Bryant, I would. Unfortunately I don’t think the measure that needs to be on the ballot will be on time. Man, as a whole, needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to a conclusion and so we are. Downsizing on a drastic level is the only thing that will answer the problem in the long term. Long term being years, perhaps decades. Instead, we keep trying to figure out how to keep the paradigm in motion another year, another decade, one more century longer. We keep cutting down, digging up, and leaving our wastes behind on a planet that is simply too small to accommodate the wants of our burgeoning population. It’s a numbers game.
Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.
As I’ve said before, I’m not pointing any fingers. I have no right to. I live that way as well. The deck has been stacked. Given the billions of us walking around on this planet, this is the only way the system will work. Trying to live any other way will eventually result in imprisonment or death. Just ask any homeless person. I offer no solutions. The system is the problem. It is what it is.
” Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.”
Yes, I said that already several times. Most sheeples in the rich countries give a shit. But I have to repeat myself:
These sheeples are in no way responsible for a whole century of anthropogenic climate change denial and all the propaganda against renewable energy and shit. You know, Jimmy Carter for instance once put a solar panel on the white house and Ronald Reagan took it off again. Do I REALLY have to school you in the politics of the militarty-industrial complex, resp. the fossil industries ?! Do you realize, that you claim indirectly, that Exxon is in a lawsuit for no reason ?! The whole fuckin system could be driven by renewable energy for many centuries already! NO?! Gush, then we are fucked anyway.
I posted about VW, praising e-cars on their webpage, while at the very same time they try to BLOCK e-cars in the EU:
” All the data, all the facts: The five e-models from Volkswagen
Volkswagen places a top priority on things like perfection and tradition
when it comes to electric vehicles. When we develop electric cars and
plug-in hybrids our guiding principle is to achieve sustainable transport
without making any compromises. Here is a look at all the vehicles
in our portfolio…”
I could go on FOREVER with such examples of double-brain-fuck in the corporate system. It’s not just VW, it’s the whole automobil industry, it is called LOBBYISM- ever heard about that?^^ Here’s another example, among MILLIONS of examples:
I mean, even the ROCKEFFELRS, who own/owned ExxonMobil, are now opponents of ExxonMobil- so PLEASE, don’t tell me, that you want to defend Exxon in any sense, like “we are all responsible, because we consume their oil”!:
” 15.4.2016 – ExxonMobil, Rockefellers face off in climate battle
US energy giant ExxonMobil is facing an onslaught from environmentalists and some shareholders alleging it hid what it knew about the effects of fossil fuels on climate change.
In an ironic twist: among the opponents is the Rockefeller Family Fund, built on the fortune amassed by John D. Rockefeller, founder of Standard Oil, which became Esso, then Exxon and then, in 1999, ExxonMobil.
The RFF met last January, in secret, in Manhattan with environmental nongovernmental groups “to establish in the public’s mind that Exxon is a corrupt institution that has pushed humanity (and all creation) towards climate chaos and grave harm,” according to an internal document on the meeting seen by AFP…”
SURE, we are all just human beings, even these suckerz of ExxonMobil et al- BUT TRUTH IS TRUTH AND A LIE IS A LIE. If we don’t manage to sort that out, we are done.
You don’t need 10 posts to make 1 point. Once again, you seem to be forcing an argument on me I have not made. Who is defending Exxon? My point is that I think your argument greatly oversimplifies reality in a way that pretends the rest of us bear no responsibility. People don’t buy oil because Exxon told them to. People buy oil to enjoy the advantages it provides them. I just don’t think this “evil them vs. good us” argument is useful or realistic. Energy makes things possible. Companies made money selling that energy to people who wanted it. Those companies also did some things they rightly deserve blame for. But oil companies didn’t change the climate—oil use did.
I didn’t sue ExxonMobil. Get that?! You have to tell your claim to the Rockefellers opponents of ExxonMobil ect, who charge ExxonMobil, not me. I am just a nobody, I just quote the message, nope else. So, if you think, this lawsuit is not proper, not honest, then I am the simply wrong recipient, I am just a nobody, thank god.
I am in no way about “good vs. evil”, I give shit about “good vs. evil”. But I give very much about CAUSE AND EFFECT, because that is a Natural Law. If we don’t give a shit about cause and effect, then this game will go on forever and any further bla bla about climate mitigation is nothing but a JOKE, a suicidal joke.
I mean, you are the one, who posted this on your twitter- and you did that for reasonable reasons, didn’t you?:
” 3.7.1977 – Climate Peril May Force Limits On Coal and Oil, Carter Aide Says
To avoid accumulation in the air of sufficient carbon dioxide to cause major climate changes, it may ultimately be necessary to restrict the burning of coal and other fossil fuels, according to Dr. William D. Nordhaus of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers…”
There are people out there, who twist the truth, who hide the truth, who think, they can fiddle cause and effect to their very own purposes and then leave the mess to the coming generations. If this game of doublespeak, doublethink does not stop, then what?! Finito. We just can’t afford things like the VW scandal forever, can we?! But it’s exactly, what’s going on all over the planet. Remember the fuckin Panama Papers shit. ONE little company in Panama maintained 250 000 (two hundred and fifty thousand) phantom companies alone. Now start to calculate: Panama, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Caiman Islands, Germany (yes) and so on and so on… what do you think, how many of these phantom companies are there on the planet? MILLIONS. Do you think, there will ever be any reasonable climate mitigation, any reasonable politics ect at all, as long, as this kinda game is going on?
