Jump to content

Earth's temperature likely marks hottest decade on record: report


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

It is true that the Northpole has less ice. But only NASA has there eyes on the southpole where the ice is growing.

Just listen to that Nobelprice holder. He has a lot of very good answers. (I hope it is not forbidden on Thaivisa to post a link from youtube) It is in german language but i'm sure you will find an original version...

 

 

  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Actually history contains some interesting clues to the 'warm' and 'cold' periods in historical times.

 

First nearly all historical accounts of these changes refer to Europe and the middle-east, the areas of Greek and Roman civilisations and their descendants. In the rest of the world, little evidence exists - and some of it suggests these were just regional events.

 

Secondly, the end of the medieval warm period coincides with the black death - which decimated European populations. This resulted in abandoned land returning to woodland. The colonisation of the Americas followed, and massive population loss among the indigenous people, and further re-greening.

 If these (globally) insignificant events caused a drop in CO2, and possibly little ice age cooling in those earlier times, how much more impact have we been capable of since the 19th century?

 

We ain't seen nothing yet. The rate of sea level rise has trebled since the 20th century, and temperature is now rising at 0.2 degrees centigrade per decade (and accelerating). We will hit our 2 degrees of warming before the middle of this century, and who knows how much by the end of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2019 at 6:45 PM, Aforek said:

There are still people who don't believe in "global warming " ????; ?

come back in one century;  you prefer to believe Trump ?  

Ah Ha; So Trump is the blame after all. That NoGoodNik !   ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, swissman53 said:

It is true that the Northpole has less ice. But only NASA has there eyes on the southpole where the ice is growing.

Just listen to that Nobelprice holder. He has a lot of very good answers. (I hope it is not forbidden on Thaivisa to post a link from youtube) It is in german language but i'm sure you will find an original version...

 

 

  

 

Ice Gains In Some Parts Of Antarctica Aren't Offsetting Its Losses [Infographic]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinanderton/2019/02/21/ice-gains-in-some-parts-of-antarctica-arent-offsetting-its-losses-infographic/#235228427030

 

Antarctica is colder than the Arctic, but it’s still losing ice

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/antarctica-colder-arctic-it’s-still-losing-ice

 

Antarctica losing six times more ice mass annually now than 40 years ago

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190114161150.htm

 

Antarctica’s Ice Loss Has Reached 250 Billion Tons Per Year

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/antarcticas-ice-loss-has-reached-250-billion-tons-year-180971280/


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2019 at 12:53 AM, pgrahmm said:

Tall claims considering consistent accurate record keeping world wide with reliable instruments might, possibly, maybe, have been employed for possibly as many as 150 years during the millions of years of the earth's existence... 

Exactly, but they are the true believers in the new religion, so they have to be right, right?

World's been hotter and cooler, and will be again.

What none of the Chicken Little's with their "climate emergency" hysteria overlook is that humans are only temporary visitors on planet earth. Sooner or later we will follow the dinosaurs into extinction. If we keep polluting the planet's oceans and putting more planes in the air and reproducing at an unsustainable rate it'll be sooner, and it'll all be our own fault. While I was writing this hundreds of old growth trees were cut down so Americans can have hamburgers and Europeans can have fancy soap.

Greedy, cruel, destructive warlovers- what's to like about humans, and why do we deserve to survive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, car720 said:

Funny,  I thought it was New Zealand.  Something to do with their cows.

All ruminants produce methane when they burp, but I think NZ produces less than 1% of world manmade greenhouse gas output. 0.17 per cent in 2014 according to google.

 

Every human and animal could leave NZ tomorrow and it would make ZERO difference to the world greenhouse gases.

 

Biggest cause of excess man made greenhouse gas is too many people. Best thing the climate warriors can do is sterilise themselves before they can breed.

 

Of course. man made greenhouse gas is small beer compared to natural sources. To say it's small would be an overstatement. Can find the actual facts as compared to the propaganda with google. Took me about 1 minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rickudon said:

We ain't seen nothing yet. The rate of sea level rise has trebled since the 20th century,

A trebling of sea level rise to 1 or 2 centimeters a year is hardly a climate emergency. 

