Climate Change

[Pilgrim]

22 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

Wake me up when Orlando is actually under water or when the ice caps actually disappear. Until then I got better things to do.

Wouldn't take much for O Town where most people live today was swamp.

 

I grew up out by Econlockhatchee Trail and Lake Underhill Road ( If you Know where that is in a Subdivision called Deerwood close to the Rio Pinar Golf Club and Pepper Tree) in the early 70's. Then later in Kissimmee as Orlando became too busy it is remarkable for me to visit either area now and I wonder

 

#1. Who in their right mind would choose such a congested traffic nightmare that makes Pittsburgh look calm by comparison. I mean seriously you can not go from one traffic light to the next without having to stop and there are too many traffic lights. Heck one evening just about two years ago now it took 45 minutes to drive 7 miles and that is unpardonable in my book.

 

#2. When I do visit and see where housing and buildings have been built I think my God that used to be swamp or a pasture and woods and laugh about the old saying about getting suckered into buying Florida swamp land.

 

Well ol Walt did and BTW all true Floridians know he was frozen and placed into suspended animation somewhere in the numerous tunnels at the park. I reckon with all the Billions they have raked in and continue doing so they already have the science to bring him back but he probably told them to wait until a much later time.

 

 

 

[Pilgrim]

On 7/11/2019 at 10:24 AM, Stosh said:

As I read it , they show excellent correlation between the sunspots and the isotopes , but the correlation looks weaker for global temperatures. If there is a problem with lots of CO2 , I think its in 'acidification' of ocean water. A theory proposed about the sun activity , it hat it has a greater effect than just that of decreased insolation , there is also a change in atmospheric albedo. So a spike in co2 might mitigate some of the effects , or exacerbate them. Dunno , but what we should all see is that there are natural changes and cycles , that change is constant , that the earth moderates itself ,and life plays a part in that. 

We haven't got the science nailed down , so to me -it makes sense to do some things like reforestation , terra-optimizing, cleaning up the mess and so forth,  which generate ecological benefit,  regardless of whether its going to shift the climatic cycles.  It doesn't have to be painful at all , there just needs to be political responsiveness. 

 

And with this the entire thread and all the arguments political and otherwise can be put to bed.  

 

Well said Stosh.

[joeblast]

12 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

 

And with this the entire thread and all the arguments political and otherwise can be put to bed.  

 

Well said Stosh.

the co2 catastrophe conjecture IS a political argument   because it would NEVER have gained any traction whatsoever if there wasnt the carrot at the end of the stick for the politicians to reach for

[Lost in Translation]

Bump.

 

Ten days and no comments. It's too quiet.

 

[Lost in Translation]

New vid dropped on PragerU this morning. It's like they read my mind!

 

Quote

We face an existential threat. Life as we know it is on the line. We have 12 short years to change everything or it’s game over.

 

This is the terrifying scenario that’s used by many leading politicians to justify a “Green New Deal”: an unprecedented increase in government power focused on the energy industry.

 

The core idea of a Green New Deal is that government should rapidly prohibit the use of fossil fuel energy and impose “100% renewable energy,” mostly solar and wind.

This may sound appealing, but consider what it would entail. 

 

Today, 80% of the energy Americans use to heat their homes, farm their land, run their factories, and drive their cars comes from fossil fuels: coal, oil, and natural gas. Only 3.4% comes from solar and wind—despite decades of government subsidies and mandates to encourage their use.

 

The reason we don’t use much sunlight and wind as energy is that they are unreliable fuels that only work when the sun shines and the wind blows. That’s why no town, city, or country has ever come close to 100%—or even 50%—solar and wind.

 

And yet, Green New Deal proponents say they can do the impossible—if only we give the government control of the energy industry and control of major users of energy, such as the transportation industry, manufacturing, and agriculture.

 

All of this is justified by the need to “do something” about the “existential threat” of rising CO2 levels. We’re told on a daily basis that prestigious organizations like the United Nations have predicted mass destruction and death if we don’t get off fossil fuels. What we’re not told is that such predictions have a decades-long track record of getting it wrong—and by wrong, I mean completely-missing-the-dart-board wrong.

 

For example, in 1989, the Associated Press reported a United Nations prediction that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” We’re now two decades past 2000, we’re not missing any nations, and human beings are living longer, healthier, and wealthier lives than ever before.

 

But aren’t things bound to get worse? Haven’t scientists established that CO2 is a greenhouse gas with a warming influence on the planet? Yes—but that’s only a small part of the big picture.

 

Although CO2 causes some warming, it’s much less significant than we’ve been told. Since we started using significant amounts of fossil fuels in the middle of the 19th century, we’ve increased the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere from .03% to .04%, which correlates with an average temperature increase of about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. It also correlates with significant global greening—because CO2 is plant food.

 

All of this is far from unprecedented territory for our planet, which has existed with at least 10 times today’s CO2 levels and a 25-degree warmer average temperature.

 

What is truly unprecedented, though, is how safe we are from climate. The International Disaster Database, a nonpartisan organization that tracks deaths from climate-related causes—such as extreme heat, floods, storms, and drought—shows that such deaths have been plummeting as CO2 emissions have been rising.

 

How is this possible? Because of the fossil fuel energy that emitted the CO2, which has empowered us to climate-proof our environment with heating, air-conditioning, sturdy buildings, mass irrigation, and weather warning systems.

 

Fossil fuel energy has not taken a naturally safe climate and made it unnaturally dangerous; it’s taken our naturally dangerous climate and made it unnaturally safe. Fossil fuels are not an existential threat. They are an existential resource because they increase something much more important than the level of CO2 in the atmosphere: the level of human empowerment. Increased life expectancy, income, health, leisure time, and education are all tightly linked to increased access to fossil fuels. 

 

Does this mean that we shouldn’t look for lower carbon energy alternatives? Of course not. But the alternatives should lead us toward more abundant, more reliable power, not less.

The most promising form of alternative energy is not unreliable solar and wind, but reliable, carbon-free nuclear energy. Sweden gets 40% of its electricity from nuclear. France, over 70%. While nuclear energy is smeared as unsafe, it has actually been demonstrated by study after study to be the safest form of energy ever created.

 

And yet, Green New Deal proponents, who say that we have 12 years to save the planet from rising CO2 levels, vigorously oppose nuclear—in addition to all fossil—fuel use.

 

By opposing every affordable, abundant, reliable form of energy, the Green New Deal won’t protect us from an existential threat; it is an existential threat.

 

I’m Alex Epstein, author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, for Prager University.

 

https://www.prageru.com/video/whats-the-deal-with-the-green-new-deal/

 

 

[ralis]

15 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

New vid dropped on PragerU this morning. It's like they read my mind!

 

 

https://www.prageru.com/video/whats-the-deal-with-the-green-new-deal/

 

 

 

PragerU is not a university nor is it an accredited institution. Epstein has a BA in philosophy from Duke and is in no way a climate scientist or holds any degree in science. You expect several of us here that actually hold degrees in a scientific field to believe this nonsense? Stop wasting your time!

 

[Lost in Translation]

14 minutes ago, ralis said:

Stop wasting your time!

 

I have literally nothing better to do right now.

 

[Lost in Translation]

17 minutes ago, ralis said:

PragerU is not a university nor is it an accredited institution. Epstein has a BA in philosophy from Duke and is in no way a climate scientist or holds any degree in science.

 

Seriously, though. How is this relevant?

 

The gist of the video is not a denial of climate change, but rather an assertion that the best way to combat a changing climate is through a better energy policy, and it lists nuclear chief among those policies. This is what I was saying just a few weeks ago so it seems quite on-point.

 

[Zork]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

Seriously, though. How is this relevant?

 

The gist of the video is not a denial of climate change, but rather an assertion that the best way to combat a changing climate is through a better energy policy, and it lists nuclear chief among those policies. This is what I was saying just a few weeks ago so it seems quite on-point.

 

Nuclear isn't safe by any means. The Japanese are the most careful and protocol dependent of all people in the world. And yet they had the Fukushima disaster.

It is not by chance that talks about using nuclear power in the UK died out after that accident.

[Lost in Translation]

6 hours ago, Zork said:

The Japanese are the most careful and protocol dependent of all people in the world. And yet they had the Fukushima disaster.

 

 

Quote

The original design basis tsunami height was 3.1 m for Daiichi based on assessment of the 1960 Chile tsunami and so the plant had been built about 10 metres above sea level with the seawater pumps 4 m above sea level. The Daini plant was built 13 metres above sea level. In 2002 the design basis was revised to 5.7 metres above, and the seawater pumps were sealed. In the event, tsunami heights coming ashore were about 15 metres, and the Daiichi turbine halls were under some 5 metres of seawater until levels subsided. Daini was less affected. The maximum amplitude of this tsunami was 23 metres at point of origin, about 180 km from Fukushima.

