BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?

Subject: anymod linkification help?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 10:58 AM

(Is having no planet to live upon actually BS?)

November 10, 2016, at the September 2016 urging of the most trustworthy, experienced, intelligent leader among my many mentors, I launched a new Ending Climate Change initiative which adds Climate Change activism to Ending Racism.

RATIONALE: "If Black and Brown Lives Matter (or Blue or White or Rainbow Lives Matter), don't those lives by definition need a planet to sustain them? And since these two legacies of Greed began at roughly the same time, they might as well end at the same time.

In the case of the loss of the planet, that needs to happen very soon. It may already be too late. Ooops!"

So if you are truly serious about putting your brilliance into that effort, I want to be in closer touch with you than we ever have been before. The same day you read this. Or the same day you reach your own tipping point about the need for fast, smart, comprehensive action. PM's titled "Exchanging contact info" (name IRL, email, cell) will be helpful. Friending (or refriending) me at Facebook, ditto.


HOMEWORK?

Yes. I think it is essential that we share a common language and knowledge base, before we all run off to do our thing; a new set of easily digested info has broken it down for us to run with. So, since I am probably the most ignorant person on the planet about Climate Change science-- and the many names by this has been worried about before-- I thought it might make sense to just lay out the best of the simplest resources I have found, as a starting point for us, and for any new people we will need to try to reach. (A side benefit-- people who will not do homework will probably not do any other sustained efforts, either, and may more properly be considered as a funding base.)

These newer items help distill a really big problem… with very complicated science… into an emotionally-manageable message: "It is definitely time to get busy."

This is an approximately weekend-length assignment, which you will do at your own speed.

•        View BEFORE THE FLOOD (the recent DiCaprio documentary easily found at Youtube), preferably with friends. After viewing, please post/send me a couple of paragraphs on, "What was YOUR tipping point?'-- when you realized that reversing Climate Change is now your key issue to confront? How does this relate to ending racism?"

•        Read http://www.theclimatemobilization.org/the_case   Read this "case statement"/history of and description of one approach to "Mobilization"-- making a note of pieces of it that relate to:
1. Your other, biggest, longstanding political passion;
2. Constituencies that seem to hear you;
3. How the options described relate to the headlines of "today" (meaning, whenever you start with us).

(Because: those who did not experience WWII as adults need this clear description of what WWII Mobilization was, as well as a piece by piece explanation of why the US would mobilize for climate, what it would look like, and how to do it ethically.)

•        http://www.naacp.org/latest/geopolitics-of-climate-changea-civil-rights-perspective/ Get up to speed with what NAACP has been doing for many years.

•        https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1cMvqc5SWjq_zVbKpocY63jFDLEOr_DITVmzRfcjMzxY/edit?usp=sharing   Some folks prefer slideshow presentations; hear/see the same info, again.

•        http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/08/26/important-message-keeper-sacred-white-buffalo-calf-pipe We must include US Indigenous voices, and we can't simply assume that everyone has actually heard how to understand 'our' 'current' passion, "Standing Rock/NoDAPL."



Obviously, it's now pretty busy at our place. I have about 18-24 months to give online support/leadership on this before we have a big tipping point of our own that may preclude my internet access. (By then I hope to be strictly face to face in this effort.)


I am NOT interested in answering questions Google can give. I am NOT interested in debating CC (pdg has an old thread easily found that may be renewed for that). Or Systemic Racism. Or polar bears.

I am NOT interested in any distractions about Cheetoism (trumpism)-- that's just a motivation you might find effective to reach other folks.

I WILL answer very simple questions that will help YOU mobilize on what ever way makes sense for you. I WILL add resources as I find them.

~Susan
sorry for any yptos
 

Subject: RE: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 05:59 PM

Sorry, this is not at all related to music and should be in the BS section, whether climate change is BS or not.

Subject: RE: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 07:06 PM

However, dear friend WYSIWYG....

It is nice to meet your cheerful face above the line.

........

HUMANS (hope,believe,deny)....the face of the geological earth continues change....Oceaniac deposits in Colorado. etc

It is a foolish attempt by man-kind....to imagine, and wish, and hope.....that their small influence, guides the universe...."be fruitful...and multiple.......take the Earth and subdue it.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 08:06 PM

Perhaps a relevant song I wrote might help keep it above the line. (And in any case, Technology belongs above the line, and technology is of cause very pertinent to climate cange. As is music and song of course, since those are pertinent to everything.)

The Black Plastic Sack

When they speak of the famous inventions
That have changed how we live till we're dead,
Of the cars and the phones and computers,
And the planes flying over our head
And they ask what's the big one that matters?
Is there one that's jumps out of the pack.
When all's said and done
I would nominate one
I give you the Black Plastic Sack.
       Is there trouble all round,
       Is the world running down
       Is this poor planet starting to crack?
       Well my thought for today is,
       Just put it away
       Put it all in that Black Plastic Sack.

Oh my house was a terrible muddle,
With the rubbish piled high all around,
All those things I had thought that I needed,
I knew very soon I'd be drowned.
It was time for a desperate decision,
I knew it was time I should act.
Out of sight out of mind
Is a watchword of mine,
So I reached for a Black Plastic Sack -   Is there trouble all round...

And into the sack went the rubbish,
And into the sack went the rest,
Into the sack went the shoes and the socks,
And the trousers and sweaters and vests,
And into the sack went the washing,
And the powder that came in a pack
And into the sack went the washing machine
Oh that wonderful Black Plastic Sack. Is there trouble all round...

And into the sack went the bills still unpaid
And those threatening letters in red
Into the sack went the records and tapes
And the books that I never had read,
And into the sack went my cheque book,
And that credit card breaking my back,
It's goodbye and good riddance my flexible friend
You belong in that Black Plastic Sack.    Is there trouble all round...

They say money's the root of all evil,
All the hatred and greed and the vice
We'd all be far better without it,
I think you should take my advice
So I'll make you a modest proposal
When you leave I'll be there at the back.
Just you throw it away, you'll be free from this day,
Put it all in my Black Plastic Sack.   Is there trouble all round...

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 08:08 PM

I meant keeping it below the line.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Nov 16 - 09:27 PM

In many countries they call the black sack a flying toilet.

Susan keep up the good work and stay in touch

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Mr Red
Date: 17 Nov 16 - 04:26 AM

that their small influence, guides the universe

Well "man" is guiding this planet's eco-system. Many species going extinct and we are hastening that process. Look inward, can't we see that our species is not immune from that process?

Science will come to the rescue, it always does! But we ainta gonna like the answer.

Even those of us who recognise the problem, don't like all the solutions. We recycle, constrain our consumption, but when there is a festival, folk club, or dance only one hour's drive away - well we have earned enough brownie points to deserve ......................