 

https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/coastal-sea-level-rise

National mean coastal sea levels have risen (relative to land) 1.81 (±0.05) millimetres per year

 

Don't panic, don't panic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rickudon said:

We will hit our 2 degrees of warming before the middle of this century, and who knows how much by the end of it?

Soooooo, what can be done to stop it that's affordable, acceptable and doable? Just running around shouting "climate emergency" isn't going to change anything. So far that's all that's happening.

Even if in an imaginary world temperature rise could be stopped at the present level, climate won't stop changing. Change is the only constant. Been happening ever since the world formed from a cloud of gas and will till the world is cold and dead. 

 

I hope you realise that outside the "bubble" of western schoolchildren and Greenpeace most people on the planet are not going to do anything. 7 billion now and rising rapidly, and they all want to live like us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

All ruminants produce methane when they burp, but I think NZ produces less than 1% of world manmade greenhouse gas output. 0.17 per cent in 2014 according to google.

 

Every human and animal could leave NZ tomorrow and it would make ZERO difference to the world greenhouse gases.

 

Biggest cause of excess man made greenhouse gas is too many people. Best thing the climate warriors can do is sterilise themselves before they can breed.

 

Of course. man made greenhouse gas is small beer compared to natural sources. To say it's small would be an overstatement. Can find the actual facts as compared to the propaganda with google. Took me about 1 minute.

Don't know but I can guarantee that there are a lot of gases created in our house especially by the wife.  :cheesy::cheesy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2019 at 8:35 AM, secondfusilier said:

there is a search site named Google.

You forgot to mention in your pompous reply that Google will deliver only the news it wont's you to read and the truth is now being conveniently filtered as our lives are now being controlled by Silicone Valley. :shock1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Ice Gains In Some Parts Of Antarctica Aren't Offsetting Its Losses [Infographic]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinanderton/2019/02/21/ice-gains-in-some-parts-of-antarctica-arent-offsetting-its-losses-infographic/#235228427030

 

Antarctica is colder than the Arctic, but it’s still losing ice

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/antarctica-colder-arctic-it’s-still-losing-ice

 

Antarctica losing six times more ice mass annually now than 40 years ago

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190114161150.htm

 

Antarctica’s Ice Loss Has Reached 250 Billion Tons Per Year

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/antarcticas-ice-loss-has-reached-250-billion-tons-year-180971280/


 

Ice loss is only what they record on the coasts. Antarctic interior is too cold for snow, so all the snow there is what came as snow many centuries ago and it just blows around now but doesn't snow. I was there a year and it never snowed, and that was on the coast. The Antarctic is classified as a desert as it does not have rainfall. The "ice" they talk about is what is lost as ice from the interior flows out to the coast.

 

However, if Antarctica warms up enough, it will snow again, which will compensate for loss of ice from the outward flow.

I wouldn't be panicking about it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Ice Gains In Some Parts Of Antarctica Aren't Offsetting Its Losses [Infographic]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinanderton/2019/02/21/ice-gains-in-some-parts-of-antarctica-arent-offsetting-its-losses-infographic/#235228427030

Antarctica is colder than the Arctic, but it’s still losing ice

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/antarctica-colder-arctic-it’s-still-losing-ice

Antarctica losing six times more ice mass annually now than 40 years ago

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190114161150.htm

Antarctica’s Ice Loss Has Reached 250 Billion Tons Per Year

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/antarcticas-ice-loss-has-reached-250-billion-tons-year-180971280/

 

Thanks Bristolboy, you saved me the effort of adding that information.
 

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

A trebling of sea level rise to 1 or 2 centimeters a year is hardly a climate emergency. 

 

https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/coastal-sea-level-rise

National mean coastal sea levels have risen (relative to land) 1.81 (±0.05) millimetres per year

 

Don't panic, don't panic.

Effects of sea level rise relative to land will depend upon which coastline. As glaciers melt off some places the loss of weight is allowing tectonic shifts to cause the land to rise in some regions - like much of Canada and Iceland. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/glacial-rebound-the-not-so-solid-earth
Meanwhile the measurements Bristolboy cited for Antarctica as well as Greenland point to an accelerating rate of sea level rise on average. Even the 1-2 centimeters per year rate will cause damage from high tides and storms to be dramatically greater by 2100. Just look at the changes high tides recently caused to Venice Italy.

That will cause major cities along coasts around the globe to invest heavily in raised highways, raised port facilities, improved pumping for subways, and shifts towards higher ground inland.

I don't think the early emergency will be coastal flooding. Globally, human society gets most of its calories from grains, and most grains are already grown at places at or above the optimal temperatures for grain yields. As temperature rises in the growing season, the mid-range forecasts for warming is already sufficient to cause major losses in grain yields by as early as mid century. THAT will be an emergency throughout the tropics, and even into the US corn belt. It will accelerate the need for people to leave their traditional homelands and seek to start over elsewhere, but those migrations will then lead to greater civil unrest and /or wars.

Sadly there is not much that can be done, especially in the dystopia that exists in national and international politics. IF people were able to unite, decide to deal with consumption by having few babies - so as to let the natural death rate help draw down population... all while shifting off the consumptive path of modern society .. towards a slower, organic/ permaculture lifestyle, the efforts to rejuvenate soil would sequester much carbon into the soil, slowing the warming. Somehow I don't see modern culture as accepting that path, not until all else has failed. That will likely be too late.

RiceCardinalTemp.png.ac7d6a0911f224d127c03046c4103ad5.pngimage.png.14b239bf07aa894073332602da8ca981.pngimage.png.1c8817eec991b6120e295220aa3401fd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, RPCVguy said:

Thanks Bristolboy, you saved me the effort of adding that information.
 

Effects of sea level rise relative to land will depend upon which coastline. As glaciers melt off some places the loss of weight is allowing tectonic shifts to cause the land to rise in some regions - like much of Canada and Iceland. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/glacial-rebound-the-not-so-solid-earth
Meanwhile the measurements Bristolboy cited for Antarctica as well as Greenland point to an accelerating rate of sea level rise on average. Even the 1-2 centimeters per year rate will cause damage from high tides and storms to be dramatically greater by 2100. Just look at the changes high tides recently caused to Venice Italy.

That will cause major cities along coasts around the globe to invest heavily in raised highways, raised port facilities, improved pumping for subways, and shifts towards higher ground inland.

I don't think the early emergency will be coastal flooding. Globally, human society gets most of its calories from grains, and most grains are already grown at places at or above the optimal temperatures for grain yields. As temperature rises in the growing season, the mid-range forecasts for warming is already sufficient to cause major losses in grain yields by as early as mid century. THAT will be an emergency throughout the tropics, and even into the US corn belt. It will accelerate the need for people to leave their traditional homelands and seek to start over elsewhere, but those migrations will then lead to greater civil unrest and /or wars.

Sadly there is not much that can be done, especially in the dystopia that exists in national and international politics. IF people were able to unite, decide to deal with consumption by having few babies - so as to let the natural death rate help draw down population... all while shifting off the consumptive path of modern society .. towards a slower, organic/ permaculture lifestyle, the efforts to rejuvenate soil would sequester much carbon into the soil, slowing the warming. Somehow I don't see modern culture as accepting that path, not until all else has failed. That will likely be too late.

RiceCardinalTemp.png.ac7d6a0911f224d127c03046c4103ad5.pngimage.png.14b239bf07aa894073332602da8ca981.pngimage.png.1c8817eec991b6120e295220aa3401fd.png

Did you read my post in which I pointed out that a warmer Antarctica will have snow which will offset the increased ice loss?

Problem with this debate is that most of us are not in possession of enough facts to know what will happen, let alone change anything.

 

One billion people malnourished today. Yes- one billion people born that shouldn't have been. If people can't feed themselves and their children they shouldn't have children. It's not as though they are going to stop having children either. There will be plenty of opportunity for "charities" to make money off the starving for decades to come, and the carnage in the Med will also continue as people that exceed the ability of their own country to support look to the streets of gold and the welfare states of Europe to live in.

