in the 2010’s, corporations are “people” while we are chopped liver. Apparently Warren Harding’s incarnates still occupy the seats of Congress, hellbent on further reducing the USA to a banana republic sh it hole. Empty suits, all of them.

Kill a bunch of people via negligence… Hey, no big deal, just pay the fine! In the same country where jaywalkers and shopliofters can ger executed on the spot, and smoking a joint can still land you in prison for life. Amazing.

One thing that has to change if we’ve got a prayer of a chance: we all need to wake up to the consequences of congressional seats filled by psychopaths. Too bad psychopathy can’t be recognized as a birth defect so easily as missing limbs or the “wrong” gender. People with no soul and no conscience are incredibly dangerous, especially when they occupy seats of power and influence, as this Amtrak scenario clearly illustrates.

But it is only one example of many. If we don’t learn to weed out these subhuman imposters, we will be forever screwed, all the way to extinction.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708


agelbert

We have problems that go way beyond the mens rea criminal negligence of the criminal justice system.

"in many ways the West already observes truly 'free markets,' or economic anarchy where giant corporations are free to do anything they wish, including wage massive, global wars in pursuit of their interests. The constrictive laws and regulations many well-intentioned free-market advocates abhor, have been imposed by these unhindered, anarchical corporations, not by a 'socialist government.' What these advocates perceive as a 'socialist government' is in fact an interface created and controlled by unhindered, unregulated, unaccountable corporate-financier interests." -- Charles Hugh Smith

"The rich executed a coup d’état that transformed the three branches of the U.S. government and nearly all institutions, including the mass media, into wholly owned subsidiaries of the corporate state." -- Chris Hedges

"The core responsibility assigned to governments in democracies is the public welfare, protecting the human birthright to basic needs: clean air, water, land, and a place to live, under equitable rules of access to all common property resources. It is astonishing to discover that major political efforts in democracies can be turned to undermining the core purpose of government, destroying the factual basis for fair and effective protection of essential common property resources of all to feed the financial interests of a few. These efforts, limiting scientific research on environment, denying the validity of settled facts and natural laws, are a shameful dance, far below acceptable or reputable political behavior. It can be treated not as a reasoned alternative, but scorned for what it is – simple thievery." —George M. Woodwell, Woods Hole Research Center founder  

"We do not need a 'new' business model for energy because we never had one. What we need, if we wish to avoid extinction, is to plug the environmental and equity costs of energy production and use into our planning and thinking. " -- A.G. Gelbert

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." -- Aldous Huxley "We can’t have a healthy business on a sick planet."-- Ashley Orgain, manager of mission advocacy and outreach for Seventh Generation, Burlington, Vermont

And spare me the the idea that voting will help. The FIRST THING the psychopaths in charge did when they executed the coup is ENSURE WHO COUNTED the votes. The 1% are suicidal psychopaths who would rather reign in profit over polluted planet hell than biosphere math heaven. IF they do not extract their insane, ignorant, arrogant and stupid heads from their collective pampered descending colons and submit to doing the biosphere math 24/7, we will go extinct, PERIOD.

The 1%'s Responsibility to Shoulder 80% of the COST of a 100% Renewable Energy World

http://blog.renewableenergyworld.com/ugc/blogs/2013/10/one-percents-planetary-assets-equals-80-responsibility-for-funding-a-100-renewable-energy-world.html

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/05/end-banksters%E2%80%99-get-out-jail-free-card#comment-320708
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 21, 2015, 09:39:35 pm
Antarctica is Losing Its Edge  :(

SNIPPET:

Quote
Do irreversible changes justify inaction?

The changes and ice losses discussed above appear to be irreversible. Their global effects will be hard and very expensive to handle. Life will not be the same. And some penguin populations will shrink, if not disappear. No matter what. It would be easy to say, therefore, that important changes to human habits are not needed (since it may be too late for Antarctica). Our only continent without permanent human inhabitants will simply have to cope—and it will be a great science experiment to see what happens.

This is wrong for three reasons that go even beyond sea level and penguins:

Other Antarctic systems are changing and can have dire consequences. Phytoplankton in the ocean produce most (perhaps 70–80 percent) of the oxygen in the atmosphere and take up most of the carbon dioxide that the oceans store. A key area for seasonal phytoplankton growth is around Antarctica—but like the algae, phytoplankton (which are also krill food) are decreasing. If this continues it could be fatal. We need oxygen.
 
•Global current systems will change. We have seen, for instance, how delicately balanced the Antarctic systems are; fractions of a degree of ocean temperature make a huge difference. But there are even bigger changes that could happen. The Southern Ocean’s cold, salty Antarctic bottom water system helps drive the mixing and the ocean nutrition system for the entire planet. And the currents also serve as a thermal control (e.g., the Gulf Stream that keeps Europe warm). In addition, much of our seafood comes from places where the cold, nutrient- and oxygen-rich Antarctic water, now thousands of miles north, is forced to the surface. Continued heating of the Southern Ocean will certainly change these patterns, and such changes may be very challenging.
 
•Even more tipping points are out there. Key glacial systems like West Antarctica are already past their tipping points. But there are likely other systems in motion that have never been measured—additional East Antarctica glacier systems, for instance—in the mysterious White Continent and globally. The smart guess is there are more tipping points and the surprises they bring will not generally be good ones for anyone.

So why make a crazy bet to say, “Let’s not bother?” It might cost us a few percent of GDP? If we do, Antarctica will likely lose more than its edge. It will lose its oceans, its middle, and its life—and so may we.

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)
http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2015_05_15_antarctica_is_losing_its_edge
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 21, 2015, 10:02:21 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuGrBhK2c7U&feature=player_embedded
The Gulf Stream and Climate Change
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/minzdr.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 26, 2015, 07:33:41 pm
Sudden onset of ice loss in Antarctica so large it affects Earth's gravity field

Date:May 21, 2015

Source:University of Bristol

Summary:Scientists have observed a sudden increase of ice loss in a previously stable region of Antarctica. The ice loss (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) in the region is so large that it causes small changes in the gravity field of the Earth.

 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150521143926.htm

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) India Heatwave Kills 800+ and Literally Melts the Roads

Cole Mellino | May 26, 2015 2:21 pm

India is in the midst of a major heatwave, which has killed at least 800 people and melted roads in New Delhi as temperatures neared 122 degrees Fahrenheit (50 degrees Celsius). India’s Meteorological Department issued heat warnings to several states where temperatures are projected to reach beyond 113 degrees Fahrenheit (45 degrees Celsius) over the next few days, according to AFP.

http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/26/india-heatwave/


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 28, 2015, 11:30:09 pm
Is Antarctica Ice Melting or Growing?   ???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPnj9eR7t0g&feature=player_embedded

MELTING!

http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/28/nasa-antarctica-ice-shelf/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 31, 2015, 01:13:06 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71l9lzLsBRc&feature=player_embedded
The receding grounding line in Antarctica means the increase in melting will be sudden and hugely accelerate sea level rise.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on May 31, 2015, 01:44:50 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310515134214.png)
http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/noahs_ark_20150530
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 02, 2015, 10:20:12 pm

Well, Well, Well, Look Who  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg) Just Endorsed a Bold Fix For Climate Change

 
—By Tim McDonnell

| Tue Jun. 2, 2015 5:38 PM EDT

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2015/06/guess-who-just-came-out-support-bold-fix-climate-change
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 02, 2015, 11:47:37 pm
India Minister: Climate Change to Blame for (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)  5th Deadliest Heat Wave in World History

Cole Mellino | June 2, 2015 4:20 pm

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/02/india-heat-wave-climate-change/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 05, 2015, 01:51:46 pm
NOAA: There Has Been No ‘Pause’ or ‘Hiatus’ in Global Warming

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)


http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/05/michael-mann-noaa-no-hiatus-global-warming/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 06, 2015, 04:08:30 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-004.gif) Insane Heat Wave in Alaska Put Temperatures Higher Than in Arizona  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)


Cole Mellino | June 5, 2015 11:44 am

 http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/05/heat-wave-alaska/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 09, 2015, 06:52:29 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090615184258.png)

NOAA temperature record updates and the ‘hiatus’  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)

Filed under:
Climate modelling
Climate Science
Instrumental Record

— gavin @ 4 June 2015

In a new paper in Science Express, Karl et al. describe the impacts of two significant updates to the NOAA NCEI (née NCDC) global temperature series. The two updates are: 1) the adoption of ERSST v4 for the ocean temperatures (incorporating a number of corrections for biases for different methods), and 2) the use of the larger International Surface Temperature Initiative (ISTI) weather station database, instead of GHCN.

This kind of update happens all the time as datasets expand through data-recovery efforts and increasing digitization, and as biases in the raw measurements are better understood.

However, this update is going to be bigger news than normal because of the claim that the ‘hiatus’ is no more. To understand why this is perhaps less dramatic than it might seem, it’s worth stepping back to see a little context…

Global temperature anomaly estimates are a product, not a measurement

Full article with several significant and irrefutable charts at the the web site staffed by Climate Scientists. (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/06/noaa-temperature-record-updates-and-the-hiatus/#sthash.0jNcSDzl.dpuf)

2036AD: Fossil Fuelers discuss global temperatures... 

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-160515143531.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 10, 2015, 09:16:37 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615202508.jpeg)
1882 photo taken by G.D. Hazard; 2005 photo taken by Bruce F. Molnia. Courtesy of the Glacier Photograph Collection, National Snow and Ice Data Center/World Data Center for Glaciology.

Before And After Pictures Show How Climate Change Is Destroying The Earth  :(

Dina Spector
 
Agelbert NOTE: This is part one of two parts.

Almost all scientists now agree that global climate change is caused by humans, while the White House pledged $1 billion on Friday to prepare for weather disasters and other events related to climate change.

A steadily-warming planet impacts the environment in many different ways.
Rising global temperatures, largely due to man-made greenhouse gases, are the source of widely-discussed observable changes to the Earth like melting glaciers, rising sea levels, warming oceans, and more extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, droughts, forest fires, and floods.


In the pictures that follow, we take a look at how climate-change-related events have affected regions around the world, whether directly or indirectly.

See the drastic changes »    (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)  :o


ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK BEFORE: Healthy pine trees stretch for tens of millions of acres in the northwestern United States and western Canada.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203142.jpeg)


ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK NOW: A hillside of dead pine trees killed by Mountain Pine Beetles shows the effects of warming temperatures in the mountain ranges. In the past, freezing temperatures reduced insect populations. The beetles are now able to survive the milder winters leading to devastating infestations.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203307.jpeg)


THE GREAT BARRIER REEF BEFORE: Considered one of the most biologically-diverse regions in the world, Australia's Great Barrier Reef covers around 135,000 square miles, or an area that's nearly the size of Texas. Ocean acidification and temperature increases from climate change are the reef's biggest long-term threat.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615204130.jpeg)

THE GREAT BARRIER REEF NOW: Warmer water temperatures trigger widespread coral bleaching, when coral turns white and is much more susceptible to death. Coral is vital to supporting ocean life.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615204221.jpeg)


THE DANUBE RIVER BEFORE: The Danube, Europe's second longest river, flows eastward from its source in Germany to the Black Sea in Romania. The Danube river basin is critical to supporting industry, transport, agriculture, and fishing.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203725.jpeg)


THE DANUBE RIVER NOW: Between 2011 and 2012, a persistent drought led to record-low water levels along the Danube, stranding boats and paralyzing parts of the busy waterway.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203821.jpeg)


THE ALPS BEFORE: Matterhorn, one of Europe's tallest peaks, located in the Alps on the border between Italy and Switzerland, is pictured with a blanket of snow and ice on Aug. 16, 1960.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203437.jpeg)


THE ALPS NOW: The Swiss peak, pictured on Aug. 18, 2005, is eroding as a result of melting glacier water at the summit. The water sinks into cracks and creates even bigger fissures after several cycles of freezing and thawing. The disintegration of Matterhorn is anecdotal of the effects of climate change in most of the Alps.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615203616.jpeg)


MUIR GLACIER BEFORE: A late-19th century photograph of Alaska's Muir Glacier shows many icebergs — some nearly 7-feet wide — in the foreground.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615202655.jpeg)


MUIR GLACIER NOW: By 2005, Muir Glacier had retreated more than 31 miles. Although this picture was taken from the same location as the early black-and-white photograph, the glacier is completely out of view. There's an abundance of vegetation looking to the west, and the beach in the foreground is now covered by pebbles, which came from sediment deposited by Muir Glacier and by melting icebergs on the ground.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100615202900.jpeg)


Second half of this series of before and after pictures tomorrow.   8)
8)

http://www.businessinsider.com/climate-change-before-and-after-pictures-of-earth-2014-2
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2015, 01:25:50 am
May 2015 Earth Climate Summary  :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4F_6awSE3A&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 11, 2015, 08:13:31 pm
Before And After Pictures Show How Climate Change Is Destroying The Earth    (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070814193155.png)

Agelbert NOTE: This is part 2 of 2 parts. Go  HERE for part 1. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/global-warming-is-with-us/msg3276/#msg3276)

LAKE CHAD BEFORE: Africa's Lake Chad, pictured in the 1930s, was once the world's sixth-largest lake. It provided water to at least 20 million people in Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615192610.jpeg)
Wikipedia/Walter Mittelholzer


LAKE CHAD NOW: The lake has lost about 80% of its surface area since the 1960s, a combined effect of irrigation, the damming of rivers, and global warming.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615192708.jpeg)
 AP Photo/Christophe Ena


SAN BLAS ARCHIPELAGO BEFORE: The San Blas islands in Panama are home to the Guna people. Their traditional thatched-roof houses and ancient way of life are being threatened by climate change.
 (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615192818.jpeg)
 Shutterstock/Jarno Gonzalez Zarraonandia


SAN BLAS ARCHIPELAGO NOW: The Caribbean island communities are flooded for several days every rainy season as a result of rising ocean levels caused by global warming. In the foreground, a traffic sign reading "Slow Down" is partially submerged.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615192907.jpeg)
 REUTERS/Carlos Jasso


CORAL REEFS BEFORE: Corals seen in Dibba, located on the east coast of the northern Emirates, are healthy and teeming with fish in 2004.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193304.jpeg)
 REUTERS/Climate change/Handout



CORAL REEFS NOW: The reef was devastated in 2008 by harmful algae blooms known as red tide, potentially linked, in part, to increased greenhouse gases and rising ocean temperatures. The tide kills sea life by depleting the oxygen in the water.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193346.jpeg)
REUTERS/Climate change/Handout



WHITBY HARBOR BEFORE: Whitby, in northern England, was once a busy fishing town that was packed with boats, fish-sellers, and tourists.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193106.jpeg)
 Shutterstock/Lighttraveler


WHITBY HARBOR NOW: The port is now quiet, flanked by empty pots, nets, and dried-out fishing boats as global warming has pushed fish stocks northward. Only about 200 fishermen remain in Whitby.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193145.jpeg)
REUTERS/Dylan Martinez



CARBON DIOXIDE LEVELS 2003: An infrared image from July 2003 shows the concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. The red areas indicate that carbon dioxide concentration is at or above 380 parts per million.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193456.jpeg)


CARBON DIOXIDE LEVELS 2007: The same image of the globe, taken exactly three years later in July 2007, shows that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are rising. The color bar used for 2003 had to be adjusted to account for the increase in carbon dioxide around the globe. Otherwise, the "2007 map would be saturated with reddish colors, and the fine structure of the distribution of carbon dioxide obscured," explains NASA.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193543.jpeg)

BONUS: These maps compare temperatures in each region of the world to what they were from 1951 to 1980. Earth's average surface temperature has increased by about 1.3°F since 1880.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110615193641.jpeg)

 Go  HERE for part 1. (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/global-warming-is-with-us/msg3276/#msg3276)


http://www.businessinsider.com/climate-change-before-and-after-pictures-of-earth-2014-2?op=1

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 17, 2015, 07:44:15 pm
Tue Jun 16, 2015 at 08:03 PM EDT.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif) Global Temperatures Soaring: 2015 starts off the top of the chart & El Niño is just warming up

2014 was the warmest year in global climate records but 2015 is on track to be significantly warmer than 2014. The first 5 months were the warmest on record and global models are predicting a super El Niño that could be the strongest ever measured on record or by paleoclimate proxies.

Australia's Bureau of Meteorology just released a stunning compilation of forecasts from a range of global models.  The consensus of models forecasts that this will be a super El Niño with water temperatures in the equatorial central Pacific of greater than 4.5°F (2.5°C) above normal. NOAA's CFS model forecasts that abnormally warm waters will spread across the southern hemisphere.

Moreover, the deep mass of much warmer than normal water in the Gulf of Alaska dubbed "the blob" will expand to cover the whole far north Pacific.

Exceptionally warm water off of the coast of New England will continue to affect east coast weather. Extraordinarily warm global sea surface temperatures forecast for this summer and fall will bring on even hotter temperatures in the second half of 2015 than the first half. If the models are correct 2015 temperatures will spike far above 2014.

Charts and graphics at link:  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/17/1393794/-Global-Temperatures-Soaring-2015-starts-off-the-top-of-the-chart-El-Nino-is-just-warming-up
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 20, 2015, 02:44:49 am
Most Important Quotes from Pope Francis Statement on Climate Change (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)


Diane MacEachern

June 18, 2015

Pope Francis has unequivocally proclaimed climate change to be one of the “principal challenges facing humanity.” In a letter, or encyclical, the Pope calls on citizens, politicians, business leaders, organizations—in short, all of us—to act immediately and decisively to stop climate change, renew our relationship with Nature, and “enter a dialogue with all people about our common home.”

“Nobody is suggesting a return to the Stone Age,” he said, “but we do need to slow down and look at reality in a different way.”

The encyclical, titled “Laudato Si, or Praised Be to You: On Care for Our Common Home,” took a year to produce with the input of dozens of scientists, scholars, theologians and even previous popes.

Here are the key quotes from the encyclical:

SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF CLIMATE CHANGE

“A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system. … A number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity.”

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE


“The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth. In many parts of the planet, the elderly lament that once beautiful landscapes are now covered with rubbish.”

“Never have we so hurt and mistreated our common home as we have in the last 200 years.”

SEA LEVEL RISE


“If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our megacities are situated in coastal areas.”

IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON ANIMALS


“Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been lost forever.”

We “must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures.”

CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE POOR


“One particularly serious problem is the quality of water available to the poor…. Yet access to safe drinkable water is a basic and universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and, as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights. Our world has a grave social debt towards the poor who lack access to drinking water, because they are denied the right to a life consistent with their inalienable dignity.”

“The exploitation of the planet has already exceeded acceptable limits and we still have not solved the problem of poverty.”

“The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation. In fact, the deterioration of the environment and of society affects the most vulnerable people on the planet: ‘Both everyday experience and scientific research show that the gravest effects of all attacks on the environment are suffered by the poorest.”

WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY

“It is foreseeable that, once certain resources have been depleted, the scene will be set for new wars, albeit under the guise of noble claims.”

SOCIAL MEDIA AS AN OBSTACLE TO SOCIAL CHANGE


“When media and the digital world become omnipresent, their influence can stop people from learning how to live wisely, to think deeply and to love generously…. True wisdom, as the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between persons, is not acquired by a mere accumulation of data which eventually leads to overload and confusion, a sort of mental pollution.

“Real relationships with others, with all the challenges they entail, now tend to be replaced by a type of internet communication which enables us to choose or eliminate relationships at whim, thus giving rise to a new type of contrived emotion which has more to do with devices and displays than with other people and with nature.”

RELATIONSHIP TO POLITICS AND OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM


“There is urgent need for politics and economics to enter into a frank dialogue in the service of life, especially human life.”

“The economy accepts every advance in technology with a view to profit, without concern for its potentially negative impact on human beings.”

“The orientation of the economy has favored a kind of technological progress in which the costs of production are reduced by laying off workers and replacing them with machines. This is yet another way in which we can end up working against ourselves.”

“Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals. Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximizing profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations? Where profits alone count, there can be no thinking about the rhythms of nature, its phases of decay and regeneration, or the complexity of ecosystems which may be gravely upset by human intervention.”

OVERCONSUMPTION


“We need to take up an ancient lesson, found in different religious traditions and also in the Bible. It is the conviction that “less is more.” A constant flood of new consumer goods can baffle the heart and prevent us from cherishing each thing and each moment. To be serenely present to each reality, however small it may be, opens us to much greater horizons of understanding and personal fulfilment. Christian spirituality proposes a growth marked by moderation and the capacity to be happy with little. It is a return to that simplicity which allows us to stop and appreciate the small things, to be grateful for the opportunities which life affords us, to be spiritually detached from what we possess, and not to succumb to sadness for what we lack. This implies avoiding the dynamic of dominion and the mere accumulation of pleasures.”

WE ARE ALL ONE FAMILY


“We need to strengthen the conviction that we are one single human family.”

“We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it.”

HOPE FOR THE FUTURE


“Yet all is not lost. Human beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of rising above themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start, despite their mental and social conditioning.”

“When we ask ourselves what kind of world we want to leave behind, we think in the first place of its general direction, its meaning and its values. Unless we struggle with these deeper issues, I do not believe that our concern for ecology will produce significant results. But if these issues are courageously faced, we are led inexorably to ask other pointed questions: What is the purpose of our life in this world? Why are we here? What is the goal of our work and all our efforts? What need does the earth have of us? It is no longer enough, then simply to state that we should be concerned for future generations. We need to see that what is at stake is our own dignity.”

WHAT WE CAN DO INDIVIDUALLY


“Education in environmental responsibility can encourage ways of acting which directly and significantly affect the world around us, such as avoiding the use of plastic and paper, reducing water consumption, separating refuse, cooking only what can reasonably be consumed, showing care for other living beings, using public transport or car-pooling, planting trees, turning off unnecessary lights, or any number of other practices. All of these reflect a generous and worthy creativity which brings out the best in human beings. Reusing something instead of immediately discarding it, when done for the right reasons, can be an act of love which expresses our own dignity.”

WHAT WE CAN DO COLLECTIVELY

“We are able to take an honest look at ourselves, to acknowledge our deep dissatisfaction, and to embark on new paths to authentic freedom. No system can completely suppress our openness to what is good, true and beautiful, or our God-given ability to respond to his grace at work deep in our hearts. I appeal to everyone throughout the world not to forget this dignity which is ours. No one has the right to take it from us.”

(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1225/1225662m3squ1oj6v.gif)


http://www.care2.com/greenliving/most-important-quotes-from-pope-francis-statement-on-climate-change.html#ixzz3da7uObwo
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 21, 2015, 10:14:32 pm
Colombia: Windstorm affects banana crops
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210615221015.jpeg)

In Uraba, Colombia, more than 200 hectares of banana were seriously affected by a gale. The weather phenomenon also caused significant damage to homes in the town of Chigorodó.

According to the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies of Colombia, the region was already on yellow alert due to the looming drought that El Niño could cause.

This implies there will be an increase in temperatures proportional to the lack of rain, which had generated alarms so that the producers took the necessary measures regarding the prevention of fires, floods and landslides.

According to estimates, there are 48,000 hectares of bananas distributed in four municipalities of Uraba, known as the Banana Axis, which accounts for more than 70% of the national production of this fruit.

Publication date: 6/8/2015

http://www.freshplaza.com/article/141071/Colombia-Windstorm-affects-banana-crops
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 24, 2015, 01:27:53 pm
6 Devastating Heat Waves Hitting the Planet

Lorraine Chow | June 23, 2015 11:28 am

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/23/heat-waves-hit-planet/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 27, 2015, 11:33:04 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky0dwKjYmHE&feature=player_embedded
Goldilocks and the Greenhouse

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 29, 2015, 02:12:48 am
Scientists Baffled Over Unprecedented Warming of Ocean Off Atlantic and Pacific Coasts

Tim Radford, Climate News Network | June 28, 2015 11:10 am

 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/28/warming-of-ocean-atlantic-pacific/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: IAMTHATIAM on June 29, 2015, 03:12:49 am
You stated:
Quote
look at the storms, droughts, and floods we've had with a warming of less than 1oC
Can you give any actual statisics/links to back that?
Also, we have risen about two degrees since the little ice age. Basically you believe we need to stay right at some halfway point of a two degree range. When has that ever happened for a long time? :o
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 29, 2015, 01:59:56 pm
Quote
'Religious leaders have a duty to speak out about climate change':... (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)
Dalai Lama Endorses Pope Francis’s Encyclical on Climate Change

Cole Mellino | June 29, 2015 10:35 am

The Dalai Lama endorsed the Pope’s encyclical on climate change yesterday while speaking at Glastonbury festival, a massive five-day festival that takes place in Somerset, England. The Buddhist leader spoke at a panel on climate change, praising the encyclical and saying it was the duty of everyone to “say more. We have to make more of an effort, including demonstrations.”

Several Republican politicians have criticized the Pope for speaking out about environmental and economic issues, including Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum and James Inhofe. But at the Glastonbury panel on climate change, the Dalai Lama said Pope Francis was “very right,” and he appreciated him releasing the papal document. The Dalai Lama called on fellow religious leaders to “speak out about current affairs which affect the future of mankind.” He also called for increased pressure on governments around the world to stop burning fossil fuels, end deforestation and transition to renewable energy sources, reports The Guardian.

He also emphasized that words alone are not enough top stop climate change. “It is not sufficient to just express views, we must set a timetable for change in the next two to four years.”

The Tibetan spiritual leader also spoke about the need to end war, calling the concept of war “outdated.” The Dalai Lama said we need to shift our focus to launch a global effort to tackle climate change. “Countries think about their own national interest rather than global interests and that needs to change because the environment is a global issue.”

He also stressed that everyone needs to take action even on an individual level to reduce their impact.   (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

To end the holy leader’s visit, Singer Patti Smith presented the Dalai Lama, who turns 80 today, with a birthday cake and led the crowd in singing happy birthday to him. 

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/29/dalai-lama-pope-encyclical/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 29, 2015, 03:03:32 pm
IAMTHATIAM said,
Quote
You stated:
Quote
look at the storms, droughts, and floods we've had with a warming of less than 1oC
Can you give any actual statisics/links to back that?

Of course. The following web site about climate science, run exclusively by climate scientists, has all the data about global temperatures (and other statistics as well). Climate science has established empirically that free energy has to go somewhere when it is trapped in our biosphere. That "somewhere" is storm activity (that mostly impacts the poorest humans and other earthlings  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)).