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 03:51 AM

I suppose taking the bigger picture, if this lump of rock becomes a lifeless lump of rock, then as far as the rest of the universe is concerned, it is not even worth bothering to give it a second thought. Hope bringing this into perspective will cheer everyone up

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 04:14 AM

"Serious yet about ending climate change?"

Nope.

This planet has always had a changing climate. If you end change you get stagnation.

The best we can hope for is that the climate remains suitable for the human contingent for a while longer.

To that end we should do nothing that exacerbates change toward one extreme or the other, but what that constitutes, I don't know.
And I think scientists are just guessing as well!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 04:59 AM

"And I think scientists are just guessing as well!"

No, we're not. Scientists have moved from proving the existence of anthropogenic climate change (the proof is in, whether you believe the scientists or the science deniers is your choice) the monitoring what the consequences are and how we can best deal with them.


"Science will come to the rescue, it always does! But we pinta gonna like the answer."

Scientists can only give advice, they are not policy makers. It's the politicians who will decide the fate of our children and grandchildren, and let's face it, the omens are not good as long-term thinking is almost entirely absent from the thought processes of all politicians the world over.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 05:30 AM

No, we're not. Scientists have moved from proving the existence of anthropogenic climate change (the proof is in, whether you believe the scientists or the science deniers is your choice) the monitoring what the consequences are and how we can best deal with them.
Any chance of having that in English?
As a sentence it doesn't make sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:15 AM

One can easily understand the sentence posted by Stu if one changes the penultimate 'the' to 'to'.

I feel it's useless for individuals to wholeheartedly believe that climate change exists and should be addressed (as I do) when many industrial nations either choose not to believe in it or refuse utterly to limit their activities which are causing it.

I can faithfully recycle, live an Earth-friendly life as much as possible (which I do) but meanwhile gigantic chimneys and industrial plants all over the world are pouring out horrifyingly massive amounts. of toxins and pollutants.

I can limit as much as possible buying anything in plastic containers or wrappings (which I do) but at the same time, trillions of plastic bottles and polystyrene trays circle endlessly in a massive whirlpool of shame around the Pacific Ocean.

I suppose my point is a distressed wail of powerlessness in the face of worldwide indifference!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 06:39 AM

Thanks Senofou. I'm terrible at typing.

You're not powerless either. The individual choices we make are as important as those of the major polluters so stick with it, every small contribution mitigates the effect of climate change slightly, and taken together these seemingly insignificant actions become very significant.

There is hope. I think sustainable will become the norm, and the large economies of the east have recognised that the future in is cheap/free and non-polluting energy and are now building industries that will allow the large-scale generation of renewable energy.

Of course, our science-denying ignoramus politicians are missing a trick here. We have the science, technology and engineering skills in the UK (and US) to be world leaders in renewable energy and we could build a manufacturing capacity to exploit this advantage, but they're so obsessed with denying/ignoring the science they will condemn us to also-rans in a massively important future industry.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 09:11 AM

Well, that's very encouraging Stu. I do agree that one can only do one's bit in a small way, but if everyone did that, the problem would be much reduced.
As a tiny example, Tesco have out-of-season fruit and vegetables from far-flung lands (I don't buy them) while our lovely local store in Wroxham makes a huge effort to sell produce from local farmers, and their spuds, sprouts, cabbage, apples (always only stuff in season) are flavourful and delicious. They haven't travelled far, haven't used vast quantities of petrol, and are sold loose. They're remarkably cheap too. (No shipping costs) I also grow a lot of produce organically on our vegetable plot.

I saw a very distressing photo the other day of the carcasses of poor starved polar bears, washed ashore somewhere. The planet really is going downhill fast.
I don't have any children or descendants, and I doubt I'll live another decade, so I suppose I could bash around ruining things without caring. But I do care, very much.

Subject: Any mod please help
From: wysiwyg
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 09:47 AM

Moving this to BS invited bullshit into it.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 12:41 PM

The situation in the Arctic is very worrying. The loss of sea ice is a response to global warming and before we even start to consider the ecological effects there are substantial changes occurring because of the ice loss, including the decrease in the amount of light and heat reflected back into the atmosphere exacerbating the warming effect, the increase in emission of methane from the Arctic shelf seas and the possibility of changes in the jet stream, something pretty much all of us in the northern hemisphere have observed over the last few years. Have we talked about the melting f the Greenland ice sheet? Sea level rise?

It might be too late for the Artic already, I can't see how we can stop that warming happening now and this will prove very problematical in ways we don't even know yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 18 Nov 16 - 01:20 PM

wysiwyg, which posts do you categorise as 'bullshit'? I hope I haven't said anything in the taurean manure department?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 06:33 AM

Here is what I requested in the OP:

So if you are truly serious about putting your brilliance into that effort, I want to be in closer touch with you than we ever have been before. The same day you read this. Or the same day you reach your own tipping point about the need for fast, smart, comprehensive action. PM's titled "Exchanging contact info" (name IRL, email, cell) will be helpful. Friending (or refriending) me at Facebook, ditto.

Love,

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Mr Red
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 08:40 AM

it has to be said, that those that are making an effort will help the situation, and would make us smug if it wasn't for the profligate individuals in society that don't give a shit. Galling is too polite a word.

As for industry - we demand medicines and fuel to let us live in health & temperatures that even in the 1930s were only available to the richer. They gotta be made even though they are making the situation worse by increasing longevity and lowering mortality. Consumption rises..

We love the internet, that through Goggle, Farcebook Amazone and IBM et al have server farms estimated to consume 20% (+) of the world's electricity.

We put PV on our roofs that are increasingly made of cadmium selenide, a toxic element coupled with an extremely rare and energy consuming material. Spread thinly, fortunately, which makes it cheaper.

The problem is simple to define, but complex to solve. Anyone got any ideas on reducing the biggest pollutant? Man!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 02:31 PM

Here is what I requested in the OP:

So if you are truly serious about putting your brilliance into that effort, I want to be in closer touch with you than we ever have been before. The same day you read this. Or the same day you reach your own tipping point about the need for fast, smart, comprehensive action. PM's titled "Exchanging contact info" (name IRL, email, cell) will be helpful. Friending (or refriending) me at Facebook, ditto.

Love,

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 05:22 PM

Susan, what the hell are you going on about?