 

IF people were able to unite, decide to deal with consumption by having few babies - so as to let the natural death rate help draw down population... all while shifting off the consumptive path of modern society .. towards a slower, organic/ permaculture lifestyle,

but you know that won't happen. Humans always resort to killing other people to get what they want. No signs this century that anything has changed.

 

A slower...….. society.

I'd love that. A society not based on greed and destruction of natural resources. Not based on ever increasing consumption. A life like we had in the 1960s, which I remember. A brief lull in major state warfare between 1945 and 1965 ( except for the forgotten war in Korea ) when there was hope for a better future. Kennedy in Camelot promised a vision of progress, exploration of the moon and further, the advance of civil rights and the end of racism.

What we need is another Jack Kennedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Exactly, but they are the true believers in the new religion, so they have to be right, right?

World's been hotter and cooler, and will be again.

What none of the Chicken Little's with their "climate emergency" hysteria overlook is that humans are only temporary visitors on planet earth. Sooner or later we will follow the dinosaurs into extinction. If we keep polluting the planet's oceans and putting more planes in the air and reproducing at an unsustainable rate it'll be sooner, and it'll all be our own fault. While I was writing this hundreds of old growth trees were cut down so Americans can have hamburgers and Europeans can have fancy soap.

Greedy, cruel, destructive warlovers- what's to like about humans, and why do we deserve to survive?

Care to follow up on my rebuttal of how NASA measures temperatures from earlier times or is that too inconvenient?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2019 at 6:53 PM, pgrahmm said:

Tall claims considering consistent accurate record keeping world wide with reliable instruments might, possibly, maybe, have been employed for possibly as many as 150 years during the millions of years of the earth's existence... 

One of the funniest posts I’ve read on this crappy anonymous forum in a very long time. Google is your friend. 
 

Educate yourself.

 

https://niwa.co.nz/climate/faq/how-do-we-determine-past-climate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JCauto said:

Care to follow up on my rebuttal of how NASA measures temperatures from earlier times or is that too inconvenient?

Don't read graphs on here. Too small on a tablet and my eyes are too old.

I also don't read a lot that was posted between when I last posted and the last page, as there isn't enough life left in me to read pages and pages on the several threads I follow. If I'm away for 2 or 3 days there can be several new pages, and Just not that dedicated to read them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you read my post in which I pointed out that a warmer Antarctica will have snow which will offset the increased ice loss?

Problem with this debate is that most of us are not in possession of enough facts to know what will happen, let alone change anything.

 

One billion people malnourished today. Yes- one billion people born that shouldn't have been. If people can't feed themselves and their children they shouldn't have children. It's not as though they are going to stop having children either. There will be plenty of opportunity for "charities" to make money off the starving for decades to come, and the carnage in the Med will also continue as people that exceed the ability of their own country to support look to the streets of gold and the welfare states of Europe to live in.

 

IF people were able to unite, decide to deal with consumption by having few babies - so as to let the natural death rate help draw down population... all while shifting off the consumptive path of modern society .. towards a slower, organic/ permaculture lifestyle,

but you know that won't happen. Humans always resort to killing other people to get what they want. No signs this century that anything has changed.

 

A slower...….. society.

I'd love that. A society not based on greed and destruction of natural resources. Not based on ever increasing consumption. A life like we had in the 1960s, which I remember. A brief lull in major state warfare between 1945 and 1965 ( except for the forgotten war in Korea ) when there was hope for a better future. Kennedy in Camelot promised a vision of progress, exploration of the moon and further, the advance of civil rights and the end of racism.

What we need is another Jack Kennedy.