Here's a snippet from one of the articles at RealClimate.org:


Quote


(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Foto_3_zu_4_Carbon_Pricing_groß.png)

Figure 1: The Global Commons and the fundamental problem of climate policy: there are still plenty of fossil resources in the ground, but only a limited disposal space in the atmosphere left. Data: Atmosphere: IPCC AR5 Synthesis Report, Table 2.2.; Resource: IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy, Figure 1.7. Source: Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC).


To frame the climate problem as a “global commons” problem has far reaching consequences.

This became clear when the term was relegated by the governments from the main text into a footnote in the report of the IPCC Working Group III. Some countries feared legal and distributional consequences.

If the atmosphere is accepted as being a global commons, this immediately raises the question of who owns the atmosphere and who is allowed to pollute it.

The encyclical is very clear about this:

Quote
The natural environment is a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity and the responsibility of everyone (95).

Ownership thus goes hand in hand with a responsibility to take into account the principles of justice.

The currently prevailing “law of the jungle”, causing the atmosphere to be overused in terms of the deposition of carbon ad infinitum, is thus de-legitimized by the Pope. - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/06/heaven-belongs-to-us-all-the-new-papal-encyclical/#sthash.MYn2tGnT.dpuf


Because of our distance from the sun, we should be a frozen ice ball with our oceans totally frozen solid. We aren't BECAUSE greenhouse gasses trap Infrared energy here. It's not a matter of belief; it's a matter of the curious, but scientifically measured way in which certain tri-atomic gas molecules like CO2 and H2O handle certain wave lengths in the electromagnetic spectrum.  This is old hat.

IAMTHATIAM said,
Quote
Also, we have risen about two degrees since the little ice age. Basically you believe we need to stay right at some halfway point of a two degree range. When has that ever happened for a long time? :o

The little ice age is not the issue here. The industrial pollution revolution IS the issue. As to global temperature increases, even the temperature increase itself is NOT the real issue with the deleterious effects of said temperature increase.

So what's the big deal? Who cares whether it is one degree, a half a degree or even two degrees or more up? After all, our climate has a natural history of going up and down. As the global warming deniers say, climate change is normal on planet earth, is it not?

All these rhetorical fun and games the deniers play in order to defend the corrupt  profit over people and planet, empathy deficit disordered, abysmally suicidal status quo neglect the central issue with our present temperature increase.

THIS is the central ISSUE: The PRESENT HIGH RATE OF TEMPERATURE INCREASE IS A BIOSPHERE KILLER.

Humans may be able to adapt to this unprecedented rapid temperature increase for a while, but the rest of the earthlings that we depend on will not. Consequently, we are acting STUPIDLY if we don't do everything we can to preserve LIFE all over the biosphere. We ARE NOT DOING THAT. 

It happened before, albeit much more slowly. And still huge die offs occurred.

So, the biosphere math tells us that we are baking in a die off GREATER than the Permian extinction (the biggest die off in natural history), never mind the more recent (relatively speaking - we weren't around then)  die offs from rapid (but not as rapid as we are experiencing today!) temperature increases.

In summary, we are stewards of the biosphere BECAUSE we are, as far as I know, the only self aware species on this planet. Therefore we MUST, as a matter of COMMON SENSE, not just morality, act to keep the biosphere in the most life preserving range of gases and temperatures. Ignoring the facts so we can keep extracting resources willy nilly is abysmally stupid, suicidal behavior. 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 30, 2015, 12:43:48 am
DISRUPTION
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktgEzXZDtmc&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on June 30, 2015, 03:19:10 pm
Pope Francis’s Encyclical Makes Waves from Brazil to the Philippines
(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/crppope650.jpg)

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif)  (http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1087/1087832pmq26zqtt4.gif) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/computer3.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/25/pope-francis-encyclical/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 04, 2015, 03:53:06 pm
Barrie Dunsmore: The real news on weather disasters

Commentary Jul. 3 2015, 7:00 pm 5 Comments

Editor’s note: This commentary by retired ABC News diplomatic correspondent Barrie Dunsmore first aired on Vermont Public Radio. All his columns can be found on his website, www.barriedunsmore.com.

We have reached the point where “storms of the century” are happening all the time. Network news programs are now devoting substantial parts of their broadcasts almost every evening to extreme weather related stories.

The coverage is formulaic. Nowadays nearly everyone has a video phone, so there is no shortage of dramatic pictures. But after a while these storms look pretty much alike. And the interviews with the families who have lost everything sometimes including even family members – as sad as they are — don’t have quite the same impact after the hundredth time.

The part of today’s coverage, which is either given short shrift or is missing entirely is – why? Oh, I know we get occasional explanations about the el-Nino effect, and very occasionally someone dares to utter the dreaded words “climate change.” This makes up a small part of the coverage – mostly because the networks are reluctant to offend fellow corporations.

But if I were running a network – which I never was and never will be – I would greatly expand the coverage of why we have such extreme weather.

After a state has been consistently ravaged by this new pattern of extreme storms, I would report how that state’s congressional delegation – its congressmen and its senators – feel about the issue of climate change through their own words and actions  ;D. The people should especially know how each member has voted, every time, on proposed governmental laws to mitigate climate change impact.

Viewers should also be repeatedly reminded of what ties these political representatives have to the oil, gas and coal industries. (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png) Under the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which gave corporations the same rights as individual people, corporations now can and do plow hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into elections. Most don’t do so for patriotic or altruistic reasons. Under current lax campaign finance laws, some of that money can be hidden. But not all of it. And the American people should be told regularly, just how much their congressmen and senators are getting from corporations, or individuals who oppose virtually any climate change legislation.

The usual argument against effective steps to slow the devastation of a changing climate is that they are too expensive.
So Americans should also frequently be told how much it is costing taxpayers right now, to clean up after every major storm, including business and workers’ pay losses. (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)


No state can be blamed for the hurricane, typhoon, flood or drought it has been hit with. But its people are ultimately responsible for those they elect to represent them.

Such news coverage would certainly make the extreme weather reporting more relevant – and even help to combat climate change. Maybe some day.  (http://www.emofaces.com/png/200/emoticons/fingerscrossed.png)

http://vtdigger.org/2015/07/03/barrie-dunsmore-the-real-news-on-weather-disasters/

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)
(https://allthoughtsworkoutdoors.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/p9047017-030close-up.jpg)



Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 05, 2015, 11:31:56 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-034.gif)Heat Waves In Europe Caused By Climate Change Says Scientists


By Rina Marie Doctor, Tech Times | July 5, 9:09 AM

Experts say that the latest heat waves in Europe is "virtually certain" to be caused by climate change. This week, Germany, Spain and London all experienced the hottest July day ever recorded.

A group of climate experts from universities, meteorological facilities and research teams from all around the world came up with a real-time analysis of climate data on Friday, July 4. According to the scientists, the heat waves striking Europe this week, or coined as three-day periods of excessive heat, are increasing in frequency.

The heat wave analysis is a segment of the bigger World Weather Attribution program, spearheaded by Climate Central, which is a science journalism group based in the US. The analysis was also supported by international organizations such as the University of Melbourne, Oxford University, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute and Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre. The objectives of the said program include utilizing weather information, forecasting and climate frameworks to present how the constantly changing patterns of weather are associated with climate change. Ultimately, the program targets that adequate public understanding be achieved to better prepare the people for radical weather alterations such as the latest heat waves in Europe.

The weather changes that transpired in Europe are highly varied. For example, in De Bilt in the Netherlands, the heat wave that is expected to hit the place in the coming days is said to happen only once in every 30 years in the 1900s. But at present, the said drastic change may occur every three and a half years, the scientists noted.

The heat wave that typically happens once every 100 years was said to have occurred in Mannheim, Germany in the last few days. According to the experts, this type of heat wave is expected to happen every 15 years with the present condition of the planet.

London hit its all-time highest temperature for July on Wednesday, July 1, as Heathrow Airport was detected to have reach 98.06 degrees Fahrenheit (36.7 degrees Celsius), the scientists said.

The connection of the increased frequency of heat waves and climate change is felt by more and more people and that we are encountering a new normal, says Maarten van Aalst, director of the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre.

In the Netherlands, the Central Bureau of Statistics estimates that an average population of 200 or more people will succumb to death each week that the country faces a heat wave. This translates to a 10 percent increase in mortality rates. (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-004.gif)

Deaths in older adults are of particular significance to this current scenario. In 2003, an additional 70,000 people were widely made up of the elderly population when France and other European countries suffered from a heat wave.

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/66079/20150705/heat-waves-in-europe-caused-by-climate-change-says-scientists.htm
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 06, 2015, 11:33:58 pm
Time is running out.  :(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xdOTyGQOso&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 06, 2015, 11:44:26 pm
Dr Jennifer Francis - Arctic Sea Ice, Jet Stream & Climate Change
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAiA-_iQjdU&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 07, 2015, 12:24:22 am
"Civilization cannot survive a 50 Gigaton methane release"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRqv_RhLno4&feature=player_embedded
Professor Peter Wadhams On Subsea Permafrost Methane Releases And Impacts on Civilisation

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 15, 2015, 06:41:51 pm
(http://img07.deviantart.net/bb24/i/2015/105/f/5/we_re_running_out_of_time_by_themoosewhisperer-d81cpwy.jpg)
We're running out of time...
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150715183719.png)

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/07/were-running-out-time#comment-327431
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 21, 2015, 03:02:17 pm
Quote
NASA’s new Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite has released a stunning, new Blue Marble photo for the first time in four decades, prompting President Obama to tweet a gentle reminder “that we need to protect the only planet we have.”

http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/21/obama-blue-marble-photo/

Agelbert Comment: "Shining" blue marble? I don't think so.

I'm surprised they didn't touch the photo up. It looks rather dusty. I saw the IMAX film at Cape Kennedy back in 1976. In that film, you saw Earth from space. Yes it was a lot closer than the photo here but the colors were sparklingly clear. The ocean hues, the land greens, browns, tans and everything in between was sharp. The clouds were distinct. The haze WAS NOT THERE in 1976.

Things are FAR WORSE than the government(s) of the world wish to admit. The people that most benefited from this biosphere trashing are in debt to all earthlings ( ALL life forms in the biosphere) for this CRIME. Make them PAY! 

The 1%'s Responsibility to Shoulder 80% of the COST of a 100% Renewable Energy World with a Viable Biosphere for ALL Earthlings. (http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/one-percents-planetary-assets-equals-80-responsibility-for-funding-a-100-renewable-energy-world)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 23, 2015, 06:26:18 pm
Quote
we ask that the Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust commit now to divesting from the top 200 fossil fuel companies within five years. And that they immediately freeze any new investment in the same companies. - The Guardian

The Argument for Divesting from Fossil Fuels is Becoming Overwhelming   (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

by The Guardian – March 17, 2015 

As progressive institutions, the Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust should commit to taking their money out of the companies that are driving global warming, says The Guardian’s editor-in-chief By Alan Rusbridger

The world has much more coal, oil and gas in the ground than it can safely burn. That much is physics.


Anyone studying the question with an open mind will almost certainly come to a similar conclusion: if we and our children are to have a reasonable chance of living stable and secure lives 30 or so years from now, according to one recent study 80 percent of the known coal reserves will have to stay underground, along with half the gas and a third of the oil reserves.

If only science were enough.  :(

If not science, then politics? MPs, presidents, prime ministers and members of congress are always telling us (often suggesting a surrender of civil liberties in return) that their first duty is the protection of the public.

But politics sometimes struggles with physics. Science is, at its best, long term and gives the best possible projection of future risk. Which is not always how politics works, even when it comes to our security. Politicians prefer certainty and find it difficult to make serious prudent planning on high probabilities.

On climate change, the public clamor is in inverse proportion to the enormity of the long-term threat. If only it were the other way round. And so, year after year, the people who represent us around the UN negotiating tables have moved inches, not miles.

When, as Guardian colleagues, we first started discussing this climate change series, there were advocates for focusing the main attention on governments. States own much of the fossil fuels that can never be allowed to be dug up. Only states, it was argued, can forge the treaties that count. In the end the politicians will have to save us through regulation – either by limiting the amount of stuff that is extracted, or else by taxing, pricing and limiting the carbon that’s burned.

If journalism has so far failed to animate the public to exert sufficient pressure on politics through reporting and analysis, it seemed doubtful whether many people would be motivated by the idea of campaigning for a paragraph to be inserted into the negotiating text at the UN climate talks in Paris this December. So we turned to an area where campaigners have recently begun to have marked successes: divestment.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif)

There are two arguments in favour of moving money out of the biggest and most aggressive fossil fuel companies – one moral, the other financial.

The moral crusaders – among them Archbishop Desmond Tutu – see divestment from fossil fuels in much the same light as earlier campaigners saw the push to pull money out of tobacco, arms, apartheid South Africa – or even slavery. Most fossil fuel companies, they argue, have little concern for future generations.

Of course, the companies are run by sentient men and women with children and grandchildren of their own. But the market pressures and fiduciary duties involved in running public companies compel behavior that is overwhelmingly driven by short-term returns.

Agelbert NOTE: See Empathy Deficit Disorder based "fiduciary duties" ignoring viable biosphere math = suicidal Homo SAPS.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)

So – the argument goes – the directors will meanwhile carry on business as usual, no matter how incredible it may seem that they will be allowed to dig up all the climate-warming assets they own. And, by and large – and discounting recent drops in the price of oil – they continue to be reasonably good short-term businesses, benefiting from enormous subsidies as they search for even more reserves that can never be used.

The pragmatists argue the case on different grounds. It is simply this: that finance will eventually have to surrender to physics.

Photo of Alan Rusbridger (at link) in London, for the launch of the Guardian’s climate change campaign.

If – eventually – the companies cannot, for the sake of the human race, be allowed to extract a great many of the assets they own, then many of those assets will in time become valueless. So people with other kinds of fiduciary duty – people, say, managing endowments, pension funds and investment portfolios – will want to get their money out of these companies before the bubble bursts.

Of course, the financial risk comes not simply from the threat of regulation, but could also be hastened by the march of alternative clean energy. Global investment in clean energy jumped 16% in 2014 to £205bn, but because of the rapid drop in the price of that energy (the cost of solar has dropped by two-thirds in 6 years), the money invested last year bought almost double the amount of electricity capacity as in 2011.

Renewable energy= (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181553.gif)                                (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif)=Fossil Fuelers
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-forum/popcorn.gif)

So there’s a risk calculation to be done by anyone invested in fossil fuels – which, one way or another, is probably most of us. Get out too early and you might forgo the reasonable returns based on current performance and the book value of the assets that are notionally exploitable.

But what of the risk of being a late exiter? Do you wait and judge when the politicians could finally summon the will to start making regulatory and market interventions … and then get out? And at the same time as everyone else is trying to do the same?

This is why the divestment movement has changed from being a fringe campaign to something every responsible fund manager can no longer ignore. How could they, when even the governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, has warned that the “vast majority of reserves are unburnable” and the bank itself is conducting an inquiry into the risk that inflated fossil fuel assets pose to the stability of the financial system?

When the president of the World Bank, Jim Yong Kim, urges: “Be the first mover. Use smart due diligence. Rethink what fiduciary responsibility means in this changing world. It’s simple self-interest. Every company, investor and bank that screens new and existing investments for climate risk is simply being pragmatic”?

When the Bank of England’s deputy head of supervision for banks and insurance companies, Paul Fisher, warns, as he did this month: “As the world increasingly limits carbon emissions, and moves to alternative energy sources, investments in fossil fuels – a growing financial market in recent decades – may take a huge hit”?

Or listen to Hank Paulson, no bleeding liberal, but secretary of the Treasury under Bush and former CEO of Goldman Sachs: “Each of us must recognize that the risks are personal. We’ve seen and felt the costs of underestimating the financial bubble. Let’s not ignore the climate bubble.”

President Obama puts it most pithily: “We’re not going to be able to burn it all.”

So the argument for a campaign to divest from the world’s most polluting companies is becoming an overwhelming one, on both moral and pragmatic grounds. But the divestment movement is sometimes misunderstood. The intention is not to bankrupt the companies, nor to promote overnight withdrawal from fossil fuels – that would not be possible or desirable.

Divestment serves to delegitimize the business models of companies that are using investors’ money to search for yet more coal, oil and gas that can’t safely be burned. It is a small but crucial step in the economic transition away from a global economy run on fossil fuels.

The usual rule of newspaper campaigns is that you don’t start one unless you know you’re going to win it. This one will almost certainly be won in time: the physics is unarguable. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

But we are launching our campaign today in the firm belief that it will force the issue now into the boardrooms and inboxes of people who have billions of dollars at their disposal.


Full article at link. Don't miss how much the Gates Foundation (and other notables) have invested in dirty energy.
>:(

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/the_argument_for_divesting_from_fossil_fuels_is_becoming_overwhelming/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 26, 2015, 07:02:38 pm
Arctic Ocean Temperatures Keep Rising   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150715183719.png)

People's emissions are causing the planet to heat up and more than 93% of this heat goes into the oceans.

 People have measured ocean temperatures for a long time. Reliable records go back to at least 1880. Ever since records began, the oceans were colder than they are now. NOAA analysis shows that, on the Northern Hemisphere, the 20th century average for June is 16.4°C (61.5°F). In June 2015, it was a record 0.87°C (1.57°F) higher.

 Back in history, there have been times when it was warmer. The last time when it was warmer than today, during the Eemian Period, peak temperature was only a few tenths of a degree higher than today, according to the IPCC. In those days, there was huge melting, accompanied by extreme storms and sea levels that were 5 to 9 m higher than today.

(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 28, 2015, 02:51:03 pm
(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/oilmarkets650.jpg)
Markets are abandoning carbon companies—even if society continues to burn far too much of it. Photo credit: Shutterstock


Get Ready for Ugly as Markets Begin to Deal With Climate Crisis


Carl Pope | July 28, 2015 9:31 am

Advocates of “market-based” climate solutions paint pastel pictures reflecting smoothly adjusting macro-economic models. Competitive markets gradually nudged by carbon pricing glide into a low carbon future in a modestly disruptive fashion, much as sulfur pollution from power plants was scaled back in the 1990’s.

But commodity markets for oil and gas don’t work that way. These real markets are poised to savagely strand assets, upset expectations, overturn long established livelihoods and leave a trail of wreckage behind them—unless climate advocates start owning the fruits of their own success and preparing for the transition. Schumpeter’s destructive engine of capitalism is about to show its ugly side.

Two powerful forces are currently driving energy markets and climate outcomes.


Fossil fuel prices are indeed opening the door to climate solutions, but not through the gradual carbon pricing mechanisms so favored by economists (and recently, reluctantly beginning to be explored by conservative thinkers). Instead, the divergence between clean energy price curves, which fall rapidly with increased market share and fossil fuel prices, which rise with consumption, are about to collide explosively.

Second, Investors are indeed, moving away from fossil fuel stocks and bonds, but not out of ethical concern over climate risk, or even an expectation of global regulation of carbon combustion. They are racing to the exit as bloated coal and oil stock values collapse on the other side of the “Commodity Super-Cycle” which until early 2014 was the dominant paradigm.

Two weeks ago I wrote two pieces in Bloomberg Views suggesting that the fossil divestment movement was arguably behind market trends in arguing that coal and oil were bad investments. The following week witnessed a cascade of commentary making my pieces look milquetoast and timid. Markets are abandoning carbon companies—even if society continues to burn far too much of it.

Look at the numbers:

U.S. coal consumption has fallen, in the face of competition from performance (efficiency), alternatives (natural gas) and disrupters (solar and wind.) Five years ago we burned a billion tons of coal; now we burn 850 million tons. Solid progress. But still 850 million tons.

What happened to coal company share values? In the last five years, a coal company has gone bankrupt on the average every month.  ;D  The second largest U.S. coal company, Alpha, after one bankruptcy and reorganization, was just dumped from the NY Stock Exchange because its price fell below $1.00. Even a coal producer (Walter) whose output, metallurgical coal, still enjoys a strong market had to file for bankruptcy. The biggest U.S. coal company, Peabody, which traded in 2011 at $73, is now selling at $1.29. The bond markets have abandoned coal. All coal company debt is now graded “junk.” In the last quarter the three worst performing major U.S. bonds were all coal:

Alpha Natural Resources: -70 percent
 Peabody: -40 percent
 Arch: -30 percent

Coal, as an investment class, is effectively finished
  ;D —coal companies will go through a series of reorganizations. After each one only those with the best balance sheets and cheapest mines will remain. The reclamation bonds which the U.S. government and the State of Wyoming allowed these companies to self-insure against their balance sheets are about to go south, creating sequential calls on capital that will push even more companies first into Chapter 11 and then into Chapter 7. Outside the U.S., 1/6th of Australia’s coal mines now operate at a loss. Companies in the sector are in liquidation, even though the world will use a lot of coal for quite a while to come. Eventually slumping demand will be overtaken by declining production and more mines will become cash flow positive, but existing stakeholders will be liquidated first. That’s the dynamic of shrinking commodity markets—investors, communities and workers lose fast even as markets shrink slowly.

Page 2 of this two page article that outlines the writing on the wall for fossil fuels.  ;D

http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/28/carl-pope-oil-gas-markets/2/




Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 31, 2015, 03:07:02 pm
Are oil spills actually good for the environment?   (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif) And is coal delicious?  (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif) In this hard-hitting satirical newscast, Dr Bill Nye's "twin brother" Andy Nye finally reveals the truths  ;D  about climate change and fossil fuels  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

Travis Irvine and Daniel Ahrens, Source: Guardian

Friday 31 July 2015 08.53 EDT 

Oil spills actually totally good for animals - video   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2015/jul/31/climate-denier-news-satire-oil-spills-animals-video?CMP=embed_video (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2015/jul/31/climate-denier-news-satire-oil-spills-animals-video?CMP=embed_video)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on July 31, 2015, 03:17:07 pm
Moo or false: do cow farts contribute to climate change? – quiz
 
How savvy are you about the unexpected forces affecting our planet? Take this quiz to find out

See how cows did on the quiz in this video:


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/24/cow-farts-climate-change-methane-environment-quiz

Agelbert NOTE: The energy density of farts (and other hydrocarbons) is, uh, not the issue here.  ;D 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 01, 2015, 05:08:38 pm
(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/beforeafterreservoirs.png)

Startling Footage of California Reservoirs Shows Devastating Impact of Epic Drought  :o

Lorraine Chow | August 1, 2015 9:48 am

https://youtu.be/jJhRNWvEIis

http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/01/california-reservoirs-epic-drought/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 01, 2015, 06:13:18 pm
Halfway to Hell: Global Temperatures Hit Critical Point, Warn Scientists

Tierney Smith, TckTckTck | July 31, 2015 11:56 am

http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/31/halfway-to-hell/

Agelbert NOTE: Lots of great comments. One particularly Orwellian piece of wailing and moaning from a Climate Change Denier was given the business, so to speak.  ;D I decided to join in on the fun.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

fred smith

The Washington Post.....

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely
any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before
ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
* * * * * * * * ****************
I must apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post – 93 years ago.

Check Snopes, this is a real news article. Explain to me how all of this didn’t lead to the destruction of the world back then. Here we are 93 years later, same ole, same ole doom and gloom. gw is ALL about POWER and MONEY. Liberals want both. I know that when one side of the argument relies on character assassination for protecting its side, there is something wrong with that side. Character assassination HAS NO PLACE here in America and to rely on it is despicable.  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg) (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/165fs373950.gif)


Agelbert repy: Your position on a plank you are walking does not change the FACT that your trajectory on that plank will lead to death when there AIN'T NO MORE "PLANK"...

A small sample of your "arguments":

1) Study: Polar Bears hate America.

2) If Global Warming is real, why do we still have frozen pizza?

3) Study: There are more bald eagles when there are more coal mines.

4) Study: More oil spills needed to help sea life.

5) Do oil covered birds swim faster? No, but that is because they are quitters!

Watch CCDN (Climate Change Denier News)  for more fossil fuel industry funded objective science. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/5yjbztv.gif)

Are you tired of facts? Do you think all the concern about climate change is just a bunch of hooey? Then this newscast is for you. See bald eagles, coal mining, unpatriotic polar bears, politics and even a frozen pizza on this satirical episode of Climate Change Denier News. (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2015/jul/03/climate-change-denier-news-frozen-pizza-senator-satirical-video")
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 02, 2015, 04:06:47 pm
(http://www.pawsforfun.co.uk/catalog/images/The%20Tick.jpg)
Thank you Homo SAPS for Global Warming!     (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/Banane21.gif)


Tick Populations Booming
by John Soltes – July 28, 2015

As climates change, ticks spread farther north, harming dogs and humans

SNIPPET:

According to experts in the field, ticks have gone through some changes over the past few years.

“I think one of the biggest concerns that you see within the published literature for ticks is that ticks’ geographical regions are expanding,” said Dr. Janet Foley, a professor and researcher at the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of California, Davis. Foley, who studies the ecology and epidemiology of infectious diseases, also serves as co-director of the Center for Vector-Borne Diseases, an institution on the frontlines of tick and mite research.

“Clearly ticks are expanding farther north,” she said. “[W]e’re finding a lot of tick species moving into new areas. And a lot of that has to do potentially with climate change [and] animal husbandry practices if we’re cutting forests or recreating grasslands.… So as a whole ticks themselves are really becoming an emerging problem, not that they always weren’t anyway, but they are getting worse.”

Foley said the expansion of their range has brought them into Canada, and she called some of them “very, very aggressive human biters” that can potentially transmit disease.
(http://cdn.toonvectors.com/images/2/23692/toonvectors-23692-140.jpg)
Don't blame us ticks! We just DO what we DO.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif)

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/tick_populations_booming/ (http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/tick_populations_booming/)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 02, 2015, 05:30:28 pm
(http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/summer2015/images/larger/jLawler.jpg)
Scientists Are Citizens Too By Joshua J. Lawler

We had just recently moved to Seattle when my wife, one-year-old son, and I were invited to a neighbor’s house for a barbeque. It was a warm summer evening, and I got to talking to our neighbor’s mother, who was visiting from Vermont. She asked what I did, and I told her that I was scientist, a professor, and that I studied climate change. In 2007, mentioning that one studied climate change often ended the conversation, or at least required a bit of explaining. But this woman was neighbors with Bill McKibben, the author and founder of 350.org. I didn’t need to explain climate change to her.

We began exchanging facts about what climate change was doing to the world – its effects on wildlife, water, plants, food security, and human health. So much for the cheery summer cookout. After a half hour or so, the grandmother asked me what I was going to give my son to allow him to live in this changing world. I wasn’t able to give her a decent answer.

At that time, I had thought extensively about how climate change will affect plants and animals – how species would respond to climate change, how relationships between species might change, and how landscapes could be altered. But I had not spent much time thinking about how climate change would impact people, including the people I love most, my family.

Nature will be fine. Yes, some species will go extinct – some already have – but the species that remain will reorganize themselves by forming new ecosystems and communities. People, however, won’t get off so easy. Fires, floods, coastal storm impacts, famine, water shortages, military conflicts, and disease outbreaks are all expected to become more frequent and/or more intense as the climate continues to change. The World Health Organization estimates that, worldwide, climate change was responsible for the loss of 5.5 million disability adjusted life years (the number of years lost due to poor health, disability, or early death) in 2000 alone.

So what would I give my son? My answer that day was defeatist. I said I would give him Buddhism (not that it was mine to give). I said I would help him find the skills to reduce suffering. It was hardly an inspiring answer.

Traditionally, science as a discipline has discouraged activism. Scientists are expected to be objective – to explore, test, and report findings and conclusions based on facts. They are expected to put aside their opinions, emotions, hopes, and fears in the course of doing their research. Normally, when scientists speak out on a subject and advocate for action, they open themselves up to criticism and accusations of bias.

But now scientists have no choice, and so a growing number of us are speaking out about climate change. Many, myself included, feel that we have a moral responsibility to help the world understand that the climate is changing; that people are responsible for it; that 97 percent of scientists agree about this; and that the changes, on the whole, won’t be good for us. 

The more I thought about climate change, the more I realized I had to do something other than publish my studies in scientific journals. I had to do more if I wanted to look my boys (I now have two) in the eyes and tell them I did all I could to slow climate change.

So I have also begun to speak out – as a scientist and as a concerned citizen. I’m running a climate change video contest for students in Washington state. I’ve written op-eds like this one. I’ve organized a group to explore the best way to teach climate change through video games.

And I have company in these efforts. Many scientists have begun to raise awareness about the dangers of climate change. When scientists, a relatively reserved group by nature, start to speak out in large numbers, it will be something that society can’t ignore.

I’m still working on teaching my sons some Buddhist practices to reduce suffering. But I’m also working to raise awareness about climate change in the hope that my boys – and boys and girls around the world – will have a future full of promise and opportunity. I’d like to thank that grandmother. Hopefully, the next time our paths cross, I will be able to give her a better answer to her question.

Joshua Lawler is an assistant professor of landscape ecology and conservation at the University of Washington and a co-founder of the group “More Than Scientists.”

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/scientists_are_citizens_too/ (http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/scientists_are_citizens_too/)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 04, 2015, 03:36:31 pm
13 Arrested at Crestwood Blockade While Reading Pope Francis’ Encyclical on Climate

SNIPPET:

One of today’s arrestees, Faith Muirhead, 45, of Beaver Dams in Steuben County, grew up in the town of Reading near the salt caverns. She said, “We are all of us stewards of the earth. I am a native of Reading and know that this area and Seneca Lake are gifts to be cherished and protected. I feel a responsibility to do what I can to protect these waters and this land. So I pray, I walk, I send letters, I call my state representatives and today, I stand at the gates of Crestwood to demonstrate my resolve. I am a teacher and a teacher of teachers. Today, I teach by putting my freedom in jeopardy in order to bring attention to the potential risks inherent in Crestwood’s plans.”

The total number of civil disobedience arrests in the eight-month-old campaign against gas storage now stands at 332.

Full article and excellent video! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-062.gif)


http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/04/arrests-reading-pope-encyclical/

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 05, 2015, 07:36:59 pm
https://youtu.be/M8EXhJmUkNE
Climate Change just hit home NBC
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 05, 2015, 10:12:49 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-050815224231.png)

https://youtu.be/WQRCVvoLzXo
NASA | No Way Back: Charting Irreversible Climate Change with Jason-3 [HD]
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 07, 2015, 06:27:27 pm
Ice-core dating corroborates tree ring chronologies

Filed under: Climate Science
 Paleoclimate
 Sun-earth connections
 — group @ 5 August 2015 Guest commentary from Jonny McAneney


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/ice-core-dating-corroborates-tree-ring-chronologies/comment-page-1/#comment-634519

SNIPPET:

Quote
Future hopes for the past

This research (only!!!) covers the last 2500 years; Half the period of human history (~5000 years). Synchronising ice cores with tree dates, as well as with historical dates, is even more problematic the further in the past one goes. If the ice core chronologies can be extended further into the past with accuracy equal to that of the NEEM NS1 core, the effects of volcanic forcing and climate more generally on past civilisations can be improved. For example, we know that Hekla had two massive eruptions in the past, probably in the 12th and 24th century BC, but we do not know exactly when, or what effect they may have had on climate and society. We do not yet know the cause of the so called 4.2 kya event (from 2200-1900 BC), which was a period of altered climate which may have led to the collapse of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, and/or the rise of the Akkadian Empire. Perhaps sufficiently accurately dated ice cores extending across these event could provide the answer?

Finally, a key controversy in archaeological research is the accurate dating of the Thera eruption, thought to have occurred in the 17th or 16th century BC. Positive identification and accurate dating of tephra in ice cores from this large Mediterranean eruption would provide a critical benchmark for early Middle Eastern history.

Trees can guide us in reconstructing the past. As my co-author Mike Baillie quipped in his book A Slice Through Time: Dendrochronology and Precision Dating,  “The trees don’t lie – and they were there”. Thanks to the research of Sigl et al. (2015), this statement is looking all the more true.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/ice-core-dating-corroborates-tree-ring-chronologies/comment-page-1/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 10, 2015, 03:25:24 pm
Even from 443 miles up, California's raging wildfires look terrifying
(http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/aawEpMlA52RKXY5abI6ggg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://globalfinance.zenfs.com/en_us/Finance/US_AFTP_SILICONALLEY_H_LIVE/Even_from_443_miles_up-d4da9795899c78938cf2f7ee49a8e9c8)


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/scary-photos-california-space-whole-145749099.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/scary-photos-california-space-whole-145749099.html)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 10, 2015, 03:45:58 pm
U.S. Energy Secretary Moniz’ Statement on Papal Encyclical on Climate Change

June 18, 2015

WASHINGTON – U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz released the following statement regarding the release of a papal encyclical on climate change by Pope Francis.

"Pope Francis' call to action on climate change is an important milestone in the global effort on this issue. His is not just a powerful moral voice, he also graduated as a chemical engineer and understands the consensus of climate scientists that accumulating man-made pollution endangers our planet and people around the world. As Pope Francis reminds us, we must push for ambitious and cost-effective solutions that protect us all, including those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Pope Francis should inspire all countries to redouble the deployment of clean energy technologies and energy efficiencies and find the international will to significantly cut global emissions of heat-trapping pollution.

I thank Pope Francis for his leadership, and encourage people of all faiths to work toward the common goal of a safer world achieved by universal access to clean and affordable energy.  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png) (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)


http://energy.gov/articles/us-energy-secretary-moniz-statement-papal-encyclical-climate-change
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 13, 2015, 09:14:25 pm
21 Youths File Landmark Climate Lawsuit Against Federal Government  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif)

Our Children's Trust | August 13, 2015 9:48 am

Quote
The complaint asserts that, in causing climate change, the federal government has violated the youngest generation’s constitutional rights to life, liberty, property and has failed to protect essential public trust resources.

(http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/martinez.jpg)

Quote
4theflora_fauna 

I live in the blast zone for Jordan Cove, so I am taking the work that these young people are doing personally. What a relief after fighting this project for 8 years (some have fought them for 10) we are being joined by these wonderful folks and their lawyers. How greedy and stupid does a corporation have to be to put a gas-plant and gas-pipeline in an earthquake/tsunami zone? It would be right across a narrow bay from the airport, mall, schools and neighborhoods. They have given this foreign corp the right to take my friends' land. It will make people with asthma and lung problems sicker, many of them very young and very old. It is criminal to pollute our beautiful sea air and to use massive amounts of water to run this place in a time of emergency drought conditions. The darn pipe will cross and put at risk 400 water resources.

So, I thank them for standing up for their rights for a future with the best world possible. They are fighting for their children, their children's children, and me. Of course it's what activists all over Oregon care about and work toward. Several generations have been working over a century to conserve, preserve, and educate. The torch has to be taken-up by the young, bright, and beautiful. Blessings to them and people of all ages who love earth, our only home. It is crazy to send fossil fuels from end to the other of this tired, hot planet!


http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/13/youth-file-climate-lawsuit/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 14, 2015, 02:49:53 pm
(http://assets1.bigthink.com/system/idea_thumbnails/59003/primary/ethics.jpg?1433338238)

Despite Pope’s Call to Climate Action, Churches Still Hold Millions in Fossil Fuels   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)


Sarah Lazare, Common Dreams | August 14, 2015 10:26 am

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHzS7S9UwAAY4sv.jpg:large)

Pope Francis’ bold call to tackle climate change and save the planet appears to be in conflict with U.S. Catholic churches’ millions of dollars of investments in fossil fuels industries, including fracking, a new Reuters report shows.

Journalist Richard Valdmanis combed through church disclosures and portfolios and found: “Dioceses covering Boston, Rockville Center on Long Island, Baltimore, Toledo and much of Minnesota have all reported millions of dollars in holdings in oil and gas stocks in recent years.” (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

“The holdings tend to make up between 5 and 10 percent of the dioceses’ overall equities investments,” Valdmanis noted, “Similar to the 7.1 percent weighting of energy companies on the S&P 500 index, according to the documents.”

Furthermore, the investigation finds that, while the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops provides ethical guidelines discouraging investments in firms related to contraception, abortion, ****ography and war, it does not issue similar warnings about fossil fuels stocks.
  (http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg)

This is despite Pope Francis’s 180-page Papal Encyclical, a formal letter to Catholic bishops released in June, underscoring the moral imperative to take aggressive steps to address climate change. “This home of ours is being ruined and that damages everyone, especially the poor,” he wrote, adding: “The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system.”


The Archdiocese of Chicago acknowledged to Reuters the contradiction between the pope’s message and its over $100 million worth of fossil fuel investments. “We are beginning to evaluate the implications of the encyclical across multiple areas, including investments and also including areas such as energy usage and building materials,” Betsy Bohlen, chief operating officer for the Archdiocese, told Reuters.

In response to growing grassroots campaigns across the globe, over 300 institutions worldwide have committed to divest from fossil fuels, roughly a quarter of them faith-based organizations. The United Church of Canada announced Tuesday it will be the latest religious institution to divest and the Catholic institution Georgetown University voted in early June, two weeks before the encyclical, to halt its direct investment of its endowment funds in coal mining companies.


http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/14/pope-church-fossil-fuel-holdings/

Agelbert NOTE: We can always look on the bright side of this behavior. After all, haven't 99% of all species that have lived on this planet gone extinct? What's one more?  Our space "brothers" are patient.

(https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/59580_580341021980283_1472413725_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 14, 2015, 07:26:21 pm
Churches Still Hold Millions in Fossil Fuels 

Of course they do. Decent returns on an investment take priority over whatever the Pope knows about science in general, let alone complex models that haven't done so well to date, you know, actually modeling.

In the real world, they fire you for misleading management that badly, let alone going straight to the press and trumpeting your conclusions as a means of some sort of self esteem improvement exercise.
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090315203150.png)


Excuse me? You mean you didn't know the Pope graduated as a Chemical Engineer? And did you say the REAL WORLD? You mean the one you live in? You believe that is the REAL WORLD?

Asset Managers that CAN add and subtract (and model too! ;D) tend to disagree with you. The REAL WORLD track record of fossil fuels over the last SEVEN YEARS is the only REAL WORLD that COUNTS, pal!

HERE are the FACTS from IMPAX Asset Management, you math challenged fossil fueler:

NOTE: DON'T even try to bad mouth IMPAX, the way you do anything and/or anybody's empirical evidence that doesn't fit your world view.  8) You will accept IMPAX's numbers or you can continue living in your evolutionary dead end "real" world.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif)

Beyond Fossil Fuels: The Investment Case  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif) for Fossil Fuel Divestment  (http://elqahera-trading.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dollar-sign-thumbnail1.jpg)

Executive Summary

Pressure is building on institutional investors to assess their exposure to companies that extract fossil fuels. As concerns rise about the likely effects on the climate from greenhouse gas emissions, grassroots campaigns calling for fossil fuel divestment are growing.

In parallel, financial analysts are increasingly warning investors of the risks that tighter regulations on carbon dioxide emissions and falling demand for fossil fuels could make fossil fuel reserves substantially less valuable, or even 'stranded' and ultimately rendered worthless.

While trustees may be sympathetic to these concerns, and investment officers skeptical of the outcome of looming greenhouse gas regulation, there are legitimate questions about the effects on portfolio risk and returns from the partial or complete divestment of fossil fuel stocks.

So the question becomes: how should a fiduciary compare the risks to portfolios presented by stricter carbon regulations to the risks associated with reducing exposure to fossil fuel stocks?


Analysis of historical data shows that over the past seven years eliminating the fossil fuel sector from a global benchmark index would have actually had a small positive return effect. Furthermore, much of the economic effect of excluding fossil fuel stocks could have been replicated with 'fossil free' energy portfolios consisting of energy efficiency and renewable energy stocks, with limited additional tracking error and improved returns.

Quote
The returns over five, and where possible, seven years were analyzed. The results show that removing the fossil fuel sector in its entirety and replacing it with 'fossil free' portfolios of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other alternative energy stocks, either on a passively managed or actively managed basis would have improved returns with limited tracking error. (See Figures 3 and 4 below.)
Agelbert NOTE: figure graphics at full report link.

Impax believes that investors should consider reorienting their portfolios towards low carbon energy by replacing fossil fuel stocks with energy efficiency and renewable energy investments, thereby retaining exposure to the energy sector while reducing the risks posed by the fossil fuel sector.

IMPAX Asset Management full report: (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)


http://gofossilfree.org/se/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2014/07/impax-investment-case-for-fossil-fuel-divestment-us-final-1.pdf (http://gofossilfree.org/se/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2014/07/impax-investment-case-for-fossil-fuel-divestment-us-final-1.pdf)

MKing, only someone like you would have the brain dead brass to call somebody that uses less than a 100 gallons of gasoline a YEAR a "gas guzzler", as you have repeatedly done to me. Of course I know you are just trying to get my goat, but it shows how lacking in CFS you are.

In addition, you don't have a moral compass or possess any empathy or concern for the living beings around you beyond taking care of yourself and your family. Consequently, it is expected that you will say or do anything you can get away with to defend your profit over planet bennies.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)

I get it.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png)   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)

MKing "wisdom" is as follows: The Catholic Cardinals are "smart" if they invest in fossil fuels and the Pope is an "ignorant, math challenged religious nut" if he advocates Divestment. LOL! 

Then you whine about being censored...  ::)

Fossil Fuel Corporation Stocks  are a BAD INVESTMENT. Live with it! SELL!  8)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 14, 2015, 09:36:14 pm
Quote
‘Do no harm’: Medical professionals urge Wellcome Trust to end fossil fuel investments  (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

Dear members of the Wellcome Trust executive board,

We write as concerned health professionals and academics in relation to the Guardian’s Keep it in the ground campaign calling on the Wellcome Trust and Gates Foundation to divest from the world’s 200 largest fossil fuel companies over the next five years.

The Wellcome Trust is an outstanding philanthropic institution whose work has a profound impact on the health and wellbeing of millions worldwide. We congratulate the Trust on its leadership in promoting and funding research into the impacts of climate change, and hope that this work will continue to grow in line with the urgent threat to human health and survival. However, we were disappointed to learn of the Trust’s decision to continue to invest in fossil fuel companies.

It is uncontested that the majority of carbon reserves listed on stock exchanges must remain underground if we are to avoid exceeding a 2C rise in global mean temperature and the catastrophic health impacts this would have. Our current business-as-usual trajectory commits us to over 2C warming – a point scientists have described as the threshold between “dangerous”and “extremely dangerous” – within decades.

As the Trust acknowledges, avoiding this scenario demands an urgent transition towards clean energy. Its view, as set forth by Professor Jeremy Farrar, is that engagement with fossil fuel companies’ boards is a more effective way to support such a transition than divestment. However, there is little or no evidence to suggest that this approach holds a realistic prospect of reducing global fossil fuel production sufficiently in the limited time available.

We believe a complete transformation of the energy sector is needed, driven by strong climate policies, and that divestment has greater potential to bring this about. The ethical and financial case for fossil fuel divestment is well founded and has been supported by the president of the World Bank and the director-general of the World Health Organisation (WHO), both public health physicians. Through the political change it has helped catalyse, the same strategy played a vital role in the movements against apartheid and tobacco. As such, we welcome the statement that the Trust would consider this step if engagement proves ineffective.

Our primary concern is that a decision not to divest will continue to bolster the social licence of an industry that has indicated no intention of taking meaningful action. Indeed, many of these companies continue to use their considerable influence to delay political action, as tobacco companies have done previously. Shell’s lobbying against binding EU renewables targets and its decision to drill for Arctic oil, which cannot safely be burned, give additional cause for alarm. Further, having a financial interest in the extraction of “unburnable” reserves may restrict organisations’ capacity to advocate effectively for the policy framework that is needed.

Lastly, divestment rests on the premise that it is wrong to profit from an industry whose core business threatens human and planetary health, bringing to mind one of the foundations of medical ethics – first, do no harm. We believe that, in aligning organisations’ investments with their aims and values, it goes beyond a “grand gesture”. The question is not only one of direct, short-term impacts, but of leadership. Health organisations such as the Wellcome Trust have considerable moral and scientific authority, and a decision to divest has the potential to influence policy-makers, other investors and the public, in the UK and internationally.

We thank the Trust for its openness to dialogue and its commitment to transparency, and request that you make public what, specifically, the Trust aims to achieve through shareholder engagement, and by when. We would particularly like to know at what point Trust will divest should these aims not be met, whether on a company-by-company or sector-wide basis.

Yours sincerely,
The undersigned
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/aug/14/health-professionals-urge-wellcome-trust-end-fossil-fuel-investments-letter
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 14, 2015, 10:06:32 pm
Woods Hole Research Center Scientists the fossil fuelers love to hate (because WHRC scientists actually do objective science ;D).

Recent Grants

WHRC was highly successful in recently announced project selections for NASA’s Arctic Boreal Vulnerability
Experiment (ABoVE). Three proposals led by WHRC scientists, and two additional proposals on which WHRC
scientists are co-investigators, were selected following a competitive review process.


In addition, Senior Scientist Scott Goetz was selected as NASA’s overall Science Lead for the ABoVE program. All in all, WHRC is involved in 5 of 21 NASA awards, out of more than 100 proposals submitted.

Assistant Scientist Susan Natali will lead a project examining and predicting the role of winter carbon emissions in the Arctic.

Postdoctoral Fellow Brendan Rogers will lead a project to achieve a better understanding of the increase in fires in the northern latitudes and possible strategies to for improved management.

Senior Scientist Scott Goetz is the lead investigator on a project looking at changes in arctic biomes with climate change, as well as a co-investigator on a proposal to examine the effects of fire on permafrost carbon stocks.

Associate Scientist Christopher Schwalm
will be co-investigator of a project to integrate the data and models utilized by ABoVE researchers. forest area. She was surprised to discover that the carbon fluxes in both regions were much higher than she anticipated. These results suggest that increasing fire in the Arctic may shift some Siberian forests from a methane source to a sink, representing a critical positive feedback to climate change.

The Polaris Project will continue to engage young minds like Nigel and Mackenzie. Look for Polaris Project 2016.

Is the Clean Power Plan enough? ??? 


http://whrc.org/news/newsletter/pdf/WHRC_Newsletter_August2015.pdf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 16, 2015, 06:42:02 pm
Agelbert NOTE: Orignally posted June 03, 2014. The action required is more urgent each day.


It's time for Americans in the Service of Future Generations to GET WITH THE PROGRAM!
We did it with the massive, industrial scale building of Liberty Ships in WWII. We can do it again with the massive, industrial scale building of Liberty Renewable Energy Machines.


Country of Origin: United States of America
(http://www.firstnetsource.com/american_flag_graphic/large_images/flag_05.jpg)
Manufacturers: Alabama Dry Dock Co, Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyards Inc, California Shipbuilding Corp, Delta Shipbuilding Co, J A Jones Construction Co (Brunswick), J A Jones Construction Co (Panama City), Kaiser Co, Marinship Corp, New England Shipbuilding Corp, North Carolina Shipbuilding Co, Oregon Shipbuilding Corp, Permanente Metals Co, St Johns River Shipbuilding Co, Southeastern Shipbuilding Corp, Todd Houston Shipbuilding Corp, Walsh-Kaiser Co.

Major Variants: General cargo, tanker, collier, (modifications also boxed aircraft transport, tank transport,
hospital ship, troopship).

Role: Cargo transport, troop transport, hospital ship, repair ship.
Operated by: United States of America, Great Britain, (small quantity also Norway, Belgium, Soviet Union, France, Greece, Netherlands and other nations).

First Laid Down: 30th April 1941
Last Completed: 30th October 1945

Units: 2,711 ships laid down, 2,710 entered service.

Despite being initially labelled an 'ugly duckling' by the newspapers, and intended to be expendable if necessary, the ships eventually caught the imagination of the public. They proved to be easy to build, reliable and versatile, exceeding even the most optimistic expectations for their overall contribution to the war effort.

It was a project on a massive scale, undertaken with great speed and efficiency. The first Liberty ship (the Patrick Henry) was launched on 27 September 1941 (and completed on 30 December 1941), which was an incredible feat considering that just seven months previously neither shipyard nor workforce existed to build her.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/muscular.gif)  (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-013.gif)


Average Liberty Ship deadweight = 12,500 metric tons. (33,875,000 metric tons of ships built!).


Convert short tons to metric tons by multiplying the number of short tons by 0.907184

On the GE 1.5-megawatt model the total weight is 164 tons. The corresponding weights for the Vestas V90 are 75, 40, and 152, total 267 tons, and for the Gamesa G87 72, 42, and 220, total 334 tons.

164 x 0.907184 =  148.8 metric tons 

33,875,000 divided by 148.8 =  227,655  wind turbines X 1.5 MW =  341,482 MW = .3415 TW x 20% capacity factor = 68.3 x 24 hours X 365 days = 598.3 TWh/year.

2012 wind power production   United States 140.9 TWh  26.4 % of world total wind power.

1 TWhour per year = 1,000,000 MW / 8765.8 hours in a year) 114 megawatts per hour.

USA total annual electric consumption = 3,886,400,000 MWh = 3,886,400 = GWh = 3,886 TWh.


3886.4 / 598.3 =  20 to 40% of US electrical demand just from Wind Turbines in less than five years of Liberty Ship scale manufacturing wind turbine tonnage.
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-028.gif)


Liberty Ship scale manufacturing wind turbine tonnage can provide  25 to 40% of US electrical demand  in less than five years. Double that in ten years and add in Solar Panels, Geothermal, Tide and Undersea Current and we have MORE than 100% Renewable Energy!   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif)  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif)(http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)



WE can use the excess to bioremediate the environmental damage done in the last 100 years.  WE can rid ourselves of Planet Polluting Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Poison Plants in a decade and win the Climate Victory for Future Generations! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)We can set an example for all the nations on the Earth of the Proper Path to a Viable and Vibrant Bounty filled, harmonious Biosphere.


Let's GET IT DONE! Our children and grandchildren are counting on us!
(http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)



http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1214/#msg1214 (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1214/#msg1214)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 20, 2015, 05:57:07 pm
08/18/2015 03:24 PM   

Islamic Leaders Issue Thoughtful, Strong Climate Declaration


SustainableBusiness.com News


Islamic leaders from 20 countries issued a "Climate Change Declaration" today, calling on world leaders to take strong action at December's UN summit.

And it calls on the world's 1.6 billion Muslims and people of all faiths to take urgent action on climate as the "issue of our time." In some amazing statements (see below) they point to problems such as the goal of endless economic growth and consumerism.

Right now, the International Islamic Climate Change Symposium is taking place in Istanbul, Turkey. A diverse group of Islamic scholars from around the world drafted the Declaration after a lengthy consultation period before the conference.

Climate Change Islamic Declaration


The Declaration:

Paris UN Summit in December: urges governments to deliver a strong, binding international climate agreement that signals the end of fossil fuel use. The agreement should make it possible to limit global warming to 2C, or preferably 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, "bearing in mind that two-thirds of the earth's proven fossil fuel reserves remain in the ground." It should include clear targets and monitoring systems.

On fossil fuels, it calls on wealthy and oil-producing countries, in particular, to quickly phase them out - no later than 2050. The world needs to swiftly transition to 100% renewable energy - preferably distributed energy which can "reduce poverty and achieve sustainable development," it says. And "generous support" - financial and technical - is needed for vulnerable communities already experiencing severe impacts.

Moral Case for Action


Based on Islamic teachings, it makes a moral case for Muslims and people of all faiths to take urgent climate action.
Quote

"We call on the people of all nations and their leaders to:

•Recognize the moral obligation to reduce consumption so the poor may benefit from what is left of earth's non-renewable resources;

•Re-focus concerns from unethical profit from the environment, to that of preserving it and elevating the condition of the world's poor.

•Invest in the creation of a green economy.

•Realize that to chase after unlimited economic growth in a planet that is finite and already overloaded is not viable. Growth must be pursued wisely and in moderation; placing a priority on increasing the resilience of all, and especially the most vulnerable, to the climate change impacts already underway and expected to continue for many years to come.

•Set in motion a fresh model of wellbeing, based on an alternative to the current financial model which depletes resources, degrades the environment, and deepens inequality.

The Corporate Sector must:

•Shoulder the consequences of their profit-making activities, and take a visibly more active role in reducing their carbon footprint and other forms of impact upon the natural environment;

•Commit to 100% renewable energy to mitigate the environmental impact of their activities as soon as possible.

•Change from the current business model which is based on an unsustainable escalating economy, and adopt a circular economy that is wholly sustainable;

•Pay more heed to social and ecological responsibilities, particularly to the extent that they extract and use scarce resources;

•Assist in divestment from the fossil fuel driven economy and scaling up of renewable energy and other ecological alternatives.
(http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)

"It is with great joy and in a spirit of solidarity that I express to you the promise of the Catholic Church to pray for the success of your initiative and her desire to work with you in the future to care for our common home and thus to glorify the God who created us," says Cardinal Peter Turkson, President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Vatican City.

The world's major religions have now issued climate declarations: the Pope's Encyclical and the Rabbinic Letter on the Climate Crisis.

Last year, religious and spiritual leaders held the  Religions for the Earth conference in New York City and the Vatican held a 5--day summit, Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature: Our Responsibility. 

Read the Islamic Climate Change Declaration:   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)
 
Website: http://islamicclimatedeclaration.org/islamic-declaration-on-global-climate-change/

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26406
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 22, 2015, 02:52:52 am
Based on science as reliable as source rock analysis.

As Ice Age ended, greenhouse gas rise was lead factor in melting of Earth's glaciers (http://phys.org/news/2015-08-ice-age-greenhouse-gas-factor.html#jCp)

August 21, 2015

(http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2015/asiceageende.jpg)
Improved dating methods reveal that the rise in carbon dioxide levels was the primary cause of the simultaneous melting of glaciers around the globe during the last Ice Age. The new finding has implications for rising levels of man-made greenhouse gases and retreating glaciers today. Credit: National Science Foundation

A fresh look at some old rocks has solved a crucial mystery of the last Ice Age, yielding an important new finding that connects to the global retreat of glaciers caused by climate change today, according to a new study by a team of climate scientists.

For decades, researchers examining the glacial meltdown that ended 11,000 years ago took into account a number of contributing factors, particularly regional influences such as solar radiation, ice sheets and ocean currents.

But a reexamination of more than 1,000 previously studied glacial boulders has produced a more accurate timetable for the pre-historic meltdown and pinpoints the rise in carbon dioxide - then naturally occurring - as the primary driving factor in the simultaneous global retreat of glaciers at the close of the last Ice Age, the researchers report in the journal Nature Communications.

"Glaciers are very sensitive to temperature. When you get the world's glaciers retreating all at the same time, you need a broad, global reason for why the world's thermostat is going up," said Boston College Assistant Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences Jeremy Shakun. "The only factor that explains glaciers melting all around the world in unison during the end of the Ice Age is the rise in greenhouse gases."

The researchers found that regional factors caused differences in the precise timing and pace of glacier retreat from one place to another, but carbon dioxide was the major driver of the overall global meltdown, said Shakun, a co-author of the report "Regional and global forcing of glacier retreat during the last deglaciation."

"This is a lot like today," said Shakun. "In any given decade you can always find some areas where glaciers are holding steady or even advancing, but the big picture across the world and over the long run is clear - carbon dioxide is making the ice melt."
While 11,000 years ago may seem far too distant for a point of comparison, it was only a moment ago in geological time. The team's findings fix even greater certainty on scientific conclusions that the dramatic increase in manmade greenhouse gases will eradicate many of the world's glaciers by the end of this century.

"This has relevance to today since we've already raised CO2 by more than it increased at the end of the Ice Age, and we're on track to go up much higher this century—which adds credence to the view that most of the world's glaciers will be largely gone within the next few centuries, with negative consequences such as rising sea level and depleted water resources," said Shakun.

The team reexamined samples taken from boulders that were left by the retreating glaciers, said Shakun, who was joined in the research by experts from Oregon State University, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Purdue University and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.

Each boulder has been exposed to cosmic radiation since the glaciers melted, an exposure that produces the isotope Beryllium-10 in the boulder. Measuring the levels of the isotope in boulder samples allows scientists to determine when glaciers melted and first uncovered the boulders.

Scientists have been using this process called surface exposure dating for more than two decades to determine when glaciers retreated, Shakun said. His team examined samples collected by multiple research teams over the years and applied an improved methodology that increased the accuracy of the boulder ages.

The team then compared their new exposure ages to the timing of the rise of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, a development recorded in air bubbles taken from ice cores. Combined with computer models, the analysis eliminated regional factors as the primary explanations for glacial melting across the globe at the end of the Ice Age. The single leading global factor that did explain the global retreat of glaciers was rising carbon dioxide levels in the air.

"Our study really removes any doubt as to the leading cause of the decline of the glaciers by 11,000 years ago - it was the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere," said Shakun.

Carbon dioxide levels rose from approximately 180 parts per million to 280 parts per million at the end of the last Ice Age, which spanned nearly 7,000 years. Following more than a century of industrialization, carbon dioxide levels have now risen to approximately 400 parts per million.
"This tells us we are orchestrating something akin to the end of an Ice Age, but much faster. As the amount of carbon dioxide continues to increase, glaciers around the world will retreat," said Shakun.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-ice-age-greenhouse-gas-factor.html#jCp (http://phys.org/news/2015-08-ice-age-greenhouse-gas-factor.html#jCp)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 24, 2015, 03:37:07 pm
I read the Automatic Earth blog for about a year around 2009 or so back when I was trying to make sense of economics.  I started reading her solution space essay and got a few paragraphs in before abandoning it.  It just seemed like the same old **** said for the millionth time in the collapse blogosphere.  Not that I'm jumping on the hate on Nicole Foss band wagon...I really don't give a **** but I don't have money on Wall Street either.  I have some money in my pocket, and tomorrow I'm gonna go get more money doing the landscape hustle. 

I still contend that preparing for collapse is next to impossible.  The only preparation that would matter would be to already be living in a community that is concerned with sustainable agriculture as well as security within that community.  As in, already producing food and have contingency plans to defend it or surplus to accept desperate new comers. 

Having six months of food stores will definitely give you an advantage, but it's nothing permanent...just a band aid.  By the time that food runs out you'll just be late to the fedghetto lines.

No man is an island Lucid.

We are all in this world together. There is no hiding or escaping the fate of our race, perhaps just delaying a negative outcome, if that is our fate, for a short while before joining the rest of humanity. You seem to have come to that realization already.

The smart and constructive amongst us will alert us of the dangers we face and extol us to try and unite in common cause to do some thing about it and learn to try our best to respect and care for one another as brothers with a common cause.

We have to prevent  bad outcomes, not figure out how to hide from them.

That is why folks like Agelbert who constantly try and present solutions and show us what can be done by the constructive who live amongst us are the only people worth listening to, and the prophets of doom like Foss and others; while certainly having a right and cause to be negative on the outlook, bring nothing of value to the table.

Stop telling me what the **** is wrong, tell me, or rather us, how to try and fix it or STFU.

                                         
                                       (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-md-u7QK_4yg/ULJI3FyD1vI/AAAAAAAAW7Q/65lfwklOoKo/s1600/wind_and_solar_energy.jpg)


That is why folks like Agelbert who constantly try and present solutions and show us what can be done by the constructive who live amongst us are the only people worth listening to, and the prophets of doom like Foss and others; while certainly having a right and cause to be negative on the outlook, bring nothing of value to the table.

Stop telling me what the **** is wrong, tell me, or rather us, how to try and fix it or STFU.

                                         
                                      (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-md-u7QK_4yg/ULJI3FyD1vI/AAAAAAAAW7Q/65lfwklOoKo/s1600/wind_and_solar_energy.jpg)

Spoken like a true wise one Ox...I'm proud of you and your wisdom  :)

So I'll tell you my part about how to fix it...learn how to use bamboo in your culture :icon_mrgreen:

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150815173931.png)

Que Agelbert's Chinese Star Wars Lucid Bamboo Joke.  The caption should read:

"****, I can't even split bamboo and weave a basket with it...and I'm Chinese, yet this 6'4" celtic hair ball can.  Chin, give this fucker a job."   ;D
A big (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/thankyou.gif)to  GO and Lucid!   (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 24, 2015, 09:27:49 pm
Climate Scientists (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif) identify the errors (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif) in contrarian papers  published that question Climate Change science

Quote
Rather than assessing one specific paper, however, I wanted to know Why are there conflicting answers concerning climate change in the scientific literature?

Agelbert NOTE:
I think we know the answer to that one. (http://www.whydidyouwearthat.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/tumblr_l7j9nik8Wf1qaxxwjo1_5001.jpeg)

But Scientists can't just yell BRIBED FRAUD among their peers. They have to methodically expose the crooks and liars among them with step by step, detailed point by point revealing of "errors" in the references for contrarian positions that continue to populate contrarian papers, despite having been previously identified as errors. Scientists can't just say that this is the tried and true MO of propagandists everywhere. The Marshall Institute of fossil fuelers did it from the word go decades ago. The trick is to publish a fraudulent paper in a peer reviewed journal.

Money is used to do that. Deliberate distortions of empirical data are used to justify a contrarian position that just happens to argue against changing the dirty energy using status quo. ;) The bought and paid for scientist claims to have no conflict of interest. The money trail to him or her is disguised and devious.

When his "errors" are pointed out in peer review as a basis to deny publication, other bought and paid for "reviewers" will claim that is an "inflammatory charge" and the paper gets published.

THEN the same paper comes under increasing scrutiny and is debunked.

HOWEVER, it is now PART OF THE CLIMATE SCIENCE LITERATURE. So, they keep referencing it hither and yon. Works every time!(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)  So it goes.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)

The polite scientist below does not come right out and say that. But what he says is quite enough (the team's difficulties in getting published were fascinating  :P) to see that there is a lot of money funding "erroneous"  ;) climate skepticism (and climate science journal peer reviewers  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp)) that eat it up, while obstacles to publishing SPECIFIC PAPERS that are directed at REMOVING erroneous papers from the literature are FORMIDABLE. The fossil fuel industry is busy, busy, busy.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mocantina.gif)



SNIPPET for non-geeks:  ;D


Quote
So what were our main conclusions?  ???

After all this, the conclusions were surprisingly unsurprising in my mind. The replication revealed a wide range of types of errors, shortcomings, and flaws involving both statistics and physics.

It turned out that most of the authors of the contrarian papers did not have a long career within climate research.
Newcomers to a scientific discipline may easily err because they often lack tacit knowledge and do not have the comprehensive overview. Many of them had authored several of the papers and failed to cite relevant literature or include relevant and important information.

The motivation for the original plea for a formal rebuttal paper was that educators should be able to point to the peer-reviewed literature “to fight skepticism about the fundamentals on climate change”.

Now, educators can also teach their students to learn from mistakes through replication of case studies.

The important question to ask is where does the answer or information come from? If it’s a universally true result, then anybody should get similar answers. It is important to avoid being dogmatic in science.


References


1. R.E. Benestad, D. Nuccitelli, S. Lewandowsky, K. Hayhoe, H.O. Hygen, R. van Dorland, and J. Cook, "Learning from mistakes in climate research", Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5)

2. O. Humlum, J. Solheim, and K. Stordahl, "Identifying natural contributions to late Holocene climate change", Global and Planetary Change, vol. 79, pp. 145-156, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.09.005 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.09.005)


Let’s learn from mistakes
Filed under: Climate Science Scientific practice skeptics — rasmus @ 23 August 2015
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/lets-learn-from-mistakes/#sthash.23a1JK7M.dpuf (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/lets-learn-from-mistakes/#sthash.23a1JK7M.dpuf)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 25, 2015, 11:28:09 pm
Thom Hartman puts it all together in this interview about the Crash of 2016. (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif)Don't miss it!

https://youtu.be/rvxhh3hjfSs

He explains the HUGE added stressor of the climate degradation.

https://youtu.be/06WOhNgXBZw

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 28, 2015, 12:19:28 am
Shocking: Prominent climate denier gets money from Big Coal

By Katie Herzog  on 26 Aug 2015

Christopher Horner has made his career fighting climate change, but not in the way you’re thinking: He’s been fighting the notion that it exists at all. (http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif)

Horner is senior fellow and lawyer for the Competitive Enterprise Institute   (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil19.gif)— a think tank devoted to promoting free market ideals and less governmental regulation of industries like tobacco and fossil fuels. You know, the good guys. Horner is also a vocal climate denier, and has written books with titles like The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism) and Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed. He makes regular appearances on Fox News when they need an expert on the climate change hoax, and his Twitter feed looks like a tween conspiracy theorist’s.

One of Horner’s preferred tactics is to inundate climate researchers with records requests so they get too bogged down with his bull**** to do actual work. He was also an instrumental figure in promoting the smear campaign known as “Climategate,” in which thousands of emails and other documents were hacked from a server at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. Conservative groups and climate deniers used the documents to allege a systematic attempt on the part of scientists to defraud the public about the causes of global temperature increases. Unfortunately for Horner (and the planet), eight subsequent investigations revealed no wrongdoing on the part of the researchers.

The question is: Why? What drives a seemingly intelligent (or at least educated) human being to look decades of scientific data in the eye and go, “Nah. The world is cooling. Definitely cooling.”

Turns out, it’s money.

The Intercept analyzed bankruptcy filings of the one of the largest coal companies in America, Alpha Natural Reserves, and found line items for Horner’s home and work — suggesting Horner’s work spouting bull**** about global cooling is paid for by Big Coal itself. The Intercept’s Lee Fang reports:


The Alpha Natural Resources filing corroborates the suggestion in a recent email from chief executives of major coal firms that they are underwriting Horner’s current work.

In early June this year, the Coal & Investment Leadership Forum, a trade show, sent this message to its email list: “As the ‘war on coal’ continues, I trust that the commitment we have made to support Chris Horner’s work will eventually create great awareness of the illegal tactics being employed to pass laws that are intended to destroy our industry.” The email was signed by Alliance Resource Partners’ Joe Craft III, Alpha Natural Resources’ Kevin Crutchfield, Drummond Company’s Gary Drummond, Arch Coal’s John Eaves and United Coal Co.’s Jim McGlothlin.

Well, would you look at that. Color us surprised. It’s almost like this dude cares more about his own wallet and insane political agenda than he does the fate of this poor spinning planet we call home. Sounds like he’d make a great presidential candidate.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png) (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)


http://grist.org/climate-energy/shocking-prominent-climate-denier-gets-money-from-big-coal/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on August 29, 2015, 05:54:21 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270615171708.jpeg)

Humans to Blame for Catastrophic Drought in California, Scientists Say (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/desertsmile.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/28/humans-blame-california-drought/

Agelbert Note:
As was expected, some fossil fuelers showed up to deny global warming had anything to do with it. It's what they do. And that's not all they do.

The Fossil Fuel Industry Propagandists need to address the FACT that the fossil fuel industry has

1) the MOTIVE (threatened profits from climate change science demanding an end to fossil fuel use)

2) the OPPORTUNITY (privileged access to main streammedia and powerful politicians)

AND
3) the MEANS (billions of dollars from dirty energy profits)


to produce fraudulent scientific papers based on distorted models of climate science that challenge/refute the climate science consensus that fossil fuels are over heating the biosphere.


So, in true Orwellian fashion,
they accuse the truly objective climate scientists of doing what the fossil fuel industry has been doing for several decades to defend the fossil fuel industry massive subsidy swag (in comparison to the pittance for Renewable Energy) and dirty energy profits.

As you may observe by the rather selective nature of fossil fueler comments, fossil fuelers spend no time at all questioning the models that question/challenge/deny global warming.

Propagandists hired by the Fossil Fuel Industry to pollute internet threads with doubletalk dissembling and mendacity (always vociferously denying that they are bought and paid for by Big Oil, of course!), also spend no time at all addressing the giant conflict of interest the fossil fuel industry has that inhibits any objective scientific inquiry whatsoever on the question of whether to burn fossil fuels or not.

Oh no. They spend most of their Empathy Deficit disordered  time making spurious and defamatory charges about the alleged mens rea involved in climate change science modeling that predicts a hotter biosphere from green house gasses the fossil fuel industry externalizes to we-the-people.

Fossil Fuelers claim the empirical data is distorted or cherry picked or erroneous or incomplete or whatever to "justify all that money and subsidy swag" (LOL!) for Renewable Energy. It's allegedly a big conspiracy to ruin our quality, comfort and high standard of living that ONLY the burning of fossil fuels can provide.  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)

They are just following the Karl Rove, Machiavlelli worshipping playbook.

Karl Rove strategy #3: Accuse your opponent of your weakness.

Scientists try to replicate climate denier findings and fail  ;D

By Suzanne Jacobs  on 26 Aug 2015

SNIPPET:

Quote
When we tried to reproduce their model of the lunar and solar influence on the climate, we found that the model only simulated their temperature data reasonably accurately for the 4,000-year period they considered. However, for the 6,000 years’ worth of earlier data they threw out, their model couldn’t reproduce the temperature changes.

The authors argued that their model could be used to forecast future climate changes   ;), but there’s no reason to trust a model forecast if it can’t accurately reproduce the past.  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif)

http://grist.org/news/scientists-try-to-replicate-climate-denier-findings-and-fail/ (http://grist.org/news/scientists-try-to-replicate-climate-denier-findings-and-fail/)
(http://www.freesmileys.org/custom/image/tongue%5E_%5Earial%5E_%5E0%5E_%5E0%5E_%5EBurning Fossil Fuels IS SUICIDE%5E_%5E.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 01, 2015, 03:31:22 pm
Obama Is a Climate Hypocrite. His Trip to Alaska Proves It.   >:(
 
This is not what strong leadership looks like.

—By Eric Holthaus

Tue Sep. 1, 2015 12:18 PM EDT

SNIPPET:

Quote
On Monday morning President Obama headed to Alaska—the front lines of climate change—for a trip the White House is calling "a spotlight on what Alaskans in particular have come to know: Climate change is one of the biggest threats we face, it is being driven by human activity, and it is disrupting Americans' lives right now."

Problem is, those words fall flat when compared with Obama's mixed record on climate. The widely publicized trip comes at a delicate moment for the president. Barely two weeks ago, his administration gave Royal Dutch Shell final approval to drill for oil offshore from Alaska's northwest Arctic coast—not exactly the sort of thing you'd expect from someone who professes to be "leading by example."

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/09/obama-climate-hypocrite-alaska

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 02, 2015, 02:05:26 am
(http://images.bidnessetc.com/img/exxon-mobil-corporation-was-aware-of-climate-change-3-decades-ago-email-rev.jpg)


Exxon Knew About The Scientific Reality Of Climate Change In 1981


By JOE ROMM  July 12th, 2015

 Follow @constantineRPT
   
“… As recently as February 2015, a New York Times exposé revealed that a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who routinely casts doubt on widely accepted climate science had ‘accepted more than $1.2 million’ in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. …”

“Pope Francis blasts global warming deniers,” the Washington Post wrote last month. The Pope’s climate encyclical focused on the immorality of climate inaction — which makes the immorality of knowingly spreading disinformation for the purpose of delaying action all the more base.

Now the Union of Concerned Scientists has disclosed an email revealing that Exxon understood the scientific reality of climate change as far back as 1981. “Other companies, such as Mobil, only became aware of the issue in 1988, when it first became a political issue,” Exxon’s former in-house climate expert, chemical engineer Leonard S. Bernstein wrote last year. The 30-year veteran of Mobil and Exxon explained:

Exxon first got interested in climate change in 1981 because it was seeking to develop the Natuna gas field off Indonesia. This is an immense reserve of natural gas, but it is 70% CO2. That CO2 would have to be separated to make the natural gas usable.

And yet despite a growing understanding of the scientific reality of climate change in the 1980s and 1990s, Exxon became one of the biggest funders of scientists and think tanks and others who do little but deny and cast doubt on the scientific understanding of human-caused global warming.

As recently as February 2015, a New York Times exposé revealed that a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who routinely casts doubt on widely accepted climate science had “accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers.” This included funding from ExxonMobil and “at least $230,000 from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.”

In the book and film “Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming,” historians and journalists show that this misinformation and disinformation campaign goes all the way back to the tobacco industry’s campaign to cast doubt on claims that cigarette smoking is bad for your health — and that in some cases it involves the same exact people.

The Times documented back in 2009 that the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), an anti-action lobbying group backed by fossil fuel industries, ignored its own climate scientists during the 1990s while spreading disinformation about global warming. An internal report stating that the human causes of global warming “cannot be denied” was ignored by GCC leaders. The GCC led an “aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.” Yet the final draft of a 1995 “Primer on Climate Change Science” written by the GGC’s own scientific experts revealed that those experts “were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.”

Quote
Those experts explained: “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied.” And after a long analysis of “Are There Alternate Explanations for the Climate Change Which Has Occurred Over the Last 120 Years?” they conclude: “The contrarian theories raise interesting questions about our total understanding of climate processes, but they do not offer convincing arguments against the conventional model of greenhouse gas emission-induced climate change.”

The Times reported that the GCC “was financed by fees from large corporations and trade groups representing the oil, coal and auto industries, among others” with a budget totaling nearly $1.7 million in 1997 alone. Ultimately, the Times notes, “The coalition, according to other documents, later requested that the section of the primer endorsing the basics of global warming science be cut.”

The tobacco industry knew of the dangers of smoking and the addictive nature of nicotine for decades, but its CEOs and representatives publicly denied those facts.
In the same way, many of those denying the reality of human-caused climate change have long known the actual science.

Over the years, fossil fuel company executives have funneled tens of millions of dollars into this disinformation campaign.
The top funder was ExxonMobil for a long time. But the company was overtaken years ago by Koch Industries, run by billionaires Charles and David Koch, who spent more than $48.5 million from 1997 to 2010 to fund disinformation. From 2005 to 2008, the Kochs outspent Exxon-Mobil well over 2-to-1 in funding the climate denial machine.

In February, the New York Times revealed that over the previous ten years, Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon had accepted more than a million dollars from fossil fuel interests, including Exxon-Mobil and the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, “while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers.” During this period, Soon advanced a repeatedly debunked theory arguing that humans are not the primary cause of global warming. The Times explained:

Though he has little formal training in climatology, Dr. Soon has for years published papers trying to show that variations in the sun’s energy can explain most recent global warming. His thesis is that human activity has played a relatively small role in causing climate change.

The New York Times then explains that “many experts in the field say that Dr. Soon uses out-of-date data, publishes spurious correlations between solar output and climate indicators, and does not take account of the evidence implicating emissions from human behavior in climate change.” Gavin A. Schmidt, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies explained that solar variability probably is responsible for at most 10 percent of recent global warming, whereas human-caused greenhouse gases are responsible for the overwhelming majority of it. He added, “the science that Willie Soon does is almost pointless.”

In October 2014, the Smithsonian itself put out a climate statement, which makes clear that such a view is simply anti-scientific. The Smithsonian explains, “Scientific evidence has demonstrated that the global climate is warming as a result of increasing levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases generated by human activities.” Amazingly, the newly uncovered documents show that “Dr. Soon, in correspondence with his corporate funders, described many of his scientific papers as ‘deliverables’ that he completed in exchange for their money.” The Smithsonian repeatedly signed off on contracts with Southern Company Services — a coal company and long-time funder of science denial — requiring the Smithsonian to provide the coal utility “advanced written copy of proposed publications … for comment and input.”

Yet the fossil fuel industry has known for two decades that the solar variability explanation for recent climate change is untrue. As far back as 1995, the scientific and technical advisers to the Global Climate Coalition wrote in their draft primer:


[The] hypothesis about the role of solar variability and [Pat] Michaels’ questions about the temperature record are not convincing arguments against any conclusion that we are currently experiencing warming as the result of greenhouse gas emissions. However, neither solar variability nor anomalies in the temperature record offer a mechanism for off-setting the much larger rise in temperature which might occur if the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases were to double or quadruple.

So the fossil fuel industry has known for a long, long time that human-caused climate change was a very real threat based on well-documented science. It has callously disregarded that reality to spread falsehoods and thwart action.
  (http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000370273/polls_Smiley_Angry_256x256_3451_356175_answer_4_xlarge.png)


The Pope ends his encyclical calling on God to “Enlighten those who possess power and money that they may avoid the sin of indifference, that they may love the common good, advance the weak, and care for this world in which we live. The poor and the earth are crying out.”

If indifference to the dangers of climate inaction by the rich and powerful is a sin, what would the Pope say about a company that’s fostering lies in order to spread indifference among the public, the media, and policy-makers?

http://www.constantinereport.com/exxon-knew-scientific-reality-climate-change-1981/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 02, 2015, 04:00:53 pm
Tue Sep 01, 2015 at 06:49 AM EDT.

You ain't seen nothing yet! Northeast’s Next Winter Is Going to Be Freakishly Cold

by Pakalolo

https://youtu.be/6KEkSfgHJNk

Full article:


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/01/1417293/-You-ain-t-seen-nothing-yet-Northeast-s-Next-Winter-Is-Going-to-Be-Freakishly-Cold

Agelbert Comment:
More "Externalized" costs thanks to you know who.

In a just world, the bastards that made all the profits from selling us fossil fuels and buying politicians to strangle Renewable Energy for the last CENTURY or so should PAY for our increased heating costs in the Northeast caused by Global Climate Change.

But we do not live in a just world.

We can fuel ALL our cars on E100 WITHOUT reducing our food supply, regardless of what you may have heard.

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/ethanol/msg3693/?topicseen#new

We need fossil fuels like a hole in the head.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 02, 2015, 09:01:08 pm
Shilling for Dollars
(https://frackorporation.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/gilbert-ross.gif)

Front groups with official and impressive name such as Medicine and Public Health at the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) tend to lend an air of authoritative credibility to a given issue. It carries the impression of being an expert source.

To increase the “expert credibility” image, add someone with a few letters before and/or after their name to the staff.

But is the front group or its representatives really an expert and credible organization?  (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif)

Full article:
https://frackorporation.wordpress.com/2015/08/15/shilling-for-dollars/

Agelbert NOTE:
The short answer is NO. The ACSH is funded by a rogues gallery of polluters. The scientists they employ are bought and paid for to distort, dissemble and twist the science of applied physics (see "High Energy Density" of fossil fuels happy talk) and climate science along with several other pro-corporate and anti-people propaganda). The ACSH exists to perpetuate the profit over planet polluting status quo, PERIOD.



Why You Can’t Trust the American Council on Science and Health

Posted on April 17, 2015 by Gary Ruskin

The American Council on Science and Health is a front group for the tobacco, agrichemical, fossil fuel, pharmaceutical and other industries.

Personnel

ACSH’s “Medical/Executive Director” is Dr. Gilbert Ross.[2] In 1993, according to United Press International, Dr. Ross was “convicted of racketeering, mail fraud and conspiracy,” and was “sentenced to 47 months in jail, $40,000 in forfeiture and restitution of $612,855” in a scheme to defraud the Medicaid system.[3]
ACSH’s Dr. Ross was found to be a “highly untrustworthy individual” by a judge who sustained the exclusion of Dr. Ross from Medicaid for ten years.[4]


Funding
  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

ACSH has often billed itself as an “independent” group, and has been referred to as “independent” in the press. However, according to internal ACSH financial documents obtained by Mother Jones:

“ACSH planned to receive a total of $338,200 from tobacco companies between July 2012 and June 2013. Reynolds American and Phillip Morris International were each listed as expected to give $100,000 in 2013, which would make them the two largest individual donations listed in the ACSH documents.”[5]

“ACSH donors in the second half of 2012 included Chevron ($18,500), Coca-Cola ($50,000), the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation ($15,000), Dr. Pepper/Snapple ($5,000), Bayer Cropscience ($30,000), Procter and **** ($6,000), agribusiness giant Syngenta ($22,500), 3M ($30,000), McDonald’s ($30,000), and tobacco conglomerate Altria ($25,000).

Among the corporations and foundations that ACSH has pursued for financial support since July 2012 are Pepsi, Monsanto, British American Tobacco, DowAgro, ExxonMobil Foundation, Philip Morris International, Reynolds American, the Koch family-controlled Claude R. Lambe Foundation, the Dow-linked Gerstacker Foundation, the Bradley Foundation, and the Searle Freedom Trust.”[6]

ACSH has received $155,000 in contributions from Koch foundations from 2005-2011, according to Greenpeace.[7]

Indefensible and incorrect statements on science
ACSH has:

Claimed that “There is no evidence that exposure to secondhand smoke involves heart attacks or cardiac arrest.”[8]

Argued that “there is no scientific consensus concerning global warming. The climate change predictions are based on computer models that have not been validated and are far from perfect.”[9]

Argued that fracking “doesn’t pollute water or air.”[10]

Claimed that “The scientific evidence is clear. There has never been a case of ill health linked to the regulated, approved use of pesticides in this country.”[11]

Declared that “There is no evidence that BPA [bisphenol A] in consumer products of any type, including cash register receipts, are harmful to health.”[12]

Argued that the exposure to mercury, a potent neurotoxin, “in conventional seafood causes no harm in humans.”[13]

Footnotes

[2] “Meet the ACSH Team,” American Council on Science and Health website.

[3] “Seven Sentenced for Medicaid Fraud.” United Press International, December 6, 1993. See also correspondence from Tyrone T. Butler, Director, Bureau of Adjudication, State of New York Department of Health to Claudia Morales Bloch, Gilbert Ross and Vivian Shevitz, “RE: In the Matter of Gilbert Ross, M.D.” March 1, 1995. Bill Hogan, “Paging Dr. Ross.” Mother Jones, November 2005. Martin Donohoe MD FACP, “Corporate Front Groups and the Abuse of Science: The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH).” Spinwatch, June 25, 2010.

[4] Department of Health and Human Services, Departmental Appeals Board, Civil Remedies Division, In the Cases of Gilbert Ross, M.D. and Deborah Williams M.D., Petitioners, v. The Inspector General. June 16, 1997. Docket Nos. C-94-368 and C-94-369. Decision No. CR478.

[5] Andy Kroll and Jeremy Schulman, “Leaked Documents Reveal the Secret Finances of a Pro-Industry Science Group.” Mother Jones, October 28, 2013. “American Council on Science and Health Financial Report, FY 2013 Financial Update.” Mother Jones, October 28, 2013.

[6] Andy Kroll and Jeremy Schulman, “Leaked Documents Reveal the Secret Finances of a Pro-Industry Science Group.” Mother Jones, October 28, 2013. “American Council on Science and Health Financial Report, FY 2013 Financial Update.” Mother Jones, October 28, 2013.

[7] “Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group: American Council on Science and Health (ACSH).” Greenpeace. See also Rebekah Wilce, “Kochs and Corps Have Bankrolled American Council on Science and Health.” PR Watch, July 23, 2014.

[8] Richard Craver, “The Effects of the Smoking Ban.” Winston-Salem Journal, December 12, 2012.

[9] Elizabeth Whelan, “’Global Warming’ Not Health Threat.” PRI (Population Research Institute) Review, January 1, 1998.

[10] Elizabeth Whelan, “Fracking Doesn’t Pose Health Risks.” The Daily Caller, April 29, 2013.

[11] “TASSC: The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition,” p. 9. Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, University of California, San Francisco. November 21, 2001. Bates No. 2048294227-2048294237.

[12] “The Top 10 Unfounded Health Scares of 2012.” American Council on Science and Health, February 22, 2013.

[13] “The Biggest Unfounded Health Scares of 2010.” American Council on Science and Health, December 30, 2010.

Food For Thought, Hall of Shame

http://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-you-cant-trust-the-american-council-on-science-and-health/

Agelbert NOTE:
Here is an excellent example of pseudo scientific baloney published by the ACSH (it's three years old but the same baloney continues to be peddled by fossil fuelers and those that swallowed their mendacious propaganda):

Energy Density: Why Gasoline Is Here To Stay  (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg)

By Hank Campbell   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp) | August 2nd 2012 11:00 PM

SNIPPET 1 - The Pretense of Objectivity Wind Up (i.e. tough love "real world" baloney mixed with sympathy laced rhetoric):

Like people who approach geopolitics with the attitude of "If people would just talk to each other, we would all along", there are a lot of naïve assumptions about just dumping gasoline.

We know it causes emissions, and emissions are bad, we know a lot of the money paid for oil goes to fund Middle Eastern terrorism, and that is bad - those things should cause both the left and the right in America to want gasoline gone. And yet it is not gone. The reason is simple: gasoline is a lot more efficient than alternative energy proponents want to believe.


SNIPPET 2 - The pitch:

Energy density is the amount of stored energy in something; in the case of gasoline we talk in America about a 1 gallon volume but I will use both metric and standard for the values. Gasoline has an energy density of about 44 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg), converted to American values that is 1.3 × 108 J/gallon.


SNIPPET 3 (Just ONE of SEVERAL real world AND applied physics LIES):

Ethanol was the last craze of the Anything-But-Oil contingent yet even they had to succumb to reality and recognize that the lower energy density meant 25% worse gas mileage - worse for people, worse for food prices and worse for the environment.
http://www.science20.com/science_20/energy_density_why_gasoline_here_stay-91403
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-090315203150.png)


Agelbert NOTE: To begin with, ethanol is not a "craze". It was not a craze in 2012 and, because presently 15 billion gallons of it are made a year (http://www.e100ethanolgroup.com/Can_We_Really_Do_This_.html), it certainly isn't one now.

But the fact that the author is so ignorant of history (Edison labs in partnership with the U.S. Navy, in the first decade of the 20th century, PROVED that ethanol was a superior fuel to gasoline - It was rather convenient for Standard Oil that Prohibition just happened to come along after Rockefeller funded the temperance movement to the tune of several million dollars...) is informative about the questionable scientific objectivity of the author.  ;)

The author puts up a happy talk graph showing gasoline as the high energy density champion over E85. He leaves out E100 (an informative omission that points squarely at a fossil fuel bias).

The chart is accurate. So what's the problem? The problem is that energy density of gasoline and ethanol is a process determined in the lab, by scientists, in certain standardized conditions. I'm CERTAIN fossil fuelers know this. The energy density of about 44 MJ/kg) for gasoline is determined by heating water, in an open flame in standard atmospheric conditions (a fixed temperature and pressure - sea level at 59 degrees F). 

If the above appears irrelevant to you, let me remind you that heating water in an open flame is an EXTERNAL combustion process. It is true that gasoline will heat that water quicker than ethanol.  ;D

But, unless you have a steam engine running your car, you need to consider how much WORK you can get from gasoline versus ethanol in an INTERNAL combustion engine. (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6869.gif)

The author neglected to mention that ethanol (E100) has a higher octane rating than non-leaded gasoline, even though E100 has a lower energy density.  ;D High octane ratings give a fuel better mileage as long as you oxidize them in a high compression internal combustion engines. That is why tetra-ethyl lead was invented to help our children's IQ... You see, ethanol was outlawed for fuel thanks to Prohibition... And, by the way, leaded gasoline is STILL LEGAL for use in aircraft internal combustion engine, all of which are high compression engines. Do you live under the approach to general aviation airport? Then you are getting the "benefit" of still another "externalized" cost thanks to the fossil fuel industry.

When you mix gasoline with ethanol (e.g. E85) you LOWER the octane rating. IOW, you are making it LESS efficient. You are making it LESS competitive with gasoline. You are getting the waste heat disadvantage of gasoline and losing the a part of the high octane rating of ethanol. That is Inefficient. That is unscientific. That is STUPID. But that is convenient and profitable for the fossil fuel industry. You might ask yourself why E100 is in common use in Brazil, but not in the USA. I'll give you three guesses - the first two don't count.  ;)

Why ethanol's octane rating is higher than that of non-leaded gasoline if ethanol has a lower energy density? Because ethanol is of uniform chemical structure. Consequently, it burns evenly and does not suffer from pre-ignition (like low octane gasoline DOES) which can severely damage an engine.

More thermodynamically important, however,  the consistent chemical structure of E100 ensures complete combustion, aided by the fact that it carries it's own oxygen.

In addition, ethanol has extremely low waste heat because, unlike gasoline, it doesn't produce carbon deposits from incomplete combustion on the cylinder walls that increase friction and decrease engine life.

Unlike an engine running on gasoline, you can touch the block, or the manifold, of an engine running on ethanol with your hand AND KEEP IT THERE without getting burned. This has huge savings implications for engine design that the fossil fuel industry has done it's best to keep from internal combustion engine designers and manufacturers (more on that below).

IN SUMMARY, "High energy density" calculations  are based on EXTERNAL thermodynamic combustion processes. It is true that gasoline will boil water in an open flame faster than ethanol will. That doesn't have beans to do with automobiles.

But when INTERNAL combustion is involved, ethanol produces more useful work than gasoline. That has EVERYTHING to do with automobiles.

But there is more the fossil fuel industry does not want most people to know. Due to the fact that ethanol burns so cleanly and has such low waste heat, a high compression internal combustion engine specifically designed for ethanol would be about 30% lighter (i.e. a lot cheaper) because the metal alloys involved would not have to be engineered to withstand the engine stressing waste heat that gasoline generates. Of course, said internal combustion engine (ICE) could not be approved for running gasoline. Gasoline would trash an engine designed specifically to run on ethanol in short order. The fossil fuel industry would not like that at all.

A lighter ICE running ethanol would then get even more mechanical energy (i.e. WORK) out of each gallon because less engine weight would need to be moved along with the car and occupants.

The Fossil Fuel Industry knows all that. That is why they continuously try to demonize and talk down ethanol biofuel with mendacity and dissembling about "low ERoEI", "water in the fuel" and "corrosion".

I, and many others, have exposed all that fossil fuel industry self serving propaganda. But they just keep throwing it out there to try to preserve the TOTALLY unscientific basis for claiming fossil fuels are a "better fuel" than E100 (pure ethanol).

Don't believe them. And check to see who is doing the funding when you read happy talk about fossil fuels.

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) is not objective, science based or credible. Hank Campbell, like the fossil fueler MKing that haunts the Doomstead Diner, is not interested in scientific objectivity; preserving the fossil fuel profit over planet status quo with mens rea mendacity is behind everything they write. (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)



Further reading that methodically takes apart some relatively recent pseudo scientific baloney by the "illustrious" Professor Charles Hall, friend of fossil fuelers everywhere.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png)(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png)


Renewables have higher ERoEI than fossil fuels (http://bountifulenergy.blogspot.com/2014/07/renewables-have-higher-eroei-than.html)

  (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/yayayoy/yayayoy1106/yayayoy110600019/9735563-smiling-sun-showing-thumb-up.jpg)

 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 02, 2015, 11:03:35 pm
https://youtu.be/-qsoRkl6Njs

Bees and flowers have a special relationship, and climate change is screwing it up     (http://www.mrwallpaper.com/wallpapers/Sad-Sunflower.jpg)


By Clayton Aldern  on 1 Sep 2015

http://grist.org/news/bees-and-flowers-have-a-special-relationship-and-climate-change-is-screwing-it-up/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 07, 2015, 05:45:11 pm
Rising sea levels will not affect our ability to harvest energy from Ocean currents.

So, if we harvest a lot of our energy from the oceans, at least we won't be making things worse as the earth heats up. I always say that when you are in hole, it is prudent to stop digging. The ocean currents are available near most of the populated areas 24/7. We have the technology to tap that energy. This is not hard.

Here is some info on the physics of Ocean Currents. They leave out the rotation of the earth, which is behind MOST of the physics of ocean currents. But, we would all be dead without rotation for many other reasons so I can understand why it is such a given that it is not mentioned (i. e. assumed).

 (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif)
https://youtu.be/o8nezU0M7mI
Air and Ocean Currents


https://youtu.be/5tRiZG-yR24
Ocean Currents 1994 -2002 


 Clean Renewable Energy from Ocean Currents can Power the World.  (http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/masdar-engage-contest-entry-by-a-g-gelbert/msg587/#msg587)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 09, 2015, 06:46:30 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L19JBY0kNmo&feature=player_embedded

Presentation by Jennifer Hynes on runaway feedbacks in the Arctic and the resulting threat of near-term human extinction.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 09, 2015, 07:43:13 pm
Comment by Mike at RealClimate, Climate science from climate scientists:

Quote
Mike says: 3 Sep 2015 at 1:47 PM I think scientists are conservative by nature and training. I think the scientific community has been remiss in allowing policy makers to cherry pick the data and projections and create public policy targets that are political expedient.

For those reasons and more, I will occasionally entertain myself and allow the scientific community to continue the discussion about the disconnect between the catastrophic consequences the planet is dishing up in response to carbon loading and ocean acidification.

At some point (usually retirement ) scientists will speak out strongly about our predicament.

At the point that the scientific community speaks strongly and loudly about our collective situation, I expect that we will have passed some thresholds that lead to a place where passenger pigeons still crowd the sky.

Until then, the media will cover the building human displacement crisis as a function of Islamic fundamentalism and a political problem rather than early stages of what will become a wave of displacement secondary to rising sea levels, droughts, etc. and will engage in faux balance by presenting “both” sides on climate change.

Short version: Jerry Ford could have done as well as Obama has done on climate change. And we (collectively) have let the policy makers get away with this poor performance.

The scientific community has special responsibilities in this situation and has failed to meet those responsibilities imho.

Mal Adapted says: 4 Sep 2015 at 9:11 AM Mike: I think the scientific community has been remiss in allowing policy makers to cherry pick the data and projections and create public policy targets that are political expedient.

If policy makers did only what the scientific community allowed, AGW would never have become an existential threat.

At the point that the scientific community speaks strongly and loudly about our collective situation, I expect that we will have passed some thresholds that lead to a place where passenger pigeons still crowd the sky.

IOW, at the point when scientists are policy makers, and policy makers are scientists. I’m glad I won’t leave descendants.


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/09/unforced-variations-sept-2015/#sthash.IxU0e93v.dpuf

 
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 09, 2015, 08:19:04 pm
Cimate Denier gets his ass handed to him by a climate scientist.  ;D

Quote
Jim Baird]: Proposition: the climate science community is failing mankind by overlooking the events that brought on the hiatus. http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Science-and-politics-disre-by-Jim-Baird-Climate_Climate-Change_Climate-Change-Agreement_Climate-Crisis-150902-43.html

From your link:


It was scientists who discovered, measured and explained these events but the practical implications seems to have escaped them; with the result policy makers are deprived of the information that would enable them to address climate change with the least cost and to the greatest benefit.

Rebuttal:
it is not the climate science community that is failing mankind, but the policy makers who have chosen to ignore the clear and unambiguous advice the climate science community has been offering for years.

In early 2014 the US National Academy of Sciences, established by Congress in 1863 to “investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science”, published a 34-page booklet titled Climate Change: Evidence and Causes, free to download at the link.

It addressed 20 common questions laypeople often have about AGW, including this one:

Q: Does the recent slowdown of warming mean that climate change is no longer happening?

A: No. Since the very warm year 1998 that followed the strong 1997-98 El Niño, the increase in average surface temperature has slowed relative to the previous decade of rapid temperature increases. Despite the slower rate of warming the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s.

A short-term slowdown in the warming of Earth’s surface does not invalidate our understanding of long-term changes in global temperature arising from human-induced changes in greenhouse gases.

The climate science community has provided all the information needed by policy makers to address climate change with the least cost and to the greatest benefit.

It has simply been swamped by the flood of deliberate disinformation issuing from both professional and volunteer AGW-deniers, at the behest of those who’ve accumulated vast private fortunes by socializing the enormous cost of climate change.


Indeed, it is playing into their hands to use ‘hiatus’ or ‘pause’ for what was not a cessation, but at most a slightly-reduced rate, of warming.

It is policy makers who have cravenly allowed themselves to be unduly influenced by the power of fossil-fuel wealth.

In turn, our fellow citizens have allowed their elected representatives to act for the benefit of the few, against the interests of the rest of us.

Every literate person has access to the same information RC readers do, and has the choice to accept or deny it. Let us assign the blame to whom it belongs: we have the government we deserve.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/09/unforced-variations-sept-2015/#sthash.IxU0e93v.dpuf

Agelbert NOTE:
I agree with the all of the rebuttal, EXCEPT the last sentence. Let us assign the blame to whom it belongs: The Fossil Fuel Industry BECAUSE THEY are the ones who have CORRUPTED out government.

We DID NOT deserve that. It was, and is, a crime. Blaming the VICTIM is not justice; it is socializing the blame. I'm certain the fossil fuel industry would be quite happy if the "we are all to blame" meme, so favored by Wall Street Bankers since 2008, enabled them to EXTERNALIZE the blame along with the environmental costs.

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing, human health depleteing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)



Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 11, 2015, 01:38:39 pm
(http://www.realclimate.org/images//Bjorn_Lomborg_Sea_Level_Rise.png)
Figure 3 The data behind Lomborg’s claim of falling sea level. Image courtesy of Greg Laden’s blog.

Bjørn Lomborg, just a scientist with a different opinion?   (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif)
 


Filed under: Climate Science Communicating Climate skeptics
 — stefan @ 31 August 2015

SNIPPET 1:

Bjørn Lomborg is a well-known media personality who argues that there are more important priorities than reducing emissions to limit global warming. In a recent controversy centering on him, the Australian government (known for its contradictory position on climate change) offered the University of Western Australia (UWA) $4 million to make Lomborg professor – which UWA first accepted, but then after massive protest from its staff and students refused. The Australian government was quick to label it a “freedom of speech” issue that Lomborg should get a university position, and vowed to find another university that would host him. However, free speech doesn’t guarantee everyone a university position; there are also academic qualifications required.  ;D

SNIPPET 2:

Danish biologist Kåre Fog has a good summary on his Lomborg Errors website of how Lomborg has shifted his position continuously over time, from denying global warming is a problem to wanting to fix it with drastic geoengineering measures. The website has extensive documentation of Lomborg’s errors. Fog concludes about Lomborg: “He does precisely what the fossil fuel industry would want a PR agent to do”.

Agelbert NOTE: Don't miss reading this article by a Climate Scientist that carefully and methodically exposes Bjørn Lomborg's LACK of scientific objectivity.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110915133135.jpeg)

 http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/#sthash.82d1Gs8e.dpuf
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 11, 2015, 08:14:29 pm
Quote
Think climate change is a low-priority problem? Something to put off while we deal with more immediate threats? Then Climate Shock will open your eyes. Leading economists Wagner and Weitzman explain, in simple, understandable terms, why we face an existential threat in human-caused climate change.

The authors lay out the case for taking out a planetary insurance policy, without delay, in the form of market mechanisms aimed at keeping carbon emissions below dangerous levels. —Michael E. Mann, author of The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars

Agelbert NOTE: In page two of the above article, the scientist Michael Mann discusses the Alan style denial of reality by a journalist. The scientists that wrote the book are accused of “exaggerating extreme outcomes”.

That's baloney, of course. But that's all part of the delay, delay, delay game used to avoid recognizing the threat. And we know that makes people who want to feel comfortable wallow in their denial comfortably. The Fossil Fuel Industry psychos love this!

Michael Mann makes it clear that the Alan (or Ashvin) type arguments presented are, not just baseless, but harmful:

Quote
The straw man continues to the very end of the article, with Schrager concluding:

It’s tempting to shout from the rooftops that this is a disaster waiting to happen, because the downside is so scary–even if it will only impact our grandchildren. More so for climate change where the stakes are so much bigger. But that only gives skeptics room to question climate scientists’ findings. If anything, the existence of uncertainty provides the best case for swift action because the solutions (cap-and-trade, investment in renewables) are relatively cheap compared to what they will be in the future if worst cases are realized.

Which means that she apparently didn’t really get anything out of Climate Shock at all.

The actual reason uncertainty provides the “best case for swift action,” as explained in excruciating detail in Climate Shock, is the FAT TAIL of risk emphasized by Wagner and Weitzman (and by me in the Esquire piece). The best reason for taking out a planetary insurance policy is the non-negligible likelihood of climate changes that are considerably greater, and risks that are more severe, that our average current predictions. That, in a sentence, is the thesis of Climate Shock.

There is need for a nuanced discussion of climate risk and solutions, and the challenges inherent in decision making in the face of uncertainty—things I always stress in my commentaries and public speaking engagements about climate change.

But straw man constructions that caricature these nuanced matters and misrepresent the scientists and their efforts to inform this critical discussion, does absolutely nothing to advance that discussion. Indeed, it does quite a bit to harm it.

Climate Shock: The Economic Consequences of a Hotter Planet
http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/11/michael-mann-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/11/michael-mann-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk/)

Though I have not read the book, I'm certain the gravity of our situation is laid out in stark mathematical reality in it. I recommend anyone that thinks those of us warning about this existential threat are too "way out there" to read the article and the book. The less people are in denial about reality, the greater the possibility that SOME of the human species can survive.
(https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/snap-2013-11-06-at-14-31-28.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 12, 2015, 05:07:49 pm
Here''s something for Alan and Ashvin to ponder. Perhaps it will spur them to admit things are worse than they thought. But I'm not holding my breath. And then they say the Doomers suffer from "confirmation bias".  ::)

Quote
Think climate change is a low-priority problem? Something to put off while we deal with more immediate threats? Then Climate Shock will open your eyes. Leading economists Wagner and Weitzman explain, in simple, understandable terms, why we face an existential threat in human-caused climate change.

The authors lay out the case for taking out a planetary insurance policy, without delay, in the form of market mechanisms aimed at keeping carbon emissions below dangerous levels. —Michael E. Mann, author of The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars

Agelbert NOTE: In page two of the above article, the scientist Michael Mann discusses the Alan style denial of reality by a journalist. The scientists that wrote the book are accused of “exaggerating extreme outcomes”.

That's bull****, of course. But that's all part of the delay, delay, delay game used to avoid recognizing the threat. And we know that makes people who want to feel comfortable wallow in their denial comfortably. The Fossil Fuel Industry psychos love this!

Michael Mann makes it clear that the Alan (or Ashvin) type arguments presented are, not just baseless, but harmful:

Quote
The straw man continues to the very end of the article, with Schrager concluding:

It’s tempting to shout from the rooftops that this is a disaster waiting to happen, because the downside is so scary–even if it will only impact our grandchildren. More so for climate change where the stakes are so much bigger. But that only gives skeptics room to question climate scientists’ findings. If anything, the existence of uncertainty provides the best case for swift action because the solutions (cap-and-trade, investment in renewables) are relatively cheap compared to what they will be in the future if worst cases are realized.

Which means that she apparently didn’t really get anything out of Climate Shock at all.

The actual reason uncertainty provides the “best case for swift action,” as explained in excruciating detail in Climate Shock, is the FAT TAIL of risk emphasized by Wagner and Weitzman (and by me in the Esquire piece). The best reason for taking out a planetary insurance policy is the non-negligible likelihood of climate changes that are considerably greater, and risks that are more severe, that our average current predictions. That, in a sentence, is the thesis of Climate Shock.

There is need for a nuanced discussion of climate risk and solutions, and the challenges inherent in decision making in the face of uncertainty—things I always stress in my commentaries and public speaking engagements about climate change.

But straw man constructions that caricature these nuanced matters and misrepresent the scientists and their efforts to inform this critical discussion, does absolutely nothing to advance that discussion. Indeed, it does quite a bit to harm it.

Climate Shock: The Economic Consequences of a Hotter Planet
http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/11/michael-mann-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/11/michael-mann-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk/)

Though I have not read the book, I'm certain the gravity of our situation is laid out in stark mathematical reality in it. I recommend anyone, like Alan or Ashvin, that thinks Doomers are too "way out there" to read the article and the book. The less people are in denial about reality, the greater the possibility that SOME of the human species can survive.
(https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/snap-2013-11-06-at-14-31-28.png)

If you think those 2 will read a book your dreamin' Ag.
They like sitting in their own stink & ignorance.
Socio-pathic behavior at best ....
Al's gonna' **** his pants when PX comes whistlin' through here next spring.
As for Ashvin he'll still be in denial of the true Almighty one. Hopeless

K-Dog, I found your comments to be a mishmash of misapprehension (of what I am saying), confusion, silliness, petulance, nastiness, and a bunch of other things which I don't even want to bother typing. In other words, I found no value in your comments, and nothing truly worth responding to. Sorry.

Seemed very clear to me.  Perhaps you have a Learning Disability?  That would explain a lot.

RE



Its what he does,  plays dumb when hes got nothin then signs off sincerely. tells agb not to turn anyone off with wild rhetoric designed to scare but look at his psa. Tells us we have to be careful not to sound crazy, yet his psa tells people not to waste  time here while he does exactly that.

This thread is almost surreal... in so far as you guys are repeatedly displaying the cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias which Alan was accusing you of, but somehow fail to see it! (on second thought, it's not very surprising)

RE has failed to respond to almost every substantive point made by Alan, including his critique of posting daily news articles as sound evidence of near-term, big picture Doom. UB has failed to respond to the stats of violent crime decreasing. Yet you guys insist that "hes got nothin" and that HE is the one avoiding YOUR arguments. No one reading the entirety of this thread could possibly come to that conclusion absent cognitive dissonance or disingenuity. You guys are clearly trying to shut down dialogue/debate on these issues, perhaps with a mix of intention and unintentionally unreasonable and non-substantive responses (K-Dog's latest response was exactly that). 

As far as I can tell, AG, despite clearly being irked by Alan's and my supportive comments, is the only one responding substantively.

Quote from: AG
Here''s something for Alan and Ashvin to ponder. Perhaps it will spur them to admit things are worse than they thought. But I'm not holding my breath. And then they say the Doomers suffer from "confirmation bias".

I didn't see anything in your post or link which I disagree with (which is not to say I completely agree... I just don't know enough about the science). Clearly climate change is a real BIG threat to humanity. But I fail to see how that translates into a "high probability" (maybe this should be defined in % terms) of human extinction within 0-50 years. Perhaps if we keep adding up the various environmental problems, we eventually get to > than 50%, but I can't be anything close to certain of that.

Alan's point, though, remains valid - yelling near-term Doom (with a capital D) at the top of our lungs is almost guaranteed to turn people away from change than inspire them towards it. I'm not saying to whitewash what you believe to be the truth, but if you couch it in terms of certainty about the future and/or, "anyone who disagrees is hopelessly ignorant", then apathy and stagnation will be the result.

Do you see, Ashvin, that the logic you use to assert that Alan's "point" about "exaggerating extreme outcomes" (that's the proper phrase, old chum - yeah it does equal yelling - that's what you do when your species is genuinely threatened) is part of YOUR confirmation bias?

You don't? Well, try this on for size:

You consistently ignore the reality of the tsunami of propaganda out there that tells people everything is hunky dory. A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, Ashvin wrote an excellent article about how FUBAR things were/are.  I do believe Ashvin wrote that article out of a sense of frustration about how people REFUSED to see how they were being USED to further a morally depraved status quo fostered by TPTB. He was, and is, right.

THAT morally depraved status quo didn't just happen. Social Darwinism was, and is at the heart of it, is it not? Alan doesn't go for that. Alan doesn't DO "judgements" as to ethical or not. Alan, unfortunately supported by GO, prefers to avoid admitting the mere possibility that the ROOT of our FUBAR situation is moral depravity.

Perhaps GO hasn't seen that. I hope GO gets that now. Alan refuses to think things are FUBAR. He says that is "exaggerating extreme outcomes".

Of course your piece about our FUBAR society did not define FUBAR effects in the biosphere. It was an article on economics. But really, do you think you can ignore the cause and effect chain that leads from moral depravity to extreme environmental degradation? You can't. You can, and probably will  ::), argue things haven't gotten that bad yet, and Alan is merely warning against "irrational and sensationalist hyperbole".

No, he isn't doing that. He is bathing in that river in Egypt. WHY? Because he has an a priori (faulty) logical premise, as does GO, that there is no massive and powerful organized element out there with the Means, Motive and Opportunity to put people to sleep about how FUBAR things are. So do you. That's called endowment bias.

While people were being told massive industrialization and massive use of fossil fuels was great for "civilization" (Albert Camus — 'The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.' ), we were given the Tyranny of Big Oil (The Tyranny of Oil: The World's Most Powerful Industry--and What We Must Do to Stop It Paperback  – December 8, 2009 (http://www.amazon.com/The-Tyranny-Oil-Powerful-Industry/dp/0061434515) ).

We can argue whether the Fossil Fuel Industry MO was an accessory to, or the mastermind of, these profit over people and planet crimes against humanity that eroded democracy and ethical business practices everywhere. But I'm sure you will agree that MO is a huge causative element in our polluted biosphere.

The bottom line in the "point" Alan allegedly has is that near term human extinction (N.T.H.E.) is a LOW to NO probability event. This is the way you and GO see it too, is it not?

If you or Alan or GO could be convinced that  N.T.H.E. is NOT a LOW to NO probability event, I think your outlook on the discourse here would change. Palloy, our resident mathematician, can tell us all about probabilities. But UB, our resident psychiatrist, can tell us HOW our PERCEPTION of what those probabilities are TILTS our world view and endowment bias.

FURTHERMORE, RE and Surly, experts in the propaganda techniques they fight daily, can tell us how WELL FUNDED, REPETITIVE, CREDIBLE SOUNDING propaganda hitting people from all sides is INSTRUMENTAL in distorting the probability of this, that or the other event occurring.

I think this is ALL ABOUT endowment bias which is intimately connected to world view, which is influenced by a tsunami of propaganda lies about how hunky dory things are, which leads people to descend into denial of the actual probability of N.T.H.E., which leads them descend into derision and mockery of those seeking to warn Homo Saps, which serves the purpose of the psychos that created (and continue to exacerbate) the present mess.

It is expected that, if you believe a threat is over represented, you believe the person doing so is a fool or has some agenda. That's Alan's accusation of RE. I claim that Alan is being duped by TPTB. Back in West Point, upperclassmen would stop a plebe to have a little fun.

Upperclassman: Mr., you are a wedge.
Agelbert plebe: Yes sir!
Upperclassman: Mr, what is a wedge?
Agelbert plebe: Sir, a wedge is the simplest tool, sir!

You, GO, Alan and anyone else duped by TPTB is a tool used to DELAY the realization that drastic measures are required to LOWER the present HIGH probability of N.T.H.E..

So, let's cut to the chase, SHALL WE?  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png)

WHAT probability do you give to N.T.H.E. ?

PLEASE, lurkers and posters of all stripes weigh in. Give us a percent number from one to 1 to 100. Palloy can do the math. UB can tell us how the probability of a threat DOES NOT have to be greater than 50% do justify IMMEDIATE action, rather than incremental measures. I'll wager that 20% is enough to dispense with incremental measures, but I'm a "victim" of "confirmation bias" so I may be a bit prejudiced.   ::)

And Ashvin, PLEASE, don't claim you don't have enough data or knowledge of environmental science to avoid giving a number. Don't play the lawyer avoiding being buttonholed into a corner. You HAVE a number in your head. That NUMBER influences everything you say about this subject.

IF we can't get to the number, we can't discuss HOW people got that NUMBER inserted into their consciousness.

MY premise, the one the Ashvin of the FUBAR article partially shared, is that the NUMBER assigning N.T.H.E. to a low or NO probability status is a function of a massive propaganda effort.

And THAT, is why Alan is hypocritical in the extreme to accuse RE of hyperbole and sensationalism while simultaneously IGNORING the mens rea 'go back to sleep' propaganda of TPTB.


http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,811.msg85178.html#msg85178
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 12, 2015, 05:36:22 pm
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZAmqQkKw8FA/VD39Zyx2kxI/AAAAAAAAPLs/tTXoxfpy-Iw/s1600/800x489.jpg)
Quote
Nick Breeze interview with East Siberian Arctic Shelf researcher (ESAS) Dr. Natalia Shakhova on why the important news about methane news is not reaching mainstream news. Powerful interests seem to be in the way of Arctic methane education.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 12, 2015, 09:00:12 pm
(http://media2.fdncms.com/tucsonweekly/imager/u/original/5888381/cover.jpg)
Quote
McPherson accuses climate scientists of "malpractice" for not being candid with the public about "our 99 percent certainty of death."

"There is no expiration date stamped on us, but we have triggered events that will lead to our extinction in the not-too-distant future," he says.
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/radical-predictions/Content?oid=5888387 (http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/radical-predictions/Content?oid=5888387)

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-310714182509.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 12, 2015, 09:52:30 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLm7PSsvW8g&feature=player_embedded

Watch NASA Explain Why We Should All Be Worried About Greenland’s Melting Ice Sheet

Cole Mellino | September 9, 2015 10:05 am

http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/09/nasa-greenland-ice-sheet/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 14, 2015, 09:26:27 pm
Burning All of the World’s Fossil Fuels Would Completely Melt the Antarctic Ice Sheet

Deirdre Fulton, Common Dreams | September 14, 2015 10:43 am

Here’s another argument for keeping the world’s fossil fuels in the ground: If all the coal, gas and oil on Earth is extracted and burned, the Antarctic ice sheet will melt entirely, scientists warn in a new “blockbuster” study published last Friday in the research journal Science Advances.

“The mind-boggling point is that our actions today are changing the face of planet Earth as we know it and will continue to do so for tens of thousands of years to come. If we want to avoid Antarctica to become ice-free, we need to keep coal, gas and oil in the ground,” says Ricarda Winkelmann, lead study author of the Postdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

Quote

“For the first time we have shown there is sufficient fossil fuel to melt all of Antarctica,” Winkelmann, told the Guardian.

“This would not happen overnight,” she added, “but the mind-boggling point is that our actions today are changing the face of planet Earth as we know it and will continue to do so for tens of thousands of years to come. If we want to avoid Antarctica to become ice-free, we need to keep coal, gas and oil in the ground.”

As the Washington Post reports, “[t]he Antarctica question—whether there’s actually enough fossil fuel in the world to raise global temperatures enough to melt the entire ice sheet—surfaced at least as far back as 1979, when the New York Times published an article about the possible consequences of an Antarctic ice sheet collapse.”

To answer that question, the researchers used a state-of-the-art ice sheet model, which Winkelmann helped develop, to make projections on what would happen if humans burned various amounts of fossil fuels in the coming centuries, including what would happen if we burned all the available fuel on Earth—an amount equivalent to about 10,000 gigatons of carbon, according to previous estimates.

Under that nightmare scenario, the scientists explain in a study abstract, “Antarctica is projected to become almost ice-free with an average contribution to sea-level rise exceeding 3 [meters] per century during the first millennium.”

“This kind of sea-level rise would be unprecedented in the history of civilization,” Winkelmann told the Washington Post, which in turn wrote that “such an enormous rate of sea-level rise would likely wipe out many of the world’s coastal cities. In the U.S., alone, San Francisco would be reduced to a handful of islands, New York City would be submerged and Florida would disappear entirely.”

Previous studies have shown that the rate of melting ice in Antarctica’s vulnerable Amundsen Sea region has tripled in the past decade and that rapid melting of Antarctic ice could push sea levels up 10 feet worldwide within two centuries, “recurving” heavily populated coastlines and essentially reshaping the world.

http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/14/melt-antarctic-ice-sheet/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 15, 2015, 04:04:36 pm


I present this as part of the evidence that the probability of N.T.H.E. is increasing.


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150915151554.png)

SNIPPET 1:

“Greenhouse gases” are atmospheric gases which have been accumulating in an unprecedented fashion in recent years. They have been cited as major factors in the increase in mean global temperature which appears to be occurring at present.

Most important among these gases are carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4).

How is this related to tropical forests? Changes occurring during deforestation include the movement of carbon (as CO2) to the atmosphere from vegetation which is burned to make agricultural fields, the release of carbon from decaying vegetation (“slash”) remaining after logging, and the loss of carbon when wood products are removed from the site.

On the other hand, if and when forests regrow, carbon is returned to terrestrial systems by the incorporation of CO2 from the atmosphere into new plant material.

SNIPPET 2:

Recent calculations by Cox, et al., (2000) indicate that land temperatures may rise by as much as 8 o C because of increased CO2 in the atmosphere (an additional 600 Pg by the year 2100, or 6 Pg annually) due to a reduction in the ability of the oceans to absorb this gas and because of the deforestation and collapse of the Amazon rainforest.

Collapse would be a consequence of increased aridity and an enhancement in the respiration of soil organic matter because of higher temperatures.
 
In other words, the earth would be losing six Pg of “carbon sinks” per year directly by rainforest removal and indirectly by the effects of global warming (much caused by deforestation) on still-standing forest.
Rainforests must suffer the double insult of being the cause of their own destruction! They also calculate that mitigating the loss of these sinks would cost about $200 per ton of potential carbon emissions, or US$1.2 trillion per year.

Thus, the removal of forests, at least partly through its effects on atmospheric gases, may lead to destabilization of the global climate.

There have already been shifts in boreal forests, which are retreating northward because of global warming. Many animals have already altered their migration times and reproductive seasons.

This may have negative consequences when their life cycles are out of synchrony with their sources of food and shelter. Growing seasons for plants have increased by several days in some places. Increasing temperatures have allowed the invasion of nonnative species into some ecosystems, as well as alterations in the species composition of these ecosystems (Walther, et al., 2002).

At the very least, the complex interrelationships which have evolved over millions of years are being and will be further disrupted by continued warming.

The enhancement of photosynthesis and growth (and, so, carbon uptake) which occurs with higher temperatures has been mentioned as a possible mitigating factor in climate change. However, there are limits to how much additional growth can be expected by warming.

Most plants have either physiological or physical limits on growth, and, also, as plants age, they grow more slowly and consume less carbon dioxide.

http://www.rainforestconservation.org/rainforest-primer/3-rainforests-in-peril-deforestation/f-consequences-of-deforestation/8-climate-change-and-increase-in-greenhouse-gases/ (http://www.rainforestconservation.org/rainforest-primer/3-rainforests-in-peril-deforestation/f-consequences-of-deforestation/8-climate-change-and-increase-in-greenhouse-gases/)

Is it getting better? NO! Here's more evidence that incremental measures are not ENOUGH (which you call a "bias" for bad news):

New Report Says Deforestation Trends Point To Increasing Losses, Recommends New Rules by Katie Valentine  Aug 24, 2015 1:23pm

SNIPPET 1:
By 2050, an area of forests the size of India is set to be wiped off the planet if humans continue on their current path of deforestation, according to a new report. That’s bad news for the creatures that depend on these forest ecosystems for survival, but it’s also bad news for the climate, as the loss of these forests will release more than 100 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

SNIPPET 2:
The study, unlike other recent studies on deforestation, projects that in a business-as-usual scenario, in which the world doesn’t make any effort to reduce deforestation, tropical deforestation will increase, rather than decrease. According to the study, tropical deforestation rates in such a scenario will likely climb steadily in the 2020s and 2030s and then speed up around 2040, “as areas of high forest cover in Latin America that are currently experiencing little deforestation come under greater threat.”

SNIPPET 3:
Other studies have warned of the danger the world is in if countries don’t curb rates of deforestation and forest degradation. A study published this week in Science warned that, without policy changes, the world’s forests will become increasingly broken into unconnected patches — a fragmentation that will endanger the species that live in the forests.

“I fear a global simplification of the world’s most complex forests,” Simon Lewis, lead author of the study and tropical forest expert at the University of Leeds said in a statement. “Deforestation, logging and road building all create fragmented patches of forest. However, as the climate rapidly changes the plants and animals living in the rainforest will need to move to continue to live within their ecological tolerances. How will they move?
This is a recipe for the mass extinction of tropical forest species this century.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/24/3694560/deforestation-india-sized-chunk/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/24/3694560/deforestation-india-sized-chunk/)


Alan, the scientific community agrees that we need forests to avoid human extinction. Mass extinction of tropical forests increases the probability of N.T.H.E. This is not hard.

Climate change is also accelerating the deforestation in non-tropical forests (see article below). That is tantamount to a lot butterflies flapping on the deforestation issue. If you find that the facts as stated are being "misinterpreted" to favor sensationalist doomer outlooks, you are wrong. I just gave you poodwaddle (link here: http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env2/ (http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env2/)) stats on deforestation. Note that they list replanting efforts.

That is what objective science is all about.

It is impossible for an objective person to interpret those stats as positive. Yeah, it's depressing. So what? When you are in hole, it is customary to stop digging. Our incremental measures have not kept us from continuing to dig what may be our grave.


California ‘Firestorm’ Scorched Area Twice the Size of Manhattan in 24 Hours
Cole Mellino | September 15, 2015 12:37 pm
http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/15/california-valley-fire/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/15/california-valley-fire/)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 15, 2015, 09:17:32 pm
What Keeps Bill Nye Up At Night?

Lorraine Chow | September 15, 2015 1:17 pm

Quote
Nye didn’t mince words with his reply.

“Climate change keeps me up at night. Everywhere I look there are opportunities to be addressing climate change and everywhere I look we are not doing it. And by ‘we’ I mean not just humankind writ large but my United States where I grew up, where I went to engineering school, where I worked as an engineer trying to make the world better for somebody. And we are missing all these opportunities. It’s just crazy making.”

 (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/reading.gif)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/15/what-keeps-bill-nye-up-at-night/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/15/what-keeps-bill-nye-up-at-night/)

But Alan, Ashvin and MKing et al sleep quite well, thank you very much.   (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/fly.gif)  ::)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 15, 2015, 09:47:51 pm
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280714152422.png)
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil19.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 16, 2015, 03:25:21 am
https://youtu.be/_tVxloCKJN0
A brief explanation of why positive feedback loops are uncontrollable, once they start. Incremental measures will not stop positive feedback loops from starting. Therefore, incremental measures will not work to reduce the high probability of N.T.H.E. from a multiplicity of positive feedback loops. This is why immediate and drastic action is warranted now.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 16, 2015, 09:42:30 pm
Why positive feedback mechanisms will not be prevented by incremental measures.

 I present this as part of the evidence that the probability of N.T.H.E. is increasing.
This video is from 2007. YET, it predicts an ice free arctic in the summer between 2015-20. He was spot on. Current targets are around 2017-i9. Back in 2007, the models didn't predict that happening until around 2050! David Wasdell is a credentialed scientist. He was a reviewer in IPCC studies. He explains how the SCIENCE was downplayed by lawyers from various governments. This was done so the science predicting catastrophe (i.e. NON-linearity of degradation acceleration) WOULD NOT be made public. The only hard position reached by the IPCC is that climate change is anthropogenic, PERIOD. Since then things have improved somewhat on the truth about the gravity of our situation, but the public is still mostly in the dark about the existential threat calmly explained here.

David Wasdell makes it clear that strategy geared to today's symptoms is insufficient because causal elements have a 40 to 50 year lag. Incremental measures based on present observations are, not just doomed to fail, they guarantee that they will fail in the future. Only massive, government sponsored action NOW has a chance (and even that is not a sure thing, as is stated in this video) of somewhat ameliorating the probability of catastrophe. He clearly states  that a massive extinction event destroying over 80% of life on earth  will be triggered by about 30 positive feedback loops that credentialed climate scientists agree will overwhelm the ability of our technology to stop them.

As he says, the observation of a "tipping point", if we have the misfortune to view it, guarantees that any response is 40 to 50 years behind the baked in causative factors.

  https://youtu.be/W_aMbM20mbg

Quote
David Wasdell, Director of the Meridian Programme, is a world-renowned expert in the dynamics of climate change. He is also a reviewer of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports and the author of numerous papers and presentations on climate change and related topics.
http://www.apollo-gaia.org (http://www.apollo-gaia.org)


Here's video by Professor Kevin Anderson
explaining why every day that we delay increases the stupendous cost of the effort to bring the situation under control.

It's a long video. That means that people like Ashvin will not watch it, even though their life may depend on the knowledge imparted in it.

Professor Anderson tears apart every argument presented by Alan or Mking that defends the paltry incremental measures now used to address the issue of catastrophic climate change.

  https://youtu.be/G5cmAVxnQ3E


Climate Change: Going beyond the dangerous 

 
Quote

Ian McPherson   Uploaded on Feb 9, 2012

Kevin Anderson, former Director of the Tyndall Centre (the UK's top academic institute researching climate change) is a depressing guy. Here, in his lecture "Beyond dangerous climate change: emission scenarios for a new world", he lays out the grim reality of climate change, and our inability to address it globally.

We are currently mitigating for 4 degrees C of warming and planning for 2 degrees C. As Anderson points out, that's ass backwards. Further, he sees absolutely no way we can meet those targets, given the rapid industrialisation of China and the emerging economies, and the current state of global political inaction.

He points out, with brutal honesty, that "climate analysts construct their scenarios not to avoid dangerous climate change but to avoid threatening economic growth". There is, therefore, almost no possibility that we are going to act, either in time or at the scale necessary, to address the challenge facing us.

We pretend that 2 degrees C is our threshold. Yet the climate scenarios and plans presented to policymakers do not actually reflect that threshold. As Anderson says, "most policy advice is to accept a high probability of extremely dangerous climate change rather than propose radical and immediate emission reductions."

Depressing stuff indeed...

--------------------------------------

Download the paper this lecture is based on (written by Anderson and Alice Bows) here: http://ianmcpherson.com/blog/audio/Ke... (http://ianmcpherson.com/blog/audio/Ke...)

Read David Robert's thoughts about the paper in two articles at Grist:
http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-... (http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-...)
http://grist.org/climate-policy/2011-... (http://grist.org/climate-policy/2011-...)

--------------------------------------

This lecture is part of the London School of Economics Department of International Development Friday Lecture Series. More information can be found here: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/vi... (http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/vi...)

--------------------------------------

Speaker: Professor Kevin Anderson.
Recorded on 21 October 2011 in Hong Kong Theatre, Clement House, London UK.

This lecture is part of the LSE Department of International Development Friday Lecture Series. A question and answer session follows the talk.

Kevin Anderson is professor of energy and climate change in the School of Mechanical, Aeronautical and Civil Engineering at the University of Manchester.

He has recently finished a two-year position as director of the Tyndall Centre, the UK's leading academic climate change research organisation, during which time he held a joint post with the University of East Anglia.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 17, 2015, 02:34:11 am
Alan, What part about the REDUCTION in photosynthetic efficiency from INCREASED carbon dioxide caused HEAT do you not get? I posted the science and the link beneath your article.

Here's the biosphere nuts and bolts of it (that your article totally misses):

Quote
Climate Myth...

CO2 is plant food

Earth's current atmospheric CO2 concentration is almost 390 parts per million (ppm).  Adding another 300 ppm of CO2 to the air has been shown by literally thousands of experiments to greatly increase the growth or biomass production of nearly all plants.  This growth stimulation occurs because CO2 is one of the two raw materials (the other being water) that are required for photosynthesis.  Hence, CO2 is actually the "food" that sustains essentially all plants on the face of the earth, as well as those in the sea.  And the more CO2 they "eat" (absorb from the air or water), the bigger and better they grow. (source: Plants Need CO2) [/color]

Quote
An argument made by those who prefer to see a bright side to climate change is that carbon dioxide (CO2) being released by the burning of fossil fuels is actually good for the environment. This conjecture is based on simple and appealing logic: if plants need CO2 for their growth, then more of it should be better. We should expect our crops to become more abundant and our flowers to grow taller and bloom brighter.

However, this "more is better" philosophy is not the way things work in the real world. There is an old saying, "Too much of a good thing can be a bad thing." For example, if a doctor tells you to take one pill of a certain medicine, it does not follow that taking four is likely to heal you four times faster or make you four times better. It's more likely to make you sick.

It is possible to boost growth of some plants with extra CO2, under controlled conditions inside of greenhouses. Based on this,  'skeptics' make their claims of benefical botanical effects in the world at large. Such claims fail to take into account that increasing the availability of one substance that plants need requires other supply changes for benefits to accrue.  It also fails to take into account that a warmer earth will see an increase in deserts and other arid lands, reducing the area available for crops.

Plants cannot live on CO2 alone; a complete plant metabolism depends on a number of elements. It is a simple task to increase water and fertilizer and protect against insects in an enclosed greenhouse but what about doing it in the open air, throughout the entire Earth? Just as increasing the amount of starch alone in a person's diet won't lead to a more robust and healthier person, for plants additional CO2 by itself cannot make up for deficiencies of other compounds and elements.

What would be the effects of an increase of CO2 on agriculture and plant growth in general?

1. CO2 enhanced plants will need extra water both to maintain their larger growth as well as to compensate for greater moisture evaporation as the heat increases. Where will it come from? In many places rainwater is not sufficient for current agriculture and the aquifers they rely on are running dry throughout the Earth (1, 2).

On the other hand, as predicted by climate research, we are experiencing more intense storms with increased rainfall rates throughout much of the world. One would think that this should be good for agriculture. Unfortunately when rain falls in short, intense bursts it does not have time to soak into the ground. Instead, it  quickly floods into creeks, then rivers, and finally out into the ocean, often carrying away large amounts of soil and fertilizer.

2. Unlike Nature, our way of agriculture does not self-fertilize by recycling all dead plants, animals and their waste. Instead we have to constantly add artificial fertilizers produced by energy-intensive processes mostly fed by hydrocarbons, particularly from natural gas which will eventually be depleted. Increasing the need for such fertilizer competes for supplies of natural gas and oil, creating competition between other needs and the manufacture of fertilizer. This ultimately drives up the price of food.

3. Too high a concentration of CO2 causes a reduction of photosynthesis in certain of plants. There is also evidence from the past of major damage to a wide variety of plants species from a sudden rise in CO2 (See illustrations below). Higher concentrations of CO2 also reduce the nutritional quality of some staples, such as wheat.

4. As is confirmed by long-term  experiments, plants with exhorbitant supplies of CO2 run up against  limited availability of other nutrients. These long term projects show that while some plants exhibit a brief and promising burst of growth upon initial exposure to C02, effects such as the  "nitrogen plateau" soon truncate this benefit

5. Plants raised with enhanced CO2 supplies and strictly isolated from insects behave differently than if the same approach is tried in an otherwise natural setting. For example, when the growth of soybeans is boosted out in the open this creates changes in plant chemistry that makes these specimens more vulnerable to insects, as the illustration below shows (at link).

Plant defenses go down as carbon dioxide levels go up, the researchers found. Soybeans grown at elevated CO2 levels attract many more adult Japanese beetles than plants grown at current atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Science Daily; March 25, 2008. (Credit: Photo courtesy of Evan Delucia)


More than 55 million years ago, the Earth experienced a rapid jump in global Carbon Dioxide levels that raised temperatures across the planet. Now, researchers studying plants from that time have found that the rising temperatures may have boosted the foraging of insects. As modern temperatures continue to rise, the researchers believe the planet could see increasing crop damage and forest devastation. Science Daily; Feb. 15, 2008

https://youtu.be/Er3iD5PIR00
Quote
Global Warming reduces plant productivity. As Carbon Dioxide increases, vegetation in Northern Latitudes also increases. However, this does not compensate for decreases of vegetation in Southern Latitudes. The overall amount of vegetation worldwide declines

Quote
6. Likely the worst problem is that increasing CO2 will increase temperatures throughout the Earth. This will make deserts and other types of dry land grow. While deserts increase in size, other eco-zones, whether tropical, forest or grassland will try to migrate towards the poles. Unfortunately it does not follow that soil conditions will necessarily favor their growth even at optimum temperatures.

In conclusion, it would be reckless to keep adding CO2 to the atmosphere. Assuming there are any positive impacts on agriculture in the short term, they will be overwhelmed by the negative impacts of climate change.

Added CO2 will likely shrink the range available to plants while increasing the size of deserts. It will also increase the requirements for water and soil fertility as well as plant damage from insects.

Increasing CO2 levels would only be beneficial inside of highly controlled, enclosed spaces like greenhouses.

Basic rebuttal written by doug_bostrom

UPDATE July 2015:


The negative effects of climate change far outweigh any positive effect from increased CO2 levels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcDUaBO8T34&feature=player_embedded

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm

The fossil fuel industry has been trying to push that STUPID, "CO2 is great for plants" baloney for at least two decades. Yeah, they use CO2. Yeah, they NEED CO2. Yeah, More CO2 means they can absorb it better and grow faster.

HOWEVER, they don't do ANY of those things when they are forced outside the BAND of temperature and other conditions that are sine qua non for them. I tried to explain that to you and you totally ignored it. It's BIOSHERE MATH 101.

The fossil fuel industry is pushing the CO2 happy talk TOTALLY out of context, as you are trying to do. The desertification and deforestation is NOT being counterbalanced by the greening of colder areas now accessing more CO2 due to warming.

The data about ongoing desertification I have presented totally defeats the claim that arid areas are "greening".

Some areas towards the poles will experience some greening. SO WHAT? Are you planning on moving all the animals, insects and other biota that DON"T migrate, along with the trees and crops north or south thousands of miles? How breathtakingly naïve!

Alan, what part of this do you not understand?
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150915151554.png)


Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 17, 2015, 02:36:37 am
Burning remaining fossil fuel could cause 60-meter sea level rise

September 11, 2015
Quote

"Our findings show that if we do not want to melt Antarctica, we can't keep taking fossil fuel carbon out of the ground and just dumping it into the atmosphere as CO2 like we've been doing," Caldeira said. "Most previous studies of Antarctic have focused on loss of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. Our study demonstrates that burning coal, oil, and gas also risks loss of the much larger East Antarctic Ice Sheet."

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-fossil-fuel-meter-sea.html#jCp
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 02:27:14 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B56GS65R7vA&feature=player_embedded
[/center]
The Arctic Sea Tumbles To A New Low  :(

Quote

Arctic sea ice reaches fourth lowest minimum

(http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png)

September 15, 2015   
 
On September 11, Arctic sea ice reached its likely minimum extent for 2015. The minimum ice extent was the fourth lowest in the satellite record, and reinforces the long-term downward trend in Arctic ice extent. Sea ice extent will now begin its seasonal increase through autumn and winter. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent is average, a substantial contrast with recent years when Antarctic winter extents reached record high levels.

Please note that this is a preliminary announcement. Changing winds or late-season melt could still reduce the Arctic ice extent, as happened in 2005 and 2010. NSIDC scientists will release a full analysis of the Arctic melt season, and discuss the Antarctic winter sea ice growth, in early October.


(http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png)

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 03:38:26 am
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hcSVpFalqSY/VfJaeywpkBI/AAAAAAAARcs/y7TJN59xza0/s1600/7.png)
Thursday, September 10, 2015
   
3.27°C warmer by 2030?   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp)
 

Will it be 3.27°C warmer by the year 2030?

In December 2015, world delegates will descend on Paris to ensure that global warming will not cross the guardrail of 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
 
In a way, we have already crossed this guardrail. NOAA data show that the year-to-date land surface temperature was 1.47°C above the 20th century average on the Northern Hemisphere in 2015, as illustrated by the image below.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C0wU_Qgyg-g/VfbM0-Ou9tI/AAAAAAAARdI/QhkEa6GD-v0/s1600/ytd-anomaly.png)

 Granted, there was less warming on the Southern Hemisphere, so the globally-averaged land surface temperature was a little bit lower, i.e. 1.34°C above the 20th century average. For reference, the image below  gives an overview of mean 1901-2000 temperatures. Anyway, the difference between hemispheres is small and not very relevant since most people live on the Northern Hemisphere.
 
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5rZeuBlmndQ/VfjQ5VwAZNI/AAAAAAAARec/YVJCoTRVXaU/s1600/mean-temperature-2.png)

More importantly, this 1.47°C rise is a rise compared to the 20th century average. The 20th century average was some 0.60°C higher than temperatures were at the start of the NOAA record in 1880. In other words, temperatures for most people on Earth are already 2.07°C higher than they were in 1880.

Furthermore, between 1750 and 1880 the global average temperature had already increased by some 0.20°C.

Sure, 2015 is an El Niño year, but this El Niño is still strengthening, so 2016 could well be even warmer. Moreover, recent temperatures are in line with expectations of a polynomial trendline that is based on these NOAA data and that points at yet another degree Celsius rise by 2030, on top of the current level, as illustrated by the top image. Altogether, this would make it 3.27°C warmer than in 1750 for most people on Earth by the year 2030.

So, instead of acting as if dangerous global warming could possibly eventuate beyond the year 2100, delegates in Paris should commit to lowering temperatures, starting now.

To lower temperatures, cutting emissions alone will not be enough.

Stopping all emissions by people would make that the aerosols that are currently sent up in the air by burning fuel and that are currently masking the full impact of global warming, will fall out of the air in a matter of weeks. Until now, about half of the global temperature rise is suppressed by such aerosols. Stopping aerosols release overnight could make temperatures rise abruptly by 1.20°C in a matter of weeks.

Furthermore, carbon dioxide that is emitted now will take ten years to reach its peak impact, so we're still awaiting the full wrath of carbon dioxide emitted over the past decade.

A recent study calculates that global mean surface temperature may increase by 0.50°C after carbon emissions are stopped, and they will decrease only minimally from that level for the next 10,000 years.

Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere would not work fast enough to avoid further warming and acidification of the oceans.
In fact, temperatures look set to rise even faster as feedbacks start to kick in more fully, such as albedo changes due to decline of the snow and ice cover in the Arctic and methane releases from the Arctic Ocean seafloor. Furthermore, water vapor will increase by 7% for every 1°C warming. Water vapor is one of the strongest greenhouse gases, so increasing water vapor will further contribute to a non-linear temperature rise.

In conclusion, the world needs to commit to comprehensive and effective action that includes both emission cuts and removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and oceans, as well as further action to deal with the dire situation in the Arctic, as discussed at the Arctic-news Blog. (http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png)


http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/


Quote

"A 4 degree C temperature increase world cannot sustain a global society (like the one we now have)".

Kevin Anderson (former Director of the Tyndall Centre, the UK's top academic institute researching climate change)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 02:36:17 pm
I present the following short video as additional scientific evidence that the precautionary principle demands we engage in drastic and massive efforts immediately to reduce the probability of N.T.H.E.:

https://youtu.be/_tVxloCKJN0

A brief explanation of why positive feedback loops are uncontrollable, once they start. Incremental measures will not stop positive feedback loops from starting. Therefore, incremental measures will not work to reduce the high probability of N.T.H.E. from a multiplicity of positive feedback loops. This is why immediate and drastic action is warranted now.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 02:37:32 pm
Why positive feedback mechanisms will not be prevented by incremental measures.

 I present this as part of the evidence that the probability of N.T.H.E. is increasing.
This video is from 2012. YET, it predicts an ice free arctic in the summer between 2015-20. He was spot on. Current targets are around 2017-i9. Back in 2007, the models didn't predict that happening until around 2050! David Wasdell is a credentialed scientist. He was a reviewer in IPCC studies. He explains how the SCIENCE was downplayed by lawyers from various governments. This was done so the science predicting catastrophe (i.e. NON-linearity of degradation acceleration) WOULD NOT be made public. The only hard position reached by the IPCC is that climate change is anthropogenic, PERIOD. Since then things have improved somewhat on the truth about the gravity of our situation, but the public is still mostly in the dark about the existential threat calmly explained here.

David Wasdell makes it clear that strategy geared to today's symptoms is insufficient because causal elements have a 40 to 50 year lag. Incremental measures based on present observations are, not just doomed to fail, they guarantee that they will fail in the future. Only massive, government sponsored action NOW has a chance (and even that is not a sure thing, as is stated in this video) of somewhat ameliorating the probability of catastrophe. He clearly states  that a massive extinction event destroying over 80% of life on earth  will be triggered by about 30 positive feedback loops that credentialed climate scientists agree will overwhelm the ability of our technology to stop them.

As he says, the observation of a "tipping point", if we have the misfortune to view it, guarantees that any response is 40 to 50 years behind the baked in causative factors.

  https://youtu.be/W_aMbM20mbg

Quote
David Wasdell, Director of the Meridian Programme, is a world-renowned expert in the dynamics of climate change. He is also a reviewer of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports and the author of numerous papers and presentations on climate change and related topics.
http://www.apollo-gaia.org (http://www.apollo-gaia.org)


Here's video by Professor Kevin Anderson
explaining why every day that we delay increases the stupendous cost of the effort to bring the situation under control.

It's a long video. That means that people like Ashvin will not watch it, even though their life may depend on the knowledge imparted in it.

Professor Anderson tears apart every argument presented by Alan or Mking that defends the paltry incremental measures now used to address the issue of catastrophic climate change.

  https://youtu.be/G5cmAVxnQ3E


Climate Change: Going beyond the dangerous 

 
Quote

Ian McPherson   Uploaded on Feb 9, 2012

Kevin Anderson, former Director of the Tyndall Centre (the UK's top academic institute researching climate change) is a depressing guy. Here, in his lecture "Beyond dangerous climate change: emission scenarios for a new world", he lays out the grim reality of climate change, and our inability to address it globally.

We are currently mitigating for 4 degrees C of warming and planning for 2 degrees C. As Anderson points out, that's ass backwards. Further, he sees absolutely no way we can meet those targets, given the rapid industrialisation of China and the emerging economies, and the current state of global political inaction.

He points out, with brutal honesty, that "climate analysts construct their scenarios not to avoid dangerous climate change but to avoid threatening economic growth". There is, therefore, almost no possibility that we are going to act, either in time or at the scale necessary, to address the challenge facing us.

We pretend that 2 degrees C is our threshold. Yet the climate scenarios and plans presented to policymakers do not actually reflect that threshold. As Anderson says, "most policy advice is to accept a high probability of extremely dangerous climate change rather than propose radical and immediate emission reductions."

Depressing stuff indeed...

--------------------------------------

Download the paper this lecture is based on (written by Anderson and Alice Bows) here: http://ianmcpherson.com/blog/audio/Ke... (http://ianmcpherson.com/blog/audio/Ke...)

Read David Robert's thoughts about the paper in two articles at Grist:
http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-... (http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-...)
http://grist.org/climate-policy/2011-... (http://grist.org/climate-policy/2011-...)

--------------------------------------

This lecture is part of the London School of Economics Department of International Development Friday Lecture Series. More information can be found here: http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/vi... (http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/vi...)

--------------------------------------

Speaker: Professor Kevin Anderson.
Recorded on 21 October 2011 in Hong Kong Theatre, Clement House, London UK.

This lecture is part of the LSE Department of International Development Friday Lecture Series. A question and answer session follows the talk.

Kevin Anderson is professor of energy and climate change in the School of Mechanical, Aeronautical and Civil Engineering at the University of Manchester.

He has recently finished a two-year position as director of the Tyndall Centre, the UK's leading academic climate change research organisation, during which time he held a joint post with the University of East Anglia.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 02:51:05 pm
Quote
Climate Myth...

CO2 is plant food

Earth's current atmospheric CO2 concentration is almost 390 parts per million (ppm).  Adding another 300 ppm of CO2 to the air has been shown by literally thousands of experiments to greatly increase the growth or biomass production of nearly all plants.  This growth stimulation occurs because CO2 is one of the two raw materials (the other being water) that are required for photosynthesis.  Hence, CO2 is actually the "food" that sustains essentially all plants on the face of the earth, as well as those in the sea.  And the more CO2 they "eat" (absorb from the air or water), the bigger and better they grow. (source: Plants Need CO2)

Quote
An argument made by those who prefer to see a bright side to climate change is that carbon dioxide (CO2) being released by the burning of fossil fuels is actually good for the environment. This conjecture is based on simple and appealing logic: if plants need CO2 for their growth, then more of it should be better. We should expect our crops to become more abundant and our flowers to grow taller and bloom brighter.

However, this "more is better" philosophy is not the way things work in the real world. There is an old saying, "Too much of a good thing can be a bad thing." For example, if a doctor tells you to take one pill of a certain medicine, it does not follow that taking four is likely to heal you four times faster or make you four times better. It's more likely to make you sick.

It is possible to boost growth of some plants with extra CO2, under controlled conditions inside of greenhouses. Based on this,  'skeptics' make their claims of benefical botanical effects in the world at large. Such claims fail to take into account that increasing the availability of one substance that plants need requires other supply changes for benefits to accrue.  It also fails to take into account that a warmer earth will see an increase in deserts and other arid lands, reducing the area available for crops.

Plants cannot live on CO2 alone; a complete plant metabolism depends on a number of elements. It is a simple task to increase water and fertilizer and protect against insects in an enclosed greenhouse but what about doing it in the open air, throughout the entire Earth? Just as increasing the amount of starch alone in a person's diet won't lead to a more robust and healthier person, for plants additional CO2 by itself cannot make up for deficiencies of other compounds and elements.

What would be the effects of an increase of CO2 on agriculture and plant growth in general?

1. CO2 enhanced plants will need extra water both to maintain their larger growth as well as to compensate for greater moisture evaporation as the heat increases. Where will it come from? In many places rainwater is not sufficient for current agriculture and the aquifers they rely on are running dry throughout the Earth (1, 2).

On the other hand, as predicted by climate research, we are experiencing more intense storms with increased rainfall rates throughout much of the world. One would think that this should be good for agriculture. Unfortunately when rain falls in short, intense bursts it does not have time to soak into the ground. Instead, it  quickly floods into creeks, then rivers, and finally out into the ocean, often carrying away large amounts of soil and fertilizer.

2. Unlike Nature, our way of agriculture does not self-fertilize by recycling all dead plants, animals and their waste. Instead we have to constantly add artificial fertilizers produced by energy-intensive processes mostly fed by hydrocarbons, particularly from natural gas which will eventually be depleted. Increasing the need for such fertilizer competes for supplies of natural gas and oil, creating competition between other needs and the manufacture of fertilizer. This ultimately drives up the price of food.

3. Too high a concentration of CO2 causes a reduction of photosynthesis in certain of plants. There is also evidence from the past of major damage to a wide variety of plants species from a sudden rise in CO2 (See illustrations below). Higher concentrations of CO2 also reduce the nutritional quality of some staples, such as wheat.

4. As is confirmed by long-term  experiments, plants with exhorbitant supplies of CO2 run up against  limited availability of other nutrients. These long term projects show that while some plants exhibit a brief and promising burst of growth upon initial exposure to C02, effects such as the  "nitrogen plateau" soon truncate this benefit

5. Plants raised with enhanced CO2 supplies and strictly isolated from insects behave differently than if the same approach is tried in an otherwise natural setting. For example, when the growth of soybeans is boosted out in the open this creates changes in plant chemistry that makes these specimens more vulnerable to insects, as the illustration below shows (at link).

Plant defenses go down as carbon dioxide levels go up, the researchers found. Soybeans grown at elevated CO2 levels attract many more adult Japanese beetles than plants grown at current atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Science Daily; March 25, 2008. (Credit: Photo courtesy of Evan Delucia)


More than 55 million years ago, the Earth experienced a rapid jump in global Carbon Dioxide levels that raised temperatures across the planet. Now, researchers studying plants from that time have found that the rising temperatures may have boosted the foraging of insects. As modern temperatures continue to rise, the researchers believe the planet could see increasing crop damage and forest devastation. Science Daily; Feb. 15, 2008

https://youtu.be/Er3iD5PIR00
Quote
Global Warming reduces plant productivity. As Carbon Dioxide increases, vegetation in Northern Latitudes also increases. However, this does not compensate for decreases of vegetation in Southern Latitudes. The overall amount of vegetation worldwide declines

Quote
6. Likely the worst problem is that increasing CO2 will increase temperatures throughout the Earth. This will make deserts and other types of dry land grow. While deserts increase in size, other eco-zones, whether tropical, forest or grassland will try to migrate towards the poles. Unfortunately it does not follow that soil conditions will necessarily favor their growth even at optimum temperatures.

In conclusion, it would be reckless to keep adding CO2 to the atmosphere. Assuming there are any positive impacts on agriculture in the short term, they will be overwhelmed by the negative impacts of climate change.

Added CO2 will likely shrink the range available to plants while increasing the size of deserts. It will also increase the requirements for water and soil fertility as well as plant damage from insects.

Increasing CO2 levels would only be beneficial inside of highly controlled, enclosed spaces like greenhouses.

Basic rebuttal written by doug_bostrom

UPDATE July 2015:


The negative effects of climate change far outweigh any positive effect from increased CO2 levels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcDUaBO8T34&feature=player_embedded

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm

The fossil fuel industry has been trying to push that STUPID, "CO2 is great for plants" baloney for at least two decades. Yeah, they use CO2. Yeah, they NEED CO2. Yeah, More CO2 means they can absorb it better and grow faster.

HOWEVER, they don't do ANY of those things when they are forced outside the BAND of temperature and other conditions that are sine qua non for them.  It's BIOSHERE MATH 101.

The fossil fuel industry is pushing the CO2 happy talk TOTALLY out of context. The desertification and deforestation is NOT being counterbalanced by the greening of colder areas now accessing more CO2 due to warming.

Some areas towards the poles will experience some greening. SO WHAT? We can't plan on moving all the animals, insects and other biota that DON"T migrate, along with the trees and crops north or south thousands of miles.

This the true  situation (Poodwaddle deforestation year to date clock):
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150915151554.png)
http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env2/
Poodwaddle is firmly backed by government published data.

And there is this, which totally destroys any happy talk about CO2 "benefits".

Burning remaining fossil fuel could cause 60-meter sea level rise

September 11, 2015
Quote

"Our findings show that if we do not want to melt Antarctica, we can't keep taking fossil fuel carbon out of the ground and just dumping it into the atmosphere as CO2 like we've been doing," Caldeira said. "Most previous studies of Antarctic have focused on loss of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. Our study demonstrates that burning coal, oil, and gas also risks loss of the much larger East Antarctic Ice Sheet."

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-fossil-fuel-meter-sea.html#jCp


Here's a nice quote from another article in Phys.org:


Quote

What is the NIPCC? Is it just like the IPCC, but with an "N"?

Well, no. The NIPCC is a group of climate change "skeptics", bank rolled by the libertarian Heartland Institute to promote doubt about climate change. This suits the Heartland Institute's backers, including fossil fuel companies and those ideologically opposed to government regulation.

The NIPCC promotes doubt via thousand-page reports, the latest of which landed with a dull thud last week. These tomes try to mimic the scientific reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), right down to the acronym. However, unlike the IPCC, the NIPCC reports are works of partisan pseudoscience
.

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-adversaries-zombies-nipcc-climate-pseudoscience.html#jCp

The fossil fuel industry does not get it. Neither do those who advocate that incremental measures are sufficient to ameliorate the extinction threat that global warming poses to our species.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 03:00:20 pm
Addendum to the above post - Some of the most important questions in my mind, given the data you and others have presented, are the following (most of them are inter-related):

-What is the reliability of projections which suggest trends such as CO2 emissions, species extinction, deforestation, etc. will continue at a rate destructive enough to conclude HP (high probability) of NTHE?

-What are the chances that natural positive feedback mechanisms in these areas will burn themselves out or be counter-acted by negative feedback mechanisms?

-What are the chances that scientific technology will progress quickly enough to offer viable solutions (I believe you say this is a very good chance)?

-What are the chances that the above technology, or other mitigating policies, will be implemented by corporations and governments which can make a difference when push comes to shove (I believe you say this is a low chance, but quite possible)?

-What are the chances that consumers may intentionally or unintentionally act in ways to mitigate destructive environmental trends (for ex, becoming too poor to consume as much)?

-What are any other known or as of yet unknown factors which may serve to mitigate the destructive trends?

These are admittedly the questions of a layperson without much scientific knowledge or insight. Some of them may be nonsensical, and if so I would be glad to hear why. However, if you believe the general process of asking these and other questions is a strategy of obfuscation, misrepresentation, manipulation, etc., then we simply have a fundamental disagreement as to how the probability of NTHE should be properly assessed.

-What is the reliability of projections which suggest trends such as CO2 emissions, species extinction, deforestation, etc. will continue at a rate destructive enough to conclude HP (high probability) of NTHE?


The videos I have posted addressed this in detail. To summarize the findings, the rate of the negative effects of Global Warming is not decreasing, all the tracked effects are increasing in quantity. But more alarming, is that all of them are increasing in the rate of increase as well. I will post another video, this one from 2013, but quite comprehensive in covering both the increase and the increase in rate.

That is, the graphed slopes of CO2 increase and Temperature increase and deforestation increase and desertification increase and ocean acidification increase (and others) are all tilting upwards in angle. As you will see in the graphs presented, the IPCC scenarios are overly conservative. The observed temperature data as of 2013 was right at the top range of their most extreme scenario (from the IPCC 2007 report). A new IPCC report came out this year. The scenario range has been adjusted upwards (to more extreme), but the models, as the videos I have already presented explain, still do not account for several factors.

So there is no logical reason to believe any of the scenarios are "within the ballpark", so to speak. And all the indicators point to an increased rate of deleterious global warming effects.

As to whether the rate increase of all these factors is sufficient to warrant warnings about a high probability of N.T.H.E. if drastic measures are not engaged in to ameliorate the existential threat, the answer is yes. If the rate was decreasing or constant, the answer would be a maybe. WHY? Because of the baked in approximately 40 year causative factor time lag.

Because of that 40 year time lag, it is simply impossible, even with drastic measures to stop the continued increase in deleterious effects of global warming for that length of time, even if we go 100% green today. IOW, we have to go to more than 100% green to actually address the baked in time lag. We have go to, say 130% or so, so as to rapidly return the atmosphere to pre-industrial levels. This is certainly not limited just to CO2 reduction. Many other toxic products of industry must be eliminated somehow.

That is why incremental measures doom future generations to a high probability of extinction. Scientifically speaking, incremental measures will not even slow the rate if increase of deleterious factors, let along the quantitative increase.

-What are the chances that natural positive feedback mechanisms in these areas will burn themselves out or be counter-acted by negative feedback mechanisms?


Positive feedback mechanisms are also addressed in the videos I have presented and some of my posts. These mechanisms, of which there are about 30, once having reached a self reinforcing state (which is why they call them positive feedback mechanisms) are difficult to control. They, in fact, cannot be controlled beyond a certain point. Yes, they burn themselves out eventually. But before they do, they result in mass die offs. This has been established by studies of CO2 build up in ancient times before humans walked the earth. When a positive feedback loop reaches a certain stage, our technology is incapable of arresting it's effects. This is not alarmist hyperbole on my part. This is a direct quote from the IPCC reviewer scientist in one of the videos I presented.

The video I present at the end of this posts shows that the negative feedbacks are being overwhelmed by the positive feedbacks at present.

Positive feedback loops are not like a line of falling dominoes that you can put your hand on to stop the rest from falling. Considering the fact that there are about 30 positive feedback loops involved in global warming, it is necessary to picture their cumulative interactive, multiple feedback reinforcing effects as a chain reaction. It's not 30 independent systems. It's more like 30 times 30 (30 times repeated) because they all act to boost each other in multiples of the last iteration exponentially. That means that they get beyond the ability of our technology to control exponentially.

This short video of ping pong balls on mouse traps is a crude analogy of how positive feedback loops work;

Start at the 24 second mark:

https://youtu.be/-zX-gz1lRt0

For example, we are triggering a positive feedback loop by reducing the earth's albedo (ice cover). The videos I have presented cover how we simply cannot stop the resulting runaway greenhouse effect once the positive feedback loops begin in earnest. Guy McPherson thinks we did that already. I entertain the hope that we can ameliorate those mechanisms somewhat and postpone or possibly prevent N.T.H.E. But it is not presently feasible to do that with incremental measures.

-What are the chances that consumers may intentionally or unintentionally act in ways to mitigate destructive environmental trends (for ex, becoming too poor to consume as much)?

The main consumer culprits are the 20% in the rich countries that use around 76% of the world's resources, according to a 2007 UN pie chart. Consumers are doing quite a bit to mitigate destructive environmental trends.

But that pie chart leaves out the non-consumer polluters that do more damage than we ordinary piggies in the rich countries.

The problem is that the main polluters are outside of the consumer loop. Many people think this issue can be addressed by recycling and lowering our carbon footprint. Yes, that is important and many are doing it. But the industries that are unrelated to consumer products are gigantic polluters, showing no sign of slowing their massive polluting activities, never mind stopping them. The military of the USA, despite moves to go solar on many bases, still are one the largest polluters of the air , land and sea. In short, the governments of the world, backed by the large polluting industries continue to make things worse.

Year to date fossil fuel use:
http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env3/ (http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env3/)

So the chances that consumers acting to try to mitigate the destructive factors are high. But the chances that those actions, absent massive government efforts stop all polluting industries quickly, will actually mitigate those destructive factors, are low to none. A collapse in industrial output from massive poverty still does not account for the 40 year baked in climate damage coming at us. It would reduce the amount of polluting, but not stop it. It is sine qua non to reverse it in order to mitigate or eliminate the existential threat to our species.

I support all efforts to recycle and conserve. But I know what the biosphere math is telling us. Nevertheless, I urge all people to conserve as much as possible. Just because that behavior is somewhat quixotic, does not mean it should not be done. Responsible behavior is based on the ethical concern for future generations, regardless of whether it is enough or not. I'm sure you agree that doing the right thing does not guarantee success in human society. In fact, the reverse is true most of the time.


-What are the chances that scientific technology will progress quickly enough to offer viable solutions (I believe you say this is a very good chance)?

-What are the chances that the above technology, or other mitigating policies, will be implemented by corporations and governments which can make a difference when push comes to shove (I believe you say this is a low chance, but quite possible)?

-What are any other known or as of yet unknown factors which may serve to mitigate the destructive trends?