You want to play with Farcebook, & pretend it makes a difference, knock yourself out. But this ain't Farcebook.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 16 - 06:42 PM

I'd love a good, open banter about climate change. But this thread ain't it.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Thompson
Date: 20 Nov 16 - 01:05 AM

Climate change is not a question of normal variables. If you're saying that, you're like someone saying "Ah, sure families always quarrel" while your neighbour takes a shotgun to his wife and kids.
The graph on this US government website will give you an idea of the real scale of a disaster which is virtually certain to make humans extinct within the next 50 years.
For myself, I do what I can: I use shopping bags, not plastic bags, I cycle everywhere - 40% of car trips in Ireland are under 4km (a figure that's similar in most places), and if all those trips were made on a bike instead of in a car it would have a big effect on carbon emissions. I eat less meat than I did - meat production is wasteful. It's probably like throwing a thimbleful of water into an inferno, but enough thimblefuls and we might, might, maybe have a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 20 Nov 16 - 06:20 AM

It's a bit easier for the elderly in some ways, as we were brought up to be extremely thrifty, and any waste was seen as 'wicked'. We were quite used to having no plastic in our world, and no plastic bags or wrapping. (Everything was sold loose from sacks in the grocer's, or wooden bunkers in the greengrocers', bread was sold 'bare' and meat was wrapped in newspaper!) We walked or biked everywhere. We all grew produce on allotments and/or the gardens, and kept hens. Nothing much came here from abroad. So we were accustomed to this eco-friendly existence. I suppose burning coal was a bad thing though.

I'm glad quite a few people on here think it's worth being globally aware in our own small, limited ways. 'Mony a mickle maks a muckle' and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Rumncoke
Date: 20 Nov 16 - 02:43 PM

As the world warms up one thing we are losing is the northern permafrost and all the soil which is being held by it.

Planting trees and looking after them as the latitude at which they will survive increases might be a sensible thing to do. They could at some time in the future represent much needed fuel stocks.

Devising cheap wood burning stoves and assisting in getting trees replanted further south might also be a good idea, rather than struggling with the production and distribution of oil burning stoves and the fuel for them.
Burning wood seems to be regarded as a crime these days, but trees are actually rejuvenated by having their top growth removed, they also supply useful materials for making tools, fences, houses, vehicles - even weapons. The soft regrowth makes great food for brousing animals, and breaks the force of heavy rain, wind or snow.
A bit of help to turn deserts into productive woodland would go a long way towards peotecting soil, local wildlife and wandering nomads, and maybe people in general.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Nov 16 - 05:17 PM

The person in the woodpile in this discussion is of course mankind and his inability to master and understand his exponential growth. There are limits to growth and climate change is but one of the limiting factors. Degradation of environment leading to shortages of food and water, the pillaging of natural resources etc. etc. If all this was solved overnight, then reverting back to the situation of the mid 20th century would take generations.
    The true problem is multifaceted. Science can recognise the problems and quantify many of the variables but the inability to master the exponential means that science has no hope of curing the problem in any acceptable way.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 16 - 07:04 PM

Not saying much there, Iains, are you? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Nov 16 - 04:25 AM

Steve Shaw.
This is one of those occasions where I would hope to be proved wrong, but short of a belief in God and miracles, I see no alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 16 - 09:42 PM

A massive drive towards energy conservation, which means stopping subsidies to rich landowners to put turbines and solar cells in place and, instead, insulating all our houses and replacing inefficient boilers for free, charging the earth for anyone who wants to use aircon, forcing yanks to pay at least treble for the fuel they use in order to charge around in their gas-guzzling six-pots - stuff like that. Add your own gripes to my list. Renewable energy just makes us feel good about wasting it. And, on top of all that (here's where I lose friends), nuclear power. We simply can't behave ourselves with fossil fuels.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 04:15 AM

If you halved energy consumption tomorrow with a population of 7.4 billion then by 2100 the estimate is 11.2 billion. By shortly after 2100 all those energy savings will be cancelled out by the demands of yet more people.
That is why humanity is the true problem. That same demand for energy obviously extends to water, raw materials, living space etc etc.
That is why I see no happy outcomes.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 05:42 AM

Nope. Global population is not the energy crisis issue. The United States has a much smaller population than China and India yet is the second largest consumer of energy on earth, behind China, though only behind China in very large part because a huge proportion of the goods consumed in the US is made in China using Chinese energy. Over two-thirds of the energy consumed in the energy-guzzling US comes from fossil fuels. Any politician who suggests that US citizens should pay anything like the same amount for petrol as we do in Europe would be toast. Blaming the burgeoning billions in third world countries, most of whom consume a minuscule amount of the energy compared to that consumed by the average citizen in the West, especially in the US, is utterly bogus. Trump's greatest nation on earth is a bloody rotten role model for the rest of us and is set to get a lot worse. Do not make the poorest billions on the planet the scapegoats for western energy profligacy.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 05:44 AM

Delete the unwanted the.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 05:51 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_energy_consumption_per_capita

I hate to disagree but population is the issue. Actually the US is not the most profligate consumer of energy. The argument is not about who eats most but the gross total.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 06:34 AM

Nuclear power as it stands isn't a long term answer as we still haven't found a way of storing the spent fuel for millennia. If you don't believe that's true, go and lick a spent fuel rod and we'll see.

For us as a species, renewables are the only practical way forward at present. There's so much free energy wafting around it's almost ludicrous we don't capture and use it but the tide is turning here (barrage!) and the developing world is leading the way in this regard.

However, Steve's point about energy usage is a good one, it's just I guess most people don;t understand the scale of the problem. However, they soon will.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 07:11 AM

Well spent nuclear fuel takes up some room but not that much, and it can BE stored. Spent fossil fuel, aka carbon dioxide, has been "stored" in the atmosphere in ever-increasing amounts for two hundred years and we still haven't worked out what else to do with it. Tidal barrages are environmental disasters. Biofuels are grown on land that should be producing food, meaning we have to guzzle even more energy to import the food we need. Solar farms and windmills are ugly, unreliable and inefficient and, like other renewables, they simply make us feel good about carrying on wasting energy. Conscience-easers. There's no real political will to make serious efforts to conserve energy and increase efficiency of energy use in the places where it really matters, namely India, China, the US and, to a lesser extent, in the EU. Yes there have been nuclear accidents (every single one avoidable). But the deaths, injuries and the demonstrable environmental damage caused by nuclear power are as nothing compared to the deaths, injuries, diseases and environmental destruction caused by the extraction and use of fossil fuels, and we ain't seen nothing yet. I can raise ten fossil fuel apocalypses to every one of your nuclear apocalypses. We've got to be rational about the fact that there is no perfect solution. But you can cover the planet with a whole rash of windmills and we still can't go on like this.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 08:40 AM

Right, Iains. Take a look at your chart. Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Nigeria. All big beasts population-wise, all consuming a tenth or less per capita than the US. Brazil, less than a fifth. China, less than a third. We've covered way over half the world's population there. You want to blame people for making more people. Well I want to point out the real culprits. The US has less than five percent of the world population yet consumes 25% of the world's natural resources, and pollutes the air accordingly. Shifting the blame on to people in developing countries, which is where that big population resides that you want to blame, is, well...there's a word for it. And, worse, your approach to the problem doesn't provide even a hint of a solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 08:53 AM

I do know a little about developing countries in W Africa. My husband has 15 brothers and sisters (father had three wives). There are 60 of the extended family living in a shanty compound. Nobody has a car (the very idea!) They eat stuff cultivated in their country (maize, manioc, kasava), with a few imports such as rice. They 'consume' hardly anything. All their clothes are merely bits of cloth handed down from one to another. They have hardly any possessions. They walk everywhere, carrying water, market produce and charcoal on their heads. They sleep on a rush mat on the floor. This huge family could be said to have produced far too many children, but sadly many of them die young. The remaining ones look after their old people tenderly. I consider them as very low-consuming compared to the affluent west. They have no plastic, petrol, cars, vehicles, chemicals, cleaning products, detergents, toiletries, furniture and so on. I would say their impact on the planet is quite modest.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 09:27 AM

Fukushima wasn't an accident.

The aesthetics of windmills and solar farms are subjective. Personally, far more visual horrors have been visited on our landscape by the appalling building thrown up every where (please refer to every B&Q in existence). I like wind farms.

Renewables are not unreliable or inefficient. The technology will become part of the everyday infrastructure soon, at least in countries where the governments and people understand the potential for clean, cheap energy.

We don't know if we can safely store spent nuclear fuel long-term because the first commercial plant was only opened in the mid 1950's, which is a ludicrously insignificant about of time when it comes to the half-life of the fuel. We have zero idea how the facilities will look in two thousand years. My bet? Leaking like fuck.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 09:54 AM

Well who'd have bet 200 years ago that the carbon dioxide would be up by a third, that it would be causing terrible damage and that we still wouldn't have much of a clue as to what to do with it or get it under control. Such benign, non-poisonous stuff! Apocalyptic scare-stories about nuclear waste and accidents are just about all the so-called green lobby have in their armoury. Yet, considering that we've been far too blasé about it in the past, nuclear's track record is pretty good. As technology advances, nuclear waste storage and recycling will become more efficient and secure. We didn't abandon air travel because there were so many disasters in the 50s and 60s. Instead, we made the technology better. As for Fukushima, well it wasn't exactly on purpose. It was our fault for putting the bloody thing where we did, but call it an accident, call it stupidity, call it an act of God, but all we can do is incorporate what happened into our nuclear learning curve.

As for turbines and solar farms being so bloody lovely to look at, well stick 'em all up round your house, not all over Cornwall or Scotland. You buggers in the big towns are the ones who simply must have aircon in your hermetically-sealed office blocks. Round here, they are no more than the means for already-rich landowners to get even richer by doing nothing on their fat arses, taking their thirty of forty thousand per turbine "subsidy" and downing double whiskies in the lounge bar whilst moaning about foreigners and benefits cheats. Come and see!

Cheers, Senoufou. Nice corrective to Iain's blame game.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 10:18 AM

I have to smile at people who say they 'need' aircon. I've stayed in hotels and 'campements' in Senegal and Ghana, where the temperature was in the high thirties, and in the case of Ghana with almost full-saturation humidity. I've slept on the floor of a hut in Ivory Coast (on a mat) among a huge heap of African ladies, where the temperature caused one to drip sweat like a tap. In the hotels, I've always, always turned off the aircon, because that way, you're giving your body a chance to adapt (which it does, quite rapidly) I'm far from being Superwoman :) and if I can cope, so can everyone else. Aircon indeed! Just open a blooming window and shut up!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 12:36 PM

That's great if you can actually open the windows at all!

Where exactly is this place where you can sleep among a huge heap of African ladies? A PM will do... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 22 Nov 16 - 12:49 PM

Heh heh Steve!!! Sadly, the sleeping huts are segregated. Otherwise, I might have opted for joining my husband among a huge heap of rather nice African gentlemen!! :)

(I once travelled alone on an aeroplane from Accra heading to Tripoli with 200 African men, the only woman on board apart from the cabin staff. The stuff fantasies are made of...)

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 11:36 AM

Steve Shaw
I do not know where you get the idea of a blame game from. I said nothing about the uneven distribution of energy usage being fair or unfair. I was only dealing with the total. I think it would be a difficult argument to carry to suggest that the 3rd world lives in fuel poverty while the advanced nations are profligate. I believe it was George Bush said the American way of life was not up for negotiation.
Maybe you should take your argument up with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 12:13 PM

I think we've all heard more than enough of ignorant American politicians' hubris to last us a lifetime, thank you, and there's plenty more to come. The problem threatening the planet is carbon emissions from energy consumption. By your own statistics, that problem is overwhelmingly down to the activities of China (one-child policy), the US (only 5% of the world population, low birth rate) and Europe (under 10% of the world population, low birth rate). Other countries with big populations are not in the same emissions league. The implication of putting the blame on population increase is that you're fingering countries with high birth rates. That may well lead to other issues, but they're not the ones producing the carbon emissions, are they?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Senoufou
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 12:33 PM

I do think that over-population in under-developed countries is responsible for appalling poverty. And in Senegal, desertification is a big problem due to over grazing by goats etc of what was once savanna, in conjunction with a huge diminution of the annual rainfall (one could say complete failure!) This has caused the Sahara to spread southwards at an alarming rate, and for village wells to become almost dry as the water level falls beyond what a very long rope-and-bucket will reach.
There are large signs put up by the government all over Casamance for example (southern Senegal), warning about not letting goats eat all vegetation in an area. I saw many 'ghost villages'- no well, no people.
The result (in many W African countries I've visited) is a mass migration to the big cities. Once there, the population burgeons, putting a strain on resources (sewage for example, and general pollution with food preparation, encouraging vermin) As health declines, epidemics take hold.
While my husband's family aren't exactly contributing much to global warming, by producing so many children in rather poor health they're making their own lives much more difficult. I have never seen so many rats & cockroaches, and we were all afraid of Ebola, cholera, typhoid, polio, hepatitis and other infectious diseases.
To sum up then, controlling population would improve their lives enormously, slow desertification somewhat but not address climate change in any meaningful way (in my humble opinion).

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Nov 16 - 12:44 PM

Obviously you can use the statistics to make many points and your points I do not dispute. However the underlying reality is that if population growth continues then so does demand for energy. They are locked in step and show no sign of separating. The differences in climate make it very difficult to compare the energy requirements in somewhere like southern Nigeria with Alaska. A low input lifestyle may be very possible in the Tropics but would pose far more of a struggle in Arctic areas. You cannot wave magic wand and change the gas guzzling suburbs of America into self sufficiency plots no matter how many copies of John Seymour's book you distribute.
The problem of global warming has been recognised widely for decades yet nothing significant has been accomplished to remediate the situation. There are schools of thought that warming is already having an impact in terms of storm severity, droughts, melting permafrost, clathrates releasing methane etc etc. How many tipping points are on the horizon or have been passed already? What sort of shock is required to get some action? I do not have any of the answers and neither do any politicians.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 08:23 AM

"You buggers in the big towns are the ones who simply must have aircon"

Pardon my effrontery O wise and all-knowing one, but I live in a village, work from home and don't have aircon.