You know, I am not speaking for myself, I don’t have much to lose. I am speaking for Mother Earth and the coming generations. And another thing:
I do highly repect your patience with me, you let me speak and I really appreciate that. Thank you.
Yes, good points. It is the users of fossil fuels who use fossil fuels. Of course, the producers of fossil fuels are also users of fossil fuels and, because their profits rely on people buying those fuels, they will promote their use. But the users can’t absolve themselves from blame just because someone else sold them the fuel (or products containing/embedding the fuel). Of course, it is extremely difficult to avoid using fossil fuels in some way but that is our excuse, not the FF companies.
And the other point of Nemesis not needing to post myriads of comments to make one comment is also good. As I’d asked before, Nemesis, please pause before hitting submit to make sure you’ve added all the ideas you want to get across in the comment, instead of following up with multiple further snippets. I subscribe, to keep up to date and every comment comes into my e-mail inbox.
The Arctic is facing a decline in sea ice that might equal the negative record of 2012
“Sea ice physicists from the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), are anticipating that the sea ice cover in the Arctic Ocean this summer may shrink to the record low of 2012. The scientists made this projection after evaluating current satellite data about the thickness of the ice cover. The data show that the arctic sea ice was already extraordinarily thin in the summer of 2015. Comparably little new ice formed during the past winter. Today Dr Marcel Nicolaus, expert on sea ice, has presented these findings at a press conference during the annual General Assembly of the European Geosciences Union in Vienna.” https://www.awi.de/nc/en/about-us/service/press/press-release/der-arktis-droht-ein-meereisverlust-wie-im-negativrekordjahr-2012.html
1.5°C vs 2°C global warming – new study shows why half a degree matters
“European researchers have found substantially different climate change impacts for a global warming of 1.5°C and 2°C by 2100, the two temperature limits included in the Paris climate agreement. The additional 0.5°C would mean a 10-cm-higher global sea-level rise by 2100, longer heat waves, and would result in virtually all tropical coral reefs being at risk. The research is published today (21 April) in Earth System Dynamics, an open access journal of the European Geosciences Union (EGU), and is presented at the EGU General Assembly.” http://www.egu.eu/news/230/15c-vs-2c-global-warming-new-study-shows-why-half-a-degree-matters/
Widespread loss of ocean oxygen to become noticeable in 2030s
“BOULDER—A reduction in the amount of oxygen dissolved in the oceans due to climate change is already discernible in some parts of the world and should be evident across large regions of the oceans between 2030 and 2040, according to a new study led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
“Scientists know that a warming climate can be expected to gradually sap the ocean of oxygen, leaving fish, crabs, squid, sea stars, and other marine life struggling to breathe. But it’s been difficult to determine whether this anticipated oxygen drain is already having a noticeable impact.
“Loss of oxygen in the ocean is one of the serious side effects of a warming atmosphere, and a major threat to marine life,” said NCAR scientist Matthew Long, lead author of the study. “Since oxygen concentrations in the ocean naturally vary depending on variations in winds and temperature at the surface, it’s been challenging to attribute any deoxygenation to climate change. This new study tells us when we can expect the impact from climate change to overwhelm the natural variability.” https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/20721/widespread-loss-of-ocean-oxygen-become-noticeable-in-2030s
Climate change impact and risks of concrete infrastructure deterioration
“Atmospheric CO2 is a major cause of reinforcement corrosion in bridges, buildings, wharves, and other concrete infrastructure in Australia, United States, United Kingdom and most other countries. The increase in CO2 levels associated with global warming will increase the likelihood of carbonation-induced corrosion. Moreover, temperature rises will increase corrosion rates. Clearly, the impact of climate change on existing and new infrastructure is considerable, as corrosion damage is disruptive to society and costly to repair.” http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141029611000241
As for the little ones we’ve dismissed as unworthy and unimportant,
Despite their small brains, ravens and crows may be just as clever as chimps, research suggests
“A new study suggests that ravens can be as clever as chimpanzees, despite having much smaller brains, indicating that rather than the size of the brain, the neuronal density and the structure of the birds’ brains play an important role in terms of their intelligence.” https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160426101527.htm
And the comment was “acidic ocean = methane’s not oxidized and gets to the air.” The paper was a Shakhova/Semiletov study, but they don’t seem to mention methane at all.
D is adding a concept onto that in an area where I’m not sure it’s relevant. Anoxia is absolutely a thing that happens where some rivers reach the sea, largely because of fertilizer/nutrient runoff, and areas with larger organic matter inputs will have lower oxygen at the bottom. (Though you might have higher oxygen in the surface layer if phytoplankton are being fertilized.) Judging from this paper, that area sees some of this. But does it reach the level of inhibiting bacterial methane consumption? Over what kind of area? I don’t know.
And if the worry is that there’s a small area of the shelf where oxidation will be reduced, that strikes me as much less important than what’s going on with the actual release from the sediment across the broader area.
No, it’s not that simple. Unless we’re talking about a Wadhams-style “methane bomb”, which we don’t need to be.
Yeah, we have a tendency to lump all these outlet glaciers together, but the fine details in each of those fjords can be really important. If only we had the money, resources, and people to study the hell out of all of them…
For the dead bike driver it makes no difference, who is responsible or not. Btw, as a bike driver you are in high danger every day, you are worth nothing as a bike driver in Germany, car drivers hate bike drivers. You are a hero, when you drive a fat SUV or Mercedes, but as a bike driver you are worth a piece of shit. Therefore many bike drivers get killed in Germany every year.
Isn’t it extremly FUNNY, that all those SUV and Mercedes drivers, who mostly have children and wealth, who have much to lