BS: Serious Yet Abt Ending Climate Change?

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

No science is settled.

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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Dec 16 - 01:39 PM

Of course it is, Greggie.

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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 04 Dec 16 - 03:03 PM

Couldn't agree more.

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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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 - 07:42 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 - 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 - 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: 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 - 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 - 05:28 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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 - 10:24 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: 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: 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 - 12:19 PM

TRRRUUUUMMMMMPH!!!

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 - 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 - 09:31 AM

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

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/