 

The plant was built 10 meters above sea level. The tsumai height was 15 meters! Lesson learned?

 

 

Quote

Three Tepco employees at the Daiichi and Daini plants were killed directly by the earthquake and tsunami, but there have been no fatalities from the nuclear accident.

 

People died from the massive wall of water. No one has died from nuclear radiation exposure.

 

 

Quote

There have been no harmful effects from radiation on local people, nor any doses approaching harmful levels. However, some 160,000 people were evacuated from their homes and only from 2012 were allowed limited return. In October 2013, 81,000 evacuees remained displaced due to government concern about radiological effects from the accident.

 

No harmful effects from radiation. Sounds to me like the Fukushima reactor was designed incredibly well. In fact, if it had been five meters higher then it would have probably survived intact.

 

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspx

 

 

6 hours ago, Zork said:

It is not by chance that talks about using nuclear power in the UK died out after that accident.

 

This tells me that the UK government is ruled more by emotion than by reason.

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Lost in Translation

[Zork]

1 minute ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

 

 

The plant was built 10 meters above sea level. The tsumai height was 15 meters! Lesson learned?

 

 

 

People died from the massive wall of water. No one has died from nuclear radiation exposure.

 

 

 

No harmful effects from radiation. Sounds to me like the Fukushima reactor was designed incredibly well. In fact, if it had been five meters higher then it would have probably survived intact.

 

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspx

 

 

 

This tells me that the UK government is rules more by emotion than by reason.

 

 

I can't comment on anything of the above. I will only say that the Japanese are the quickest and best prepared workers in the world. And their engineers are nothing to scoff at either. Plus we don't know what the decision makers in the UK took under consideration before abandoning their nuclear power generation plans.

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/30/2019 at 9:44 AM, Zork said:

I can't comment on anything of the above. I will only say that the Japanese are the quickest and best prepared workers in the world. And their engineers are nothing to scoff at either. Plus we don't know what the decision makers in the UK took under consideration before abandoning their nuclear power generation plans.

if their workers are best prepared - then why did a Mascot just die from Global Warming?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99

 

Just so people know - the Liberal Science Big Money conspiracy is not complete.

Quote

 

The authors say this highlights how unusual warming has become in recent years as a result of industrial emissions.

“There is no doubt left – as has been shown extensively in many other studies addressing many different aspects of the climate system using different methods and data sets,” said Stefan Brönnimann, from the University of Bern and the Pages 2K consortium of climate scientists.

 

oops - doesn't matter if you're a Commie or a Fascist - it's all the same Platonic-based logarithmic exponential industrial mathematics!!
 

Quote

 

Three studies published in Nature and Nature Geoscience use extensive historical data to show there has never been a period in the last 2,000 years when temperature changes have been as fast and extensive as in recent decades.

 

Please remember that the top science journals are controlled by Liberal progressive politics!!

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/30/2019 at 9:42 AM, Lost in Translation said:

 

 

 

The plant was built 10 meters above sea level. The tsumai height was 15 meters! Lesson learned?

 

 

 

People died from the massive wall of water. No one has died from nuclear radiation exposure.

 

 

 

No harmful effects from radiation. Sounds to me like the Fukushima reactor was designed incredibly well. In fact, if it had been five meters higher then it would have probably survived intact.

 

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspx

 

 

 

This tells me that the UK government is ruled more by emotion than by reason.

 

 

 

There was a big cover up about Chernobyl also - with the death reports dropped by a couple orders of magnitude. The UN officially PROMOTES nuclear power!!

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/19/2019 at 5:54 AM, joeblast said:

the co2 catastrophe conjecture IS a political argument   because it would NEVER have gained any traction whatsoever if there wasnt the carrot at the end of the stick for the politicians to reach for

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99

Yep you are finally proven correct - the highest levels of science have been infiltrated and taken over by liberal progressive Pinkos!

 

[ralis]

Arguing about the politicizing of AGW solves nothing. The science is very clear that AGW is a result of human activity. Tomorrow being the 1st of August in which the Eastern shelf of the Arctic should be mostly ice free and releasing methane hydrate. Let’s keep this updated. 