I will address the above three questions after I exercise. Some of the answers are in this video, but I will verbalize them for clarity when I come back. It was published on May 2, 2013. All the data is accurate and backed by hard science. The more recent data is more alarming (this was before the latest IPCC report). But even with the data  Professor Somerville had then, the case for urgent action was clear.


https://youtu.be/B4Q271UaNPo

The Scientific Case for Urgent Action to Limit Climate Change


Distinguished Professor Emeritus Richard Somerville, world-renowned climate scientist and author of "The Forgiving Air: Understanding Environmental Change," discusses the scientific case for urgent action to limit climate change.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 03:01:30 pm
Ashvin,
Here I continue to address your questions with a post from Eddie that I comment on.

Because of that 40 year time lag, it is simply impossible, even with drastic measures to stop the continued increase in deleterious effects of global warming for that length of time, even if we go 100% green today. IOW, we have to go to more than 100% green to actually address the baked in time lag. We have go to, say 130% or so, so as to rapidly return the atmosphere to pre-industrial levels. This is certainly not limited just to CO2 reduction. Many other toxic products of industry must be eliminated somehow.

A lot of people missed the memo on this, but I've read it from a number of sources I trust.

Exactly. AS David Wasdell states in the following video, if you wish to actually ameliorate the existential threat from catastrophic climate change, you must use the projected climate condition of about 40 years from now as your target, not what is observed at present. Acting on the present guarantees failure due to the fact that the feedback mechanisms are moving faster than the policies to ameliorate climate change. This is politically very unpalatable. But it is the only approach with science behind it. IOW, if the IPCC predicted 470 ppm of CO2 and a 2 degree C increase by 2055, then drastic action to eliminate any target above that must be taken now.

Of course, that is not happening. Every day that isn't happening makes it more and more difficult to deal with.
 
https://youtu.be/W_aMbM20mbg

David Wasdell, Director of the Meridian Programme, is a world-renowned expert in the dynamics of climate change. He is also a reviewer of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports and the author of numerous papers and presentations on climate change and related topics.

Kevin Anderson, former Director of the Tyndall Centre (the UK's top academic institute researching climate change), said that a global society (like the one we have now) is not possible with our present level of technology in 4degree C or higher world. And that's where we are going, despite the IPCC figures all revolving about an alleged agreement (with no teeth, no enforcement and all voluntary carbon limits. LOL!) by the piggy countries s of taking measures to keep the planet  below 2 degrees C. Collapse is baked in, so to speak, thanks to government piecemeal incremental measures.

Back to David Wasdell, he clearly and calmly stated that the 30 or so positive feedback loops, if not addressed with absolute limits on carbon output, including even foregoing even biofuels, approximately 80% of life on Earth may die. If that isn't an existential threat, I don't know what is.


Ashvin asked,

What are the chances that scientific technology will progress quickly enough to offer viable solutions (I believe you say this is a very good chance)?'

According to both the scientists I mentioned, we do not have the technology to stop this catastrophe at this time, once the runaway greenhouse positive feedback loops push us past a certain point. Some say we have passed it. Due to the 40 year bake and the paltry government measures being employed, it sure looks that way. Drastic measures to stop emitting CO2 might change that equation.

But it is not realistic to expect governments to engage in them. When large masses of people are dying and a public outcry is sounded, it will be about 40 years too late.

All that said, there are technofix types that claim we just have to put a pack of aerosols up there and cool the planet like volcanic eruptions have partially done in the past. There is evidence that our government has been doing just that since 2000. It doesn't seem to be working. Maybe it's just a conspiracy theory, but some very obvious man made 'cloud' grids have been videoed for some time. And, they are not jet contrails.

Another less messy and much more expensive approach is to block out a portion of the sunlight reaching earth with some giant aluminum vapor coated, 1 mil thick, polyester film a few thousand miles in diameter to cool the planet. But we have no way of knowing whether such a simple solution would not trigger some, even worse, unforeseen climate effect. It certainly is true that the massive sun shield qualifies in the 'any port in the N.T.H.E. storm' category.

But it would do nothing to eliminate the other industrial toxins, unrelated to CO2, that have upped the probability of getting cancer in our lives from 1 in 10 back in 1950 to 1 in 2 (for men) and 1 in 3 (for women) at present. And no, that isn't because we "live longer" ( check the social Security stats and you will find the longevity increase applies to the top 20% wage earners. The bottom 80% "longevity increase" looks like a rounding error.  :P). ; it's because we are subject to more pollutants in our food, air and water from birth than any humans in history. 

We have a plethora of severe problems and the rug the gooberment keeps trying to sweep them under is starting to look like Mount Everest.


-What are the chances that the above technology, or other mitigating policies, will be implemented by corporations and governments which can make a difference when push comes to shove (I believe you say this is a low chance, but quite possible)?

-What are any other known or as of yet unknown factors which may serve to mitigate the destructive trends?


Well, here's the situation, according to Professor Emeritus Richard Somerville  Please note that he is a very conservative scientist. But he makes it clear how serious the urgency is BECAUSE of the limitations of our technology and government reaction times.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170915194437.png)
The above graph is discussing the procedure to limit the damage to 2 degrees C. That was in 2013. He explained that the required carbon limits, if not enforced by 2020, will basically be impossible to implement. We are passing by 2015 with no end in site to the INCREASE in carbon pollution.

As he said, once the window is closed, it will remain closed. That is a scientist's way of stating an existential threat. He understands the technology. He understands what will happen when we cannot hope to stop the positive feedback mechanisms from overwhelming reforms. He understands that will head us to 4 degrees C or more. That is a dire threat to our species, and literally millions of other species we share this planet with.


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170915194933.png)

Notice how the IPCC sea level rise predictions only fit the data at the extreme end. It is not logical to think that they aren't erring on the side of caution. They are. Therefore, only the most extreme scenarios they come up with can be considered 'in the ball park'.

Every time a report comes out, they have to admit that, yeah, the ice melted more than predicted and several other predictions were a bit on the, uh, conservative side. Each report published every 7 or 8 years gets a little more real. Consequently, it is prudent to assume that a worse than their worse case scenario is highly probable.

That is why I believe firmly that mankind faces an existential threat from Global Warming AND all the other industrial pollution factors degrading the biosphere.

That is why I focused initially on extinctions with Alan. When the extinction rate of species in our biosphere is 1,000 to 10,000 the normal background rate of the last ten thousand yeas (at least!), it's logical to then assume our species faces an existential threat.

This extinction rate cannot be neatly approached as the product of a single cause. Our society is lousy at dealing with multiple causes. It's like we are as bad as crows (they can't count above three).

But  there are thousands of toxic chemicals, radionuclides and aerosols, along with the CO2 damage that have joined together to drown us in our industrial effluents. CO2 pollution is what we should all agree on. As you can see from Alan's posts, even that is like pulling teeth.

Also, there are too many corporations stuck in the incremental measures approach to expect them to own up the their responsibility to future generations. I just posted an article on the good and the bad corporations. But the 'good" are STILL not at 100% renewable energy. And the bad ones are worse than ever.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)

It's hard to communicate this threat dispassionately. I do the best I can. We are in a world of trouble.

These are the web sites Professor Emeritus Richard Somerville recommends for reliable information. I hang around RealClimate regularly. I have posted articles from RealClimate here during the last year and have recommended it to all readers. They are the ones who are now looking very hard at the meltwater tunneling by supercritical water (liquid water several degrees below freezing due to massive glacier pressures lubricating glacier movement) beneath Greenland glaciers that is NOT addressed in any of the IPCC predictions that David Wasdell discussed.

They cover all the climate bases. RealClimate is staffed exclusively by climate scientists.  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif)


(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170915194705.png)

Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 18, 2015, 06:50:07 pm
AS you can see from the following Poodwaddle clock graphics, things are not getting better. The Renewable energy contribution is unacceptably small and the CO2 emissions, which need to be ZERO, continue to exacerbate the existential threat we face from CO2 pollution.

Here's the electrical energy only picture (year to date) to give you an idea of why fossil fuelers are not singing the blues YET. There are still way too many fossil fuel energy widgets being purchased by global society. The year to date clock on the right is for production, which doesn't directly relate to demand (although eventually it will).

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180915183537.png)
  (http://www.mrwallpaper.com/wallpapers/Sad-Sunflower.jpg)

http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock/env4/
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 19, 2015, 02:52:16 pm
As usual, when Ashvin has no way to counter my arguments, he goes away. So much for Ashvin's "objectivity". (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/www_MyEmoticons_com__burp.gif)


I wish the mendacity and duplicity of the fossil fuelers like MKing was discussed more (instead of dodged often!) by allegedly objective fellows like Ashvin and Alan. The false equivalence they ascribe (see Alan's "counterfeit" coin  ;)) to collapse sites sounding the alarm and the tsunami of bullsh it from the fossil fuel propagandists is rather telling, isn't it? It sure looks like an irresponsible and unprincipled back door defense of the polluting status quo to me.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280515145049.png)  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png) They can prissily, and line by "logical" line, claim they do not support the polluting status quo until the cows come home.

But their deliberate attempts to downplay the gravity of our situation, continually asking (when they aren't using outright mockery and derision) for more and more data before they will commit to a "firm" conclusion in regard to our plight is a CLASSIC foot dragging technique to PREVENT public opinion from demanding massive reforms! Yeah, they'll try to deny that too (and they'll do it LINE BY LINE and then claim they "countered" "spurious and groundless accusations".  ::) ).

Exxon Mobile has been DOING what Alan and Ashvin have done here for DECADES!


Direct quotes from Exxon Mobile

“…for most nations the Kyoto Protocol would require extensive diversion of human and financial resources away from more immediate and pressing needs in health care, education, infrastructure, and, yes, the environment—all critical to the well-being of future generations.”

ExxonMobil went on to advocate a “strong focus on scientific understanding” around climate change and proposed policies “that have the potential to make significant longer-term reductions in emissions, if they are needed.”

The ad finished with this: “Although it is hard to predict what the weather is going to be this weekend, we know with certainty that climate change policies, unless properly formulated, will restrict life itself.”

Exxon Advertised Against Climate Change for Decades After Top Executives Knew Burning Fossil Fuels Would Warm the Planet  >:(

http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/19/climate-change-exxon/2/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/19/climate-change-exxon/2/)

Agelbert NOTE:
The best way to describe why the fossil fuel Industry uses crocodile tears about their "concern" for humanity to lie, distort and double talk about the truth of the climate change existential threat is embodied in the following quote:

“The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.”   ―  Albert Camus

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing, human health depleteing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on! (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 19, 2015, 06:48:53 pm
Excellent comment posted on an article by Thom Hartmann

Quote

RFord • 6 hours 33 min ago #6

Seems like every time I turn around there's a new climate change report coming out showing that climate change and global warming is happening faster than had previously been predicted. Many people are not concerned about this happening (global warming) because they believe it's not going to affect them because they will die of old age long before it starts killing all human beings and they are not concerned with what will happen to yet unborn generations.

Some think that global warming is a farce and it's not feasible, or that it's too expensive to move away from carbon energy. These Ideas come from the fossil fuel industry, who pay their bought and paid for congressmen, senators and news outlets to say these things.

The fact is people are already dying from the effects of climate change in Serria (Sierra Leone - https://zikipediq.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/south-is-the-first-victim-of-global-warming/ (https://zikipediq.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/south-is-the-first-victim-of-global-warming/)) and, yes, right here in the USA.

People are dying because of drought caused forest fires either by fighting the fires or by being caught in the fires.

But many don't die, they just lose everything they own including their home. Global warming and climate change are happening now at ever increasing rates. It may not be the future generations of earthlings that go extinct. It may be the present generations that go extinct sooner than anyone has imagined.

If humans are smart, they will do all they can to keep themselves from going extinct. But I'm afraid humans are not as smart and superior as humans think they are.

The time to act against global warming is now because the tipping point is when human produced greenhouse gasses are no longer the main cause of global warming.

The tipping point is when global warming is causing global warming and then there is no stopping it. The air, water, and the surface of the Earth become extremely hot and poisoned with methane and 90 percent of all living things on earth dies.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/09/will-be-worst-el-nino-65-years#comment-335282 (http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/09/will-be-worst-el-nino-65-years#comment-335282)

I would add the following:

The responsibility to care for and preserve the biosphere on behalf of future generations, including returning it to the healthy state it was in over a century ago when we began to severely pollute it, is not optional (unless you are an Empathy Deficit Disordered Evolutionary Dead End).
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 19, 2015, 08:35:21 pm
https://youtu.be/KumLH9kOpOI

Rhetoric Versus Reality

Kevin Anderson presenting at the EcoCities conference at the Bridgewater Hall, Manchester on 14 May 2012.

The 2 degree C Increase limitation is not feasible. A 4 degree C increase is only possible with massive action from all the world's main polluting countries to totally eliminate all carbon emissions in a very limited time period. Why this is so is stated by Engineer Kevin Anderson.

Kevin Anderson is professor of energy and climate change in the School of Mechanical, Aeronautical and Civil Engineering at the University of Manchester.

He has recently finished a two-year position as director of the Tyndall Centre, the UK's leading academic climate change research organisation, during which time he held a joint post with the University of East Anglia.

Some slides rom the above video:

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915202124.png)

This last slide explains what those attempting to ridicule doomers DO NOT GET IT. And that's why I suspect the motives of ANYONE (see Alan, Ashvin, MKing, Snowleopard, etc. et al) who attempts to PREVENT progress by irresponsibly claiming that accepting the reality of a high probability of N.T.H.E. on our present trajectory, causes people to give up.(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TzWpwHzCvCI/T_sBEnhCCpI/AAAAAAAAME8/IsLpuU8HYxc/s1600/nooo-way-smiley.gif)

That's status quo defending, la la land, rhetorical BULLSH IT, as Kevin Anderson says in much more polite language below.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915212112.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 19, 2015, 10:30:17 pm
https://youtu.be/MbXuvQQt9YY
Catastrophic Climate Change & Runaway Global Warming - David Wasdell

Quote
Uploaded on Jan 9, 2012

24 minutes into the presentation he talks about NASA being afraid to release findings of methane releases off the coast of San Diego for fear of retribution by the Bush administration.

David Wasdell, Director of the Meridian Programme, is a world-renowned expert in the dynamics of climate change. He is also a reviewer of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports and the author of numerous papers and presentations on climate change and related topics.

For more on David Wasdell visit: http://www.meridian.org.uk/Resources/

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915222022.png)
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150715183719.png)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 20, 2015, 08:32:35 pm
I wish you well. The Tardigrades can wait. They are patient.

We'll leave the Earth to the Tardigrades in due time.  They can take a full on asteroid impact, we cannot.

Unless said asteroid hits in the next 30 years, Guy McPherson is wrong.

RE

I agree that we will certainly not be extinct in 30 years. But Guy McPherson is guilty of being early, not alarmist or hyperbolic.

Kevin Anderson. Richard Somerville and David Wasdell, to name just three serious scientists directly involved with climate science, agree we face an existential threat. The issue is not WHETHER we face an existential threat. The issue is HOW SOON within a few decades or less the door is closing to ameliorate or prevent that threat.
 
The deluded flat refuse to accept that their IS an existential threat, never mind IF the threat is near term.

I think you agree with that, do you not?

I think Guy McPherson understands the politics of the social system killing us quite well. How has Hansen done with his low key stuff? Not too well. And Hansen wrote a book of "fiction" where he clearly lays out an extinction scenario for humans WITHIN a century! But he won't go public with that in his peer reviewed stuff, NOT because he has no scientifically valid grounds (as idiot fossil fuelers might claim), but because he knows how it "works" in politics. He is, in a cowardly fashion, bowing to politically expedient incremental measure demands in the face of an existential threat.  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)

McPherson understands that, unless the public accepts the FACT that we do face an existential threat WITHIN a generation (regardless of whether that estimate is EARLY by two or three decades), our extinction is baked in. If he did not CARE about the our survival, he would not be shouting the warning from the rooftops!

As Kevin Anderson said, it is imperative to get people to understand the SCALE of the action that is needed. The people that claim McPherson is peddling futility are wrong.

 
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915212112.png)

It will be TOO LATE if we don't start getting serious about N.T.H.E. in 2030. MAYBE it's not too late now. But  Kevin Anderson. Richard Somerville and David Wasdell, etc. et al are making a case for DRASTIC and URGENT action. They clearly state that incremental measures will NOT WORK to prevent the extinction of most, and possibly all of the human species.

RE, this is not about Guy McPherson. He is not alone in his warning, even if he is more strident than other scientists out there.
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 20, 2015, 08:42:08 pm
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-106.gif) Tuna and mackerel populations suffer catastrophic 74% decline, research shows

WWF and the Zoological Society of London found that numbers of the scombridae family of fish, which also includes bonito, fell by 74% between 1970 and 2012, outstripping a decline of 49% for 1,234 ocean species over the same period. 

The conservation charity warned that we face losing species critical to human food security, unless drastic action is taken to halt overfishing and other threats to marine life.

Louise Heaps, chief advisor on marine policy at WWF UK, said:
Quote
"This is catastrophic. We are destroying vital food sources, and the ecology of our oceans.” (http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1593.gif)


Full article:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/15/tuna-and-mackerel-populations-suffer-catastrophic-74-decline-research-shows (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/15/tuna-and-mackerel-populations-suffer-catastrophic-74-decline-research-shows)

Agelbert NOTE: The typical reaction (by the fossil fuelers and N.T.H.E. threat denying wishful thinkers) to the above will be the wailing and gnashing of teeth about "overpopulation"  (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-scared002.gif). However, Global Warming caused CO2 ocean acidification and other industrial and big ag pollutants like chemical fertilizers will be, uh, mentioned in passing, THUS: "we are solving all that with incremental measures. No need to get so excited. We must weigh the benefits to society of business as usual against the "minor" cost of collapsing tuna, mackerel, shellfish, sea cucumbers, sea turtles, etc., populations. There is no reason to let this alarmist news stampede us in to any rash activity that might threaten GDP!".  (http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif)

Right after that they will scream for all those "useless eaters" out there to stop driving tuna sandwich prices up! The "job creator" one percent wants to serve champagne and caviar, not tuna casserole!  (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241013183046.jpeg)

Palloy tries to downplay the above marine species extinction threat. Palloy does not get it. I will explain why.

At the risk of being called a shill for the fossil fuel industry by AG, again, I should just like to point out that the pH of the oceans varies between 8.1 and 8.4, and that so far climate change hasn't altered that by 0.1 anywhere at all.  It would happen in time of course, IF we continued to burn fossil fuels at the same, or increasing rates.  But if you believe in Peak Fossils then that won't happen - not because THEY wouldn't want to, but because they won't be able to make money out of it.  That's when they will stop extracting fossil fuels, and industrial civilisation will collapse.

Temperatures will continue to rise maybe until 2045, and ocean acidification will continue, but industrialised fishing will be over almost instantly, and fish stocks will replenish quickly.  The mix of species will be different, no doubt, but they have always been different, and nobody is really aware of what the mix is anyway.

So don't worry, just pray the collapse happens soon.

Sigh, you mathematicians don't do much biosphere math, do you? What YOU call "insignificant" pH (you know, the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion concentration) differences have VERY significant (as in homeostatic band required) effects on living systems (you know, the stuff we eat!).

Homeostasis REQUIRES that strict pH (and temperature and pressure and dissolved CO2 and dissolved O2, etc.) bands be adhered to or the organism dies. The reason it dies is because thousands to millions of biochemical reactions per second, vital to living processes, will not take place outside those homeostatic bands.

For mathematicians, the numbers are "significant" if they are, say, 2% or more and INSIGNIFICANT when they vary less than that.

For biologists, the numbers are homeostatic band life or death SIGNIFICANT when they vary by 0.01 % - often even less!).

This is so because the enzymes (catalysts made by living systems to lower the energy of activation for chemical reactions so the organism does not overheat and die from chemical reaction waste heat inefficiencies) will NOT take place when the pH (in combination with the other factors I mentioned) varies by a very small percentage. And all these bands vary in different parts of the human body. The pH band your bloodstream can handle is far less than the one the water in your tissues can handle.

There is a LOT MORE to this.

For example, I'm sure you would agree that being drunk is hazardous to your health because it slows your reflexes, dehydrates you, stresses your kidneys and liver and blinds you to reality because the system thinks it is pigging out on cheap energy - sends your brain a signal that everything is amazingly great (that's called being high).

The change in concentration of alcohol in the blood required to effect all these deleterious changes (that the organism itself perceives INCORRECTLY  as  "good" because it FEELS good") is, from your point of view, tiny.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Relative_risk_of_an_accident_based_on_blood_alcohol_levels_%28linear_scale%29.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Relative_risk_of_an_accident_based_on_blood_alcohol_levels_(linear_scale).jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Relative_risk_of_an_accident_based_on_blood_alcohol_levels_(linear_scale).jpg)

Biosphere math is DIFFERENT from the math applied to non-living matter, Palloy. Stop trying to apply your math to living systems. It is tantamount to peddling rose colored glasses about the severity of our environmental plight.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)

Here's one more example of how a pollutant in our atmosphere that kills life is actually made by living systems to preserve life. It's all in the percentages, Palloy. It's all in where the polluting gas is and how much of it there is. The life or death differences in percentage are FAR LESS than 0.01%.

The gas I refer to is Nitric Oxide (NO).

Environmental effects

Nitric oxide in the air may convert to nitric acid, which has been implicated in acid rain. However, it is an important source of nutrition for plant life in the form of nitrates. Furthermore, both NO and NO2 participate in ozone layer depletion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitric_oxide (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitric_oxide)


Humans make Nitric oxide in their noses to kill bacteria before it gets to their lungs. This is why breathing through your nose is a good idea.  ;D

But the percentage is so tiny that a fellow like you would claim it was "insignificant" if it was no longer there (which would guarantee bacterial attacks on the lung tissue  :P).

On the other hand, if we breath too much  Nitric oxide because it's in the atmosphere as a pollutant, it can destroy tissue. And before it does that, it will vasodilate the begeezes out of your blood vessels, depleting your ability to get oxygen to your brain and everywhere else in your body. Too much, by a very small percentage, will kill you.

This is what homeostasis is ALL ABOUT. This is why Lovelock used the homeostatic analogy in his Gaia hypothesis. He understood the incredibly small percentage of variation that our biosphere REQUIRES to be viable. The fact that most people are not aware of this is used by the deluded wishful thinkers to claim the gravity of our situation can be solved by killing off most of the human population. NEVER MIND that the top 20% will still be there doing 80% of the damage.

(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915202124.png)

The collapse of the human population will not allow the fish populations to rebound simply because EATING the fish, though a contributing factor, is not the main reason they are headed for extinction.

Your post is biosphere reality challenged. It's time for you to take of the "culling the population will solve all our problems" rose colored glasses.

 
(http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190915212112.png)


(http://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/oareaction.jpg)

Palloy said,
Quote
At the risk of being called a shill for the fossil fuel industry by AG, again, I should just like to point out that the pH of the oceans varies between 8.1 and 8.4, and that so far climate change hasn't altered that by 0.1 anywhere at all.

How can Palloy be right about percentages and WRONG about the deleterious impact on marine species at the same time?  :icon_scratch:  First of all, he refused to state the TREND when he said that  "pH of the oceans varies between 8.1 and 8.4". This is double talk for, "it's no big deal". To cover his illogical ass he then says that "eventually" it's gonna happen. LOL! A brain dead person knows that! His entire post lowballs the  existential threat for marine species due to CO2 caused ocean acidification. This is what irresponsible defenders of the polluting energy status quo DO.   (http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp)


Quote

(http://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/co2timeseries.jpg)

OA Observations and Data

Follow the links below to access ocean acidification data for each of our observation programs

The field of carbon cycle science depends on well-designed, well-executed, and carefully maintained observations.  The PMEL carbon group primarily focuses on large scale observations of ocean interior carbon through hydrographic cruises and surface ocean carbon dynamics through measurements made on volunteer observing ships, buoys, and other autonomous systems. We work in both the open ocean and in coastal environments. We maintain long-term time series observations as well as conducting short term process studies or exploratory studies.  Since ocean acidification emerged as an important scientific issue, we have been augmenting and expanding our observational capacity by adding pH and other biogeochemical measurements to the platforms listed below.

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/OA+Observations+and+Data (http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/OA+Observations+and+Data)
Title: Re: Global Warming is WITH US
Post by: AGelbert on September 21, 2015, 08:41:35 pm
Quote
outbacktommy • 4 hours 46 min ago #9 Has the earth's capacity to provide food for the human population been exceeded? If so, by how much, or how much room is left? I'm concerned that due to the inertia of the status quo, and the pressures of the developmental state of the bulk of the earths population, that our climate tipping point was reached several years ago and that all we can do now is slow it's progress. One of the few factors that keeps me optimistic is raising my children to be aware of their consumption and how it relates to the consumption of others and the impact on our earth. - See more at: http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2015/09/will-be-worst-el-nino-65-years#comment-form

Agelbert reply to outbacktommy

Here's the situation:

I present to you following short video as scientific evidence that the precautionary principle demands we engage in drastic and massive efforts immediately to reduce the probability of Near Term Human Extinction (N.T.H.E.):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_tVxloCKJN0

A brief explanation of why positive feedback loops are uncontrollable, once they start. Incremental measures will not stop positive feedback loops from starting. Therefore, incremental measures will not work to reduce the high probability of N.T.H.E. from a multiplicity of positive feedback loops. This is why immediate and drastic action is warranted now.

For more detail on the subject of positive feedback mechanisms:
Why positive feedback mechanisms will not be prevented by incremental measures.

David Wasdell is a credentialed scientist. He was a reviewer in IPCC studies. He explains how the SCIENCE was downplayed by lawyers from various governments. This was done so the science predicting catastrophe (i.e. NON-linearity of degradation acceleration) WOULD NOT be made public. The only hard position reached by the IPCC is that climate change is anthropogenic, PERIOD. Since then things have improved somewhat on the truth about the gravity of our situation, but the public is still mostly in the dark about the existential threat calmly explained here.

David Wasdell makes it clear that strategy geared to today's symptoms is insufficient because causal elements have a 40 to 50 year lag. Incremental measures based on present observations are, not just doomed to fail, they guarantee that they will fail in the future. Only massive, government sponsored action NOW has a chance (and even that is not a sure thing, as is stated in this video) of somewhat ameliorating the probability of catastrophe.

He clearly states that a massive extinction event destroying over 80% of life on earth will be triggered by about 30 positive feedback loops that credentialed climate scientists agree will overwhelm the ability of our technology to stop them.

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/global-warming-is-with-us/msg3824/#m