"well stick 'em all up round your house, not all over Cornwall or Scotland"

Go and live in less windy spot.



"As technology advances, nuclear waste storage and recycling will become more efficient and secure."

I think we'll be abandoning nuclear for newer and safer energy generation methods in the future. Very little point in investing in it now.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 09:20 AM

Who sez I meant you, Stu?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 09:36 AM

Who sez yer diddent?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 16 - 09:55 AM

Well I must admit it seemed that way but it was intended to be a generalised spittle-flecked rant.... Jaysus, I've come to love that expression...

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 01:58 PM

Hmmmm...... 49 answers to the question posed by the thread title, amounting to "No."

No problem; now that my fast notebook puder is back from the tech, I can do this via a 'related' music thread. Thank you, all, for the ONE song.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 02:29 PM

Atta girl, Susan, pound Farcebook into submission. That'll make a real difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 02:40 PM

Does "being serious" mean "agreeing with Susan?" Just asking...

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 02:57 PM

Does "being serious" mean "agreeing with Susan"?

Usually.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Nov 16 - 07:07 PM

Well Susan, I've spent a fair bit of time responding to this thread. When I'm being non-serious around here, I tend to do flippant one-liners. I did say that I wasn't out to make friends when I embraced nuclear power. But I did try to be serious about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 09:31 AM

http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/the-growth-of-global-warming-nonsense-surely-weve-reached-peak-madness/?hl=1&noRedi


"But it's more than that, isn't it? It seems we are watching the psychological breakdown of a segment of the Western population that is desperately trying control other people and greedily snatch the world's economic levers, and employing harsh scare tactics in its effort to achieve these goals.

Let's not even pretend that this group cares about the environment. The international Paris agreement that President Obama unilaterally signed on to without input from Congress, the agreement that the alarmist community has declared to be absolutely vital to putting off climate change, would do little to stop projected warming into the next century.

Researcher Bjorn Lomborg, who believes that man's carbon dioxide emissions are having some impact on the planet, says that if every nation fulfilled its promise to cut emissions by 2030, "the total temperature reduction will be 0.048" degrees Celsius by 2100.

In other words, Paris won't change a thing.

Despite the fact that the Paris accord will produce no climate benefit, the political left, which includes the agenda-driven media, continues its deranged behavior over the election of Trump because he has indicated that he will pull the U.S. from Obama's unethical deal.

This lunacy, consciously chosen, is possibly best illustrated by the Democratic National Committee staffer who whined that Clinton's loss means that he's "going to die from climate change," and marched out of a meeting in which the Democrats were trying to rally from their election defeat."

""The only successful war on science is the one waged by the Left," Tierney, a New York Times reporter, wrote in the Autumn 2016 City Journal.

He acknowledges that "there's plenty of ignorance all around," but also reports that "some surveys show that Republicans, particularly libertarians, are more scientifically literate than Democrats.""

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 10:25 AM

First Kennedy Assassination conspiracy theories and now science denial. Is there no end to Our Bruce's gullibility?

By the way, Bruce, (to paraphrase someone we all know and love:

HOW MANY YEARS have you studied climate change in a professional, scientific capacity??

What positions of responsibility dealing with analyzing climate data have you ever been in?

What training or education or advanced degrees in climate science have you ever had?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 10:54 AM

BB

"In other words, Paris won't change a thing."


That is a bit of a sweeping statement without a shred of evidence to back it up!

Paris may make little change but at least it is recognition of the problem and a starting point.
It would be a fool that believed that reversion would be instantaneous as soon as C02 levels plateaued or even diminished. According to some studies reversion could take many decades.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 11:24 AM

Iains,

The statement was that IF the required by treaty results are implemented by 2030, the result by 2100 will be .048 degrees.

I think this might qualify as "decades"


As for GregtrF, why should I offer you what you refuse to provide to me?

Is this another example of the "Liberal" ideal? To request of others what you will not provide when asked?

Your "friends" here must be very proud of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:01 PM

Researcher Bjorn Lomborg, who believes that man's carbon dioxide emissions are having some impact on the planet, says that if every nation fulfilled its promise to cut emissions by 2030, "the total temperature reduction will be 0.048" degrees Celsius by 2100.


http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:20 PM

so what point/s are you trying to make?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:32 PM

The amount of carbon reduction that is being agreed to presently is not enough to make a difference- the amount that would be required to have a significant effect would destroy the present economics of many countries.

The ONLY way to get the level of change to man-made emissions would be a nuclear war, or major plague to reduce the population.

And even that would not REVERSE the climate change, just slow it down. Though the nuclear winter of a major TNW might help.

Of course, if we bothered to try to adapt to the climate change, shifting populations and such, we could continue our technological civilization. But to reverse it requires significant ( say 4-7 billion) population reduction or a return to the hunter-gatherer culture that has a lower environmental impact.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:47 PM

Cannot dispute the fact that those changes you itemised would work, but I cannot see too much support being generated to carry them through.
It rather cuts against the grain of everything that humanity is about.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:53 PM

I agree, which is why the effort to STOP climate change is pointless.

There needs to be an effort to ADJUST to climate change, rather than wasting efforts on trying to stop it.

Instead of reducing energy usage, we should be increasing it NOW, to move those populations whose present habitats will become unlivable, and start to convert those areas that presently are uninhabitable, but with climate change WILL be, into living and food production regions.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 12:58 PM

Atta boy, Bruce - align yourself with 1% of the world's climate change scientists, ignore the other 99%, and just for good measure, double down on it.

And then complain that people think you're a crank.

Jesus wept.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 01:09 PM

GregtrF,

Find me ONE climatologist who thinks that the Paris accord will REVERSE climate change.

Few enough will even say that it might stop it- MOST have stated it will slow it down to some degree, BUT NOT STOP IT.


Jesus may be weeping, but he died for YOUR sins, not mine. Your "friends" (if any) must be so proud of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Bill D
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 01:47 PM

I'm late to this party, but I must agree with Iains above that....the population IS the major ongoing issue. It is not the immediate 'cause' in formal terms, as all the forms of pollution science is trying to combat are the specific 'causes'... but the underlying, seldom referenced issue IS population. Why?
   Because if we 'solve' the energy questions and get rid of fossil fuels and eliminate plastic bags & styrofoam cups...etc., we still have the effluent production and water use and over-fishing and soil degradation and limited arable land ... which cannot be controlled in any useful time sequence. Population growth has fallen a bit, but the totals are still rising, and we simply cannot support 75 trillion people....*

* "what's that you say, Bill? Don't be silly, we're not going to have 75 trillion people!"

Oh, right... 22 trillion..

"You are being ridiculous! 22 trillion is nonsense!"

Ummm... sure... then YOU tell ME how many people you think the Earth can support! And while you're at it, tell me what YOU think will end the growth patterns? And suppose the answer is..um.... 17 billion (which is forecast by 2100 in some models).... where do you think these people are going to live and what are they going to eat?

People need 'space'...personal space. Look up the "rats in the cage" experiments, where rats were provided with food & water, but no restrictions on breeding. Eventually, there were fights just due to stress and unhappiness. Look up how the people on Pitcairn Island coped after the mutiny on the Bounty. It ain't pretty in many parts.

Real solutions? Restrictions on fertility... how? Well might you ask! China tried it, but has largely just 'encouraged' smaller families. Put anti-fertility drugs in the drinking water? *shrug*.. good luck!
Perhaps giving every girl, randomly, at puberty, an implant, 2/3of which are anti-fertility? Maybe.... but you KNOW there would be accusations of NON-random selection.

Of course, population growth WILL be contained, and maybe even reversed long before any "trillion" enters the count. Nature will deal with us... but I don't like the images.

Call me a sensationalist fear-monger... I'd make a bet, but I won't be around to collect my winnings. Max says Mudcat will be here as long as he can keep it going. Maybe someone in 20 MORE years will read this and nod at my prediction as "things happen". Maybe *I* will live to 97 and either apologize or say "I told you so."

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 05:40 PM

Jesus may be weeping, but he died for YOUR sins, not mine.

Fair enough, Bruce - but rationality, critical thinking, rules of evidence and factuality died for yours.

Guess I'll stick with Jeezis.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Nov 16 - 08:16 PM

Population growth has a mischievous habit of not living up to predictions, Bill. It is not a runaway law unto itself. We are still biological beings believe it or not, subject to environmental pressures we may not even be beginning to understand, many of which may work to limit population growth. Since you and I were born, Bill, population has quadrupled. But the rate of growth is slowing. Energy consumption must be the focus, not population, which, on the whole, is expanding fastest (though slowing down fast) in countries which exploit energy far less than we do, often double-figures times less. We've had the bar chart already in this thread. Blame burgeoning population in developing countries if you like, but what you're actually doing is shifting blame away from the far, far more dangerous west, which consumes energy like there's no tomorrow. And, when you shift the blame away, you're also shifting away the motivation to do something about it, because you're making the problem someone else's fault and shrugging your shoulders. Can't be right when five percent of the world consumes almost twenty percent of the energy, and far more than that of natural resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 05:14 AM

Why are you so insistant on playing a blame game?
Global warming is caused by the impact of people and the most climate stressed area of the world is also the area with the highest projected population growth. Can you not get it through your head that if the population growth is not controlled by humans, then natural processes will control it,and that outcome will not be pretty. All your game of blame allocation is doing is to draw attention away from procedures that could possibly help and reduce the human suffering. The cart and the horse are all part of the same problem - we are the problem.
We all know America is a greedy consumer of energy, we do not need you to highlight it each time you post.
It is the volume of people degrading the planet. If you are so insistant on conserving energy why do you waste so much posting every opportunity on most threads? Are your views so inportant they justify the waste of so much energy?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 08:04 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ9TMWTHESk

A presentation of the Anthropocene.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 08:27 AM

Are you still eating beef, cheese, or milk products?


"Livestock are responsible for 14.5 percent of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, with beef and dairy production accounting for the bulk of it, according to a 2013 United Nations report."

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/california-targets-dairy-cows-to-combat-global-warming/

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 09:31 AM

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 11:18 AM

Not surprising that Climate Scientist Bruce is a proponent of of The Cow Fart Hypothesis.

TRUMP! TRUUUMMMMMP!!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 11:28 AM

So, GregtrF, you are more of an expert than the EPA and UN.

You are the one who should be suspected of being Trump.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 12:19 PM

TRRRUUUUMMMMMPH!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 12:21 PM

GregtrF,

You act like Trump, you talk like him, and you claim to know everything.


Mudcat has our OWN TRUMP!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Nov 16 - 12:22 PM

Now, now, CowfartBruce, calm down. You'll do yourself an injury.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 10:24 AM

http://www.voanews.com/a/israel-west-bank-charcoal-palestinians/3620189.html

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 10:36 AM

Yes, but are the charcoal workers as bad as cows?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 10:56 AM

According to GregtrF the Liberal Voice on all things (without any education, training, or expertise) the workers are far worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 11:13 AM

We can't discuss the climate itself, without the eternal war between BB & Greg?
Sorry about that Iains...

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 12:07 PM

C'mon, Bill- cow farts is serious stuff! And Palestinian charcoal burners are killing polar bears as I type!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 12:25 PM

There was a serious article recently about a farmer feeding cows on a dried form of seaweed, which seemed to eliminate cow farts... I take the whole issue seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 12:26 PM

Why are you so insistant on playing a blame game?
Global warming is caused by the impact of people and the most climate stressed area of the world is also the area with the highest projected population growth. Can you not get it through your head that if the population growth is not controlled by humans, then natural processes will control it,and that outcome will not be pretty. All your game of blame allocation is doing is to draw attention away from procedures that could possibly help and reduce the human suffering. The cart and the horse are all part of the same problem - we are the problem.
We all know America is a greedy consumer of energy, we do not need you to highlight it each time you post.
It is the volume of people degrading the planet. If you are so insistant on conserving energy why do you waste so much posting every opportunity on most threads? Are your views so inportant they justify the waste of so much energy?

If you want to post in this aggressive and insulting fashion, I suggest that you take care to get your facts right lest you have the object of your aggression rubbing his hands with glee,

However.

Global warming is overwhelmingly caused by carbon dioxide emissions. "Impact of people" as any sort of meaningful explanation simply doesn't cut it.

Climate-stressed areas (whatever that's supposed to mean) are not caused by large population or by poverty, etc. They are caused by carbon dioxide emissions leading to global warming, which respects neither boundaries, population or prosperity. Yes the poorest with the least resources will be hit first. But the problem of climate change, which we are supposedly discussing here, is overwhelmingly caused by emissions from the US, China, Russia and Europe, all of which have relatively low population growth rates. Your obsession with burgeoning population in areas that hardly contribute to global warming at all is a complete red herring. It is an issue, but not the issue of this thread. What on earth was the point of producing your very useful graph if you're then going to completely ignore the obvious conclusions be be drawn from it?

Read your biggest paragraph again in my quote. It's aimless, unfocused twaddle. And my saying that is far less aggressive or insulting than the remarks aimed at me in the quote.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 12:38 PM

..."why do you waste so much posting every opportunity on most threads? Are your views so inportant they justify the waste of so much energy?"

In the interests of accuracy, and for the second time this week, I should like to point out my estimate that I post on approximately two percent of all threads here. You leave yourself wide open to sarcasm and ridicule when you post rubbish of that kind, and, well, some of us can't resist...

I'd also point out that if my views annoy you so much you're perfectly at liberty to ignore them.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 04:30 PM

For Steve.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=climate+stressed+areas&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb9bjv

I do not think anyone cares about how many amoeba die as a result of climate change. The entire argument is about the impact on humans, because we have the capability to cause our very own extinction event.
Those humans least able to adapt are those mainly in arid areas. Not only are their economies abysmal, birthrates are high, as is infant mortality. Additionally in many areas resource wars are occurring.
International aid in most cases is hopelessly inadaquate and UN peacekeeping simply not working.
You are guilty of splitting hairs on a serious subject. You had better hope the supply chain never fails where you live because the average human after 3 days without food is a vicious annimal and society as you know it would begin to unravel quite nastily.

I think we are all aware climate is changing and not just because of increasing CO2. whether you subscribe to the view humans caused it or exacerbated it is largely irrelevant. Unless change is made to a low carbon energy source the future could become nasty. It does not matter a hoot who is causing it as far as the frontline troops are concerned. They are dying and the complacent advanced world throws a few crumbs and pontificates, apparently unable to see that what is happening in Darfur today could bring a related outcome to themselves in the future. Do you seriously think all those north african refugees are economic migrants, or could it be they are escaping from an almost inevitable early death. (Iam also fully aware that political and religious considerations have a further impact)
To further illustrate the problem I suggest you study the impact of heat stress on all the grain crops. As the average growing temperature drops, yield declines slightly. As the average growing temperature increases beyond optimum essentially yield falls off a cliff. So for advanced economies crop yields fall, soil degrades, population increases.
   Pointing the finger at those economies being profligate with resources may make you feel better but the reality is far more serious.I am afraid the western world would need to be subjected to food rationing and a touch of famine in order to concentrate minds on the problem. No one is disputing the statistics of what countries consume the most, the immediate problem is that the human impact is already being felt by those least able to help themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 05:28 PM

You are flailing.

May I remind you that this thread is about addressing climate change. Issues to do with population increases in developing countries have nothing to do with that, as those countries are the least offenders in terms of emissions (see your own graph). Carbon emissions are the sole cause of anthropogenic global warming. That is driven almost entirely by carbon emissions from developed countries. Your attempt to conflate two world issues is wrong-headed. Worse, your campaign to control population as a solution for climate change would be inappropriate in developed countries with already-low birth rates. It would be appropriate in developing countries, of course, in your scheme of things. Two points there: first, how do you think it could be achieved? Second, have you ever delved into why birth rates are high in many developing countries? I would do a little research on that if I were you before proposing solutions that would look like naked western imperialism - and not a little racist.

Finally, get your teeth into the issues and out of Steve Shaw. Join the debate - properly.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 05:33 PM

Incidentally, your throwaway remark about not caring about amoebae betrays abject ignorance about the complexities of the environment. We meddle with the welfare of any group of organisms, amoebae included, at our peril.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 05:40 PM

Incidentally again, your link is a google results page linking to over two million articles. Would you like me to read all of them? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate change
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 06:26 PM

In my post of 05.28 I should have mentioned deforestation as a contributory cause of global warming.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 06:36 PM

Cow Trumps, Steve. Cow Trumps. Get with the program.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 07:42 PM

Cow trumps and Trump trumps both come under carbon emissions, Greg!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 07:56 PM

And then there's Bruce Trumps.......

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Dec 16 - 07:59 PM

That's just plain hot air. Causes global warming without the carbon!

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 Dec 16 - 08:24 AM

I always understood that people tend to have more children in under developed countries , not only because children are cherished as a blessing , but that in States with no social state support children automatically value, and tend to ,ageing parents .   I imagine senoufou can tell me if I'm off beam on this !

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 05:14 AM

I think some on this thread are being deliberately obtuse purely to provoke argument.
It is blindingly obvious that global warming is just one manifestation of a much larger problem that has already being alluded to by others.
Resource depletion, environmental degradation, urbanisation etc etc.
The one common denominator is people.
We have built a civilisation that is a global energy consuming monster, increasingly interconnected and becoming ever more fragile as it's systems become more complex. The discussion and action needs to progress way beyond limiting carbon emissions.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 05:45 AM

Yebbut this thread is about human-induced climate change. No-one is denying the other issues. But global warming is caused overwhelmingly by big developed countries with low birth rates and high energy consumption. You're the one provoking argument by trying to widen the issue to blame just "people" instead of focusing on the actual people who are doing the damage. There are billions of innocents with regard to climate change. The energy-consuming monster is the big developed countries. Those other billions of people can only dream about having the energy at their disposal that those countries have. Back to your graph. Any solution you can come up with for controlling or reducing population in developing countries will have little or no impact on global warming. It's for a different discussion, old chap.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 06:09 AM

You are very patronising this morning Steve. I think you will find that 10% of global warming can be attributed to tropical deforestation according to the Union of concerned scientists. And in very dry years, emissions can be extraordinarily high. In 1997,for example, fires burning peat and vegetation in Indonesia released as much CO2 into the atmosphere as the United States released that whole year. If you are so insistant on nit picking at least verify your facts before posting.
Why ask me for solutions? Surely a man of your supposed polymath skills can solve these problems yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 09:08 AM

I went to great lengths to correct my post in which I omitted to mention deforestation. Now 10% is serious but it leaves the other 90% to explain, and the vast bulk of that comes from carbon emissions from developed countries with low birth rates. There is a contribution too from oxides of nitrogen from nitrogenous artificial fertilisers which I also omitted to mention (sorry about that), almost all of which comes from agricultural practices in developed countries.

I won't patronise you but I will criticise you for being aggressive in debate whilst not on top of the issue, and for failing to focus on the subject of the thread whilst criticising me for refusing to drift off-topic. It's a very odd way to carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 09:56 AM

In general your premise that the vast bulk of emissions come from developed countries with low birthrates may hold, however if you study the detailed breakdown you may find a few surprises that depart from that model

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 10:04 AM

I can no longer grow plums and Chinese pears because they bloom from the heat of a early spring before pollinator insects are able to fly.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 11:00 AM

Yes it does hold. The numbers in your table are per capita. The "few surprises" comprise some countries with unexpectedly high per capita emissions - but, without exception, they are countries with small populations. Rainforest logging may mostly take place in developing countries, and is a concern for reasons including but not by any means exclusively global warming. But carbon and oxides of nitrogen emissions are overwhelmingly the products of large nations or blocs of nations in the developed world, and the problem is that tney can't keep them to themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 02:54 PM

After stopping coal fired energy plants, banning or boycotting palm oil plantation oil farms carved out of rain forests is a good idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 16 - 03:03 PM

Couldn't agree more.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 11:38 AM

https://www.wired.com/2016/12/global-warming-beneath-permafrost

"For hundreds of thousands of years, the Siberian permafrost has been a giant freezer for everything buried within it. But global warming has put the frozen ground in defrost mode, and the tundra is now heating up twice as fast as the rest of the planet. "Permafrost is a silent ticking time bomb," says Robert Spencer, an environmental scientist at Florida State University. As it thaws, the dirt could release a litany of horrors. Beware: The ice-beasts cometh. "

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 11:42 AM

A scientist, you say? Talking like that?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 11:48 AM

and from the arctic ocean.

http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=77868

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Jeri
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 12:37 PM

Steve, do you even read what you're attacking?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 12:38 PM

Steve the IPCC represents a kind of consensus established from peer reviewed articles and various discussion groups. It is probably safe to say the co called corporate stance they take is a somewhat conservative view. The models are imperfect, the science is in cases embryonic, some of the conclusions reached may be later proved erroneous. What is in agreement is that things are changing. Some say fast, some say slow.
Wallace Broecker, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory professor, is quoted as saying " climate is an angry beast and we are poking it with sticks"
I would say his cautious attitude should be given more attention.
There is ice core evidence to suggest climate has flipped rapidly and evidence that sea level has changed at rates faster than we are prepared to acknowledge. There are various tipping mechanisms and cascade effects that some researchers conclude could create far more rapid change scenarios than we now accept.
The science is far from perfect - these non mainstream scientific views may be correct. I hope they are not, but some of the scenarios they paint are compelling.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 01:11 PM

Cows. Its the damn cows.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 01:39 PM

Of course it is, Greggie.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 03:30 AM

"There are various tipping mechanisms and cascade effects that some researchers conclude could create far more rapid change scenarios than we now accept."

Where fast climate change has happened in the past it accepted and acknowledged amongst climate scientists, but then no-one is listening to them. Read modern climate science papers.


"The science is far from perfect"

All science is far from perfect, that's why we do research. In the case of climate science this statement is one frequently trotted out by deniers and is misleading. We have solid data on the rapid change of the climate, and we understand any of the reasons for climate variability in the past, and this is not what we are experiencing.


"A scientist, you say? Talking like that?"

Huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 04:03 AM

Stu. you are obviously another one lacking comprehension skills. It is blindingly obvious that the science is imprecise mainly because the modelling is not exact and data sets do not always lend themselves to extrapolation.(among many other reasons)If the science was settled so would be the arguments.
I presume your qualifications were not in logic.
Perhaps I should spell out a little more clearly what I said just for your benefit.
Rapid climate change in the past by some interpretations has been seen to generate rapid change on a decadal basis, some argue on an even shorter seasonal timespan.
I would suggest you read some papers on the subject and ask for help if you cannot understand them.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 04:18 AM

STU.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC34297/


http://www.geo.umass.edu/courses/geo458/Readings/Taylor99_AS.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:28 AM

Yes I read it, Jeri, thank you. I think the item does grave disservice to the crucial cause of getting everyone in board in the fight ahgainst climate change. Just look at these two extracts:

Threat level: Civilization-imperiling
Taken together, the remains of ancient grass, moss, and animals buried in permafrost add up to some 1,500 billion tons of carbon. Microbes munch on that reheated mulch, exhaling carbon dioxide that could further warm the atmosphere, which would melt even more permafrost and spur a runaway cycle of warming.

Threat level: Oh you'll be fiiiiine
In the past two years, French microbiologists have discovered two kinds of giant viruses buried deep within the Siberian permafrost. Those viruses were still infectious … to amoebas. The researchers warn that there could be other, nastier viruses, like smallpox, lurking beneath the surface, but they probably won't get you sick. Probably.

We have "microbes munching on reheate mulch." We have melting permafrost. We have giant viruses. We have weasel words ("French microbiologists have discovered...,"The researchers warn...," "even nastier viruses." The paragraphs have sensational headlines, replete in places with scaremongering allusions. Babies and bath water come to mind

What we need is careful, measured, objective scientific commentary, not the worst-of-the-worst tabloidesque popular science junk.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:35 AM

Sorry, I hit send instead of preview. Couple of glitches in there but the meaning stands.

By the way, Iains, if you want to be taken seriously as a commentator on matters scientific, you really should know that the whole point of science is that it's never "settled." It's particularly important that you get this when you are indulging in sarcasm and accusations of incomprehension, à la Teribus, directed at other posters.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:56 AM

Steve I think it is a given that the science is never settled until after the event. The point I was trying to make is that the IPCC reports give a conservative view because inevitably that is where consensus lies. However there is a body of research that suggests that at times events can change dramatically over a decade or even a year.
I do not think anyone could dispute the real threat of climate change, the real problem is that perhaps these changes may be on our doorstep.
AS yet there is no accurate way to predict timescales or severity it is just known it is in the offing.
Many seem to think it is a problem for our children, or grandchildren.
I merely make the point that the problems posed could arrive sooner.
Obviously, as yet, there are no certainties, some probabilities and some rather nasty possibilities.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:59 AM

"Stu. you are obviously another one lacking comprehension skills."

Seems to me you suffer from an inability to articulate yourself clearly and a surfeit of self-confidence which you attempt to disguise with vague assertions and belligerence. Read the reply ,we understand about abrupt climate change (we've known about if for years, it's hardly scientists not being "prepared to acknowledge". You posted links to two papers though, so you MUST be clever


"Perhaps I should spell out a little more clearly what I said just for your benefit."

No need mucker. You didn't read my reply, or are not paying much attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:57 AM

Unfortunately, Iains, people DO dispute the real and imminent threat of climate change, including very powerful people who have a vested interest in our continuing to burn fossil fuels. They now have a very powerful politician backing them. The science is not settled, not now nor will it be in the future. The deniers latch on to the inevitable imprecisions in the scientific picture, as vested interests always tend to do. They are extremely dangerous people and we can fight them only with cool, calm, collected, measured, well-presented science. What we don't need is popular science scaremongering, which leaves us all the more open to ridicule and dimissiveness.

Subject: RE: BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?
From: Stu
Date: 22 Dec 16 - 07:06 AM

No science is settled.