[Earl Grey]

19 minutes ago, ralis said:

Arguing about the politicizing of AGW solves nothing. The science is very clear that AGW is a result of human activity. Tomorrow being the 1st of August in which the Eastern shelf of the Arctic should be mostly ice free and releasing methane hydrate. Let’s keep this updated. 

 

Interesting to note is that the biggest proponents of educating people about and preventing climate change are insurance companies.

 

There are hundreds of companies in China that invest the most in sustainability knowing that we are contributing to a dangerous world and are aware their population can't live without some degree of sustainability. 

[ralis]

1 hour ago, Earl Grey said:

 

Interesting to note is that the biggest proponents of educating people about and preventing climate change are insurance companies.

 

There are hundreds of companies in China that invest the most in sustainability knowing that we are contributing to a dangerous world and are aware their population can't live without some degree of sustainability. 

 

Here is the latest update which fits in with Void’s comments here. 

 

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/

Edited August 1, 2019 by ralis

[dawei]

10 hours ago, Earl Grey said:

There are hundreds of companies in China that invest the most in sustainability knowing that we are contributing to a dangerous world and are aware their population can't live without some degree of sustainability. 

 

I might suggest that the central government is the voice behind it.  As my wife says, 'when Xi opens his mouth, the country listens'.  This 'listening' is their 'call to arms' on whatever issue is put forth. 

 

While they have a long way to go, I do believe the slow boat of china is moving in the right direction. 

[Earl Grey]

19 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

I might suggest that the central government is the voice behind it.  As my wife says, 'when Xi opens his mouth, the country listens'.  This 'listening' is their 'call to arms' on whatever issue is put forth. 

 

While they have a long way to go, I do believe the slow boat of china is moving in the right direction. 

 

In some regards, yes, but there are also smaller communities from the grass level who are interested in it as urban migration can't sustain the country's population. 

 

I don't agree with how a lot of their politics go, especially towards the West Philippine Sea and their BRI debt diplomacy, but they at least know they can't let their consumer demands continue without some sort of eye on sustainability for their environment. 

 

How they affect other countries and their environment though, such as Cambodia and the Philippines and access to natural resources, is another story...

[dawei]

19 minutes ago, Earl Grey said:

In some regards, yes, but there are also smaller communities from the grass level who are interested in it as urban migration can't sustain the country's population. 

 

Yes, I can see that and it is an interesting point.  If you have any links on that would be interested. 

[Earl Grey]

1 minute ago, dawei said:

 

Yes, I can see that and it is an interesting point.  If you have any links on that would be interested. 

 

I'll see what I can find as most of my info was from my Peace Corps network back in the day (my assigned country was Tanzania, but we had PC volunteers from China we ran into during travels and Chinese in East Africa mentioned PC volunteers to us in their relatives' villages). 

[dawei]

1 minute ago, Earl Grey said:

 

I'll see what I can find as most of my info was from my Peace Corps network back in the day (my assigned country was Tanzania, but we had PC volunteers from China we ran into during travels and Chinese in East Africa mentioned PC volunteers to us in their relatives' villages). 

 

Sounds good.  I'm going to also ask my wife.  I know that some villages have become almost tourist areas but due to the lack of resources.  For example: A couple friend of ours went to spend a week in the village that had essentially no electricity.  While a beautiful area, and they were fed aplenty, my friend said going to bed at dark was a challenge

[Earl Grey]

Just now, dawei said:

 

Sounds good.  I'm going to also ask my wife.  I know that some villages have become almost tourist areas but due to the lack of resources.  For example: A couple friend of ours went to spend a week in the village that had essentially no electricity.  While a beautiful area, and they were fed aplenty, my friend said going to bed at dark was a challenge

 

Yes, that was true in the villages for my friends when they were assigned there, including the squat toilets. 

 

One of the sad things about the Peace Corps is that while ideally, people seek to improve the lives of those living in abject poverty, there comes a point where we ask how much of their way of life is being traded for "modernization and sustainability" and how much should really be touched when we ask them to move on the path towards living like homogenized urbanites and the McWorld? 

 

Mother Jones had an article a little over ten years ago saying that the entire population of China can't sustain the Super-Size It philosophy of America. Nowadays, it seems even just the urban population and all that pollution is doing quite a lot of damage itself.

[gendao]

On 8/1/2019 at 9:43 AM, Earl Grey said:

Yes, that was true in the villages for my friends when they were assigned there, including the squat toilets. 