I read your post and until you asked specifically I was going to let it slide. Why? Because the studies are in process and the quality of reporting in media is mixed. Lots of accounts give a sigh of relief and say "whew! at least that's not such a big problem."
NOT SO FAST. While the current systems of melt vs snowfall at least partially balance, we don't know how well. Neither do we know how long the balance will last. There are tipping points at which the ice shelves thin enough to no longer be grounded - allowing larger calving events followed by far faster inland glacier flow.
795317552_Antarcticreverse-slope-melt.jpg.71a30c71a16198766e5a32d1650ff7d9.jpg
Once that happens the rate of calving will exceed snow deposition.
Interesting is this new mapping of the glacial flows across the whole continent.
►https://youtu.be/KlDO0C8r_ws

Two articles discuss the situation
►https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-more-snow-in-antarctica-slow-sea-level-rise/
►https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/03/large-antarctic-snowfall-increases-could-counter-sea-level-rise-scientists-say/#comments-wrapper

In the comments of the WP article is one citing this video by my professor - Richard Alley
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7MNA44RMNA&feature=youtu.be&t=31m38s►

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RPCVguy said:

I read your post and until you asked specifically I was going to let it slide. Why? Because the studies are in process and the quality of reporting in media is mixed. Lots of accounts give a sigh of relief and say "whew! at least that's not such a big problem."
NOT SO FAST. While the current systems of melt vs snowfall at least partially balance, we don't know how well. Neither do we know how long the balance will last. There are tipping points at which the ice shelves thin enough to no longer be grounded - allowing larger calving events followed by far faster inland glacier flow.
795317552_Antarcticreverse-slope-melt.jpg.71a30c71a16198766e5a32d1650ff7d9.jpg
Once that happens the rate of calving will exceed snow deposition.
Interesting is this new mapping of the glacial flows across the whole continent.
►https://youtu.be/KlDO0C8r_ws

Two articles discuss the situation
►https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-more-snow-in-antarctica-slow-sea-level-rise/
►https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/03/large-antarctic-snowfall-increases-could-counter-sea-level-rise-scientists-say/#comments-wrapper

In the comments of the WP article is one citing this video by my professor - Richard Alley
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7MNA44RMNA&feature=youtu.be&t=31m38s►

There's also this:

First evidence that Antarctica's thinning ice shelves are causing more ice to move from the land into the sea

https://phys.org/news/2019-12-evidence-antarctica-thinning-ice-shelves.html

Particularly alarming because the effects of the thinning are translated almost immediately into increased rate of flow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of watching talking heads debating the impeachment hearings, I watched this. Dan Britt was funny, he actually is responsible for some of the raw data, and he explains climate wonderfully well. His slides were worth taking screen captures, of which I arranged a sampling as shown. 55 min

413961967_HistoryofClimate.jpg.1643fe82eddd3b9997fa08f792f230d7.jpg
The screen grab at the right explains the slope and changes in slope of what has happened since we came out of the depths of the last ice age during the Holocene. Agriculture provided the original shift away from expected rate of cooling, then the CO2 from industrialization completely overwhelmed the trend towards cooling. He's a good speaker worth hearing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yze1YAz_LYM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Soooooo, what can be done to stop it that's affordable, acceptable and doable? Just running around shouting "climate emergency" isn't going to change anything. So far that's all that's happening.

Well, actually a lot IS being done. CO2 emissions this year will only rise by 0.6%, and that is mainly due to China and India. Most of Europe has been reducing emissions for the last 20 years, and even the USA has been reducing by about 1% a year for the last 12 years (even with Trump!) This has mainly been by replacing Coal with Gas, but renewable electricity has been booming this century and provides about 40% of electricity in the UK now (more than from fossil fuels). Basically more of the same, in more countries, will probably see emissions start to decline in the next 10 years. Not enough to stop the '2 degrees rule' but at least heading in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2019 at 12:14 AM, TopDeadSenter said:

So it's back to "Global Warming" again. This shaggy dog story has more plot twists than the Jussie Smollet lynching.

so if you believe the article, why is it so cold in LOS, why has the summer not come yet to NZ, record cold weather in the north, the southern hemisphere is cold, porkys here big time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, kiwikeith said:

so if you believe the article, why is it so cold in LOS, why has the summer not come yet to NZ, record cold weather in the north, the southern hemisphere is cold, porkys here big time

Because there's a difference between climate and weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2019 at 4:18 AM, bristolboy said:

Because there's a difference between climate and weather.

Yes, we all know that, but when all the Chicken Little's are telling us that we are all going to die in 10 years if we don't "do something", which is never specified ( ?because they have no clue what "something" is ), and it doesn't actually get noticeably hotter ( I assure you that when it's "hot" in LOS a degree or two more is irrelevant ), and the sea level doesn't actually rise, it leads to doubt that it's actually going to happen.

Your usual response is to say "rate of change", but what makes you think that a species that has raped the planet for centuries, destroyed untold other species, polluted the oceans, air and land is immune from being exterminated just as the dinosaurs were? We are guests on the planet and have behaved extremely badly. Perhaps Gaia has had enough of our appalling treatment of the environment, and our overpopulation, and has decided to send us to join the dinosaurs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes, we all know that, but when all the Chicken Little's are telling us that we are all going to die in 10 years if we don't "do something", which is never specified ( ?because they have no clue what "something" is ), and it doesn't actually get noticeably hotter ( I assure you that when it's "hot" in LOS a degree or two more is irrelevant ), and the sea level doesn't actually rise, it leads to doubt that it's actually going to happen.

Your usual response is to say "rate of change", but what makes you think that a species that has raped the planet for centuries, destroyed untold other species, polluted the oceans, air and land is immune from being exterminated just as the dinosaurs were? We are guests on the planet and have behaved extremely badly. Perhaps Gaia has had enough of our appalling treatment of the environment, and our overpopulation, and has decided to send us to join the dinosaurs.

Find me a quote from anyone authoritative that says we're all going to die in 10 years. Until then, stop your lying.

And I don't see how my invoking rate of change contradicts or endorses  the notion that humanity will survive the current situation. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Find me a quote from anyone authoritative that says we're all going to die in 10 years. Until then, stop your lying.

And I don't see how my invoking rate of change contradicts or endorses  the notion that humanity will survive the current situation. 

 

Did you miss the part where I was referring to the Chicken Little's? Jai yen, jai yen.

I seem to remember certain posters lying about me, and although I called them out I'm still waiting for an apology.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:
On 12/5/2019 at 10:18 AM, bristolboy said:

Because there's a difference between climate and weather.

Yes, we all know that,

Not all. Apparently the person who asked the question that   Bristolboy answered , did not know that.

   If I had a dollar for every time I have answered the same question with the same answer I would have....

(wait I am counting.... c rup I am out of fingers!!) alright , I will have many dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2019 at 6:31 PM, RPCVguy said:

Instead of watching talking heads debating the impeachment hearings, I watched this. Dan Britt was funny, he actually is responsible for some of the raw data, and he explains climate wonderfully well. His slides were worth taking screen captures, of which I arranged a sampling as shown. 55 min

413961967_HistoryofClimate.jpg.1643fe82eddd3b9997fa08f792f230d7.jpg
The screen grab at the right explains the slope and changes in slope of what has happened since we came out of the depths of the last ice age during the Holocene. Agriculture provided the original shift away from expected rate of cooling, then the CO2 from industrialization completely overwhelmed the trend towards cooling. He's a good speaker worth hearing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yze1YAz_LYM

A brilliant and entertaining talk by a physicist and fellow alumni.  He tells the whole story based on geology and the solar system. His unbiased scientific views have perspectives of interest to all sides of the climate debate. Something for everyone.

 

- Its all China and India's fault!  40 million years ago India collided with China forcing up the massive Himalayas whose exposed rock gobbled up most of Earth's CO2, causing our current abnormal ice age.

 

- Low CO2 then left the Earth sensitive to Milankovitch cycles which are causing periodic glaciations and abnormally cold high latitudes.

 

- Then he shows how it was first agriculture and then fuels that started raising CO2 and delaying the next freeze up.  His conclusions are interesting.

 

It's refreshing to hear an unbiased view unlike those of many fresh grad climatologists who can't separate social cause from objective science. Way better than uneducated Greta. He is also very funny.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...