 

One of the sad things about the Peace Corps is that while ideally, people seek to improve the lives of those living in abject poverty, there comes a point where we ask how much of their way of life is being traded for "modernization and sustainability" and how much should really be touched when we ask them to move on the path towards living like homogenized urbanites and the McWorld? 

 

Mother Jones had an article a little over ten years ago saying that the entire population of China can't sustain the Super-Size It philosophy of America. Nowadays, it seems even just the urban population and all that pollution is doing quite a lot of damage itself.

Lol, "Peace Corps"...or "Colonialist Corporation?"

 

Fact is, these impoverished areas don't need "improving."  They already got it right!  Squatting to shit is much healthier both ergonomically - and ecologically!  And aside from all the energy savings alone, no light pollution at night is a godsend to both human and ecological health!  I actually just showered last night in the dark, and it felt sooo amazingly relaxing to my eyes/body!

Quote

Artificial Lights Disrupt the World’s Ecosystems
Scientific evidence suggests that artificial light at night has negative and deadly effects on many creatures including amphibians, birds, mammals, insects and plants.
Nocturnal animals sleep during the day and are active at night. Light pollution radically alters their nighttime environment by turning night into day.

According to research scientist Christopher Kyba, for nocturnal animals, “the introduction of artificial light probably represents the most drastic change human beings have made to their environment.”

“Predators use light to hunt, and prey species use darkness as cover,” Kyba explains “Near cities, cloudy skies are now hundreds, or even thousands of times brighter than they were 200 years ago. We are only beginning to learn what a drastic effect this has had on nocturnal ecology.”

So, what are they really "improving" the world for?  Certainly not native Nature or human health, as is scientifically-proven!

 

Thing is, what the colonialists don't realize is that they aren't actually colonizing the planet for themselves, but their Biblical Annunaki overlords - who conveniently instructed their obedient sheeple (Christians) to overpopulate, domesticate, and terraform the planet into an eventual technological singularity  (centralized Matrix) for them starting ~6000 years ago.  This required a huge labor force and several millenia - hence the initial need for overpopulation and termination of all other competing, "useless," indigenous lifeforms who wouldn't "git wit da pogrom" (particularly "poor, primitive," aboriginal populations stewarding the land sustainably - that the Peace Corps specifically target for lifestyle conversion).  This was really what the last ~600 years of Christian colonialism was about - to completely destroy Nature around the globe (like land clearing a site before construction).  And once this phase has been completed (like just about soon now)...then human slave populations may be radically reduced to only leave ET hybrids and remote controllable, GMO'd, cyborg puppets as low-caste settlers in their place.  Geoengineered/natural cataclysmic and kill switch time, BABY!  Above which the Annunaki/Reptilians/Greys will reign supreme in their more inhabitable digs (for them)! 

And globalist organizations like the OrweIIian "Peace Corps" are all helping with this much larger, covert agenda.  It's just another Doublespeak version of Christians "saving souls" by obliterating them!!!  WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!!

Edited August 3, 2019 by gendao

[Earl Grey]

Just now, gendao said:

Lol, "Peace Corps"...or "Colonialist Corporation?"

 

Fact is, these impoverished areas don't need "improving."  They already got it right!  Squatting to shit is much healthier ergonomically.  And aside from the energy savings alone, no light pollution at night is a godsend to both human and ecological health!  I actually just showered last night in the dark, and it felt sooo amazingly relaxing to my eyes/body!

So, what are they really "improving" the world for?  Certainly not native Nature or human health, as is scientifically-proven!

 

Thing is, what the colonialists don't realize is that they aren't actually colonizing the planet for themselves, but their Biblical Annunaki overlords - who conveniently instructed their sheeple (Christians) to overpopulate, domesticate, and terraform the planet into an eventual technological singularity for them starting ~6000 years ago.  This required a huge labor force and several millenia - hence the initial need for overpopulation and termination of all other competing, "useless," indigenous lifeforms (including aborigines stewarding the land sustainably).  This was really what the last ~600 years of Christian colonialism was about - to completely destroy Nature around the globe (like clearing a site before construction).  And once this phase has been completed (like just about soon now), then human slave populations may be radically reduced to only leave ET hybrids and controllable GMOd cyborg puppets as low-caste settlers in their place.  Above which the Annunaki/Reptilians/Greys will reign supreme in their more inhabitable digs! 

And globalist organizations like the "Peace Corps" are all helping with this much larger, covert agenda.  WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!!

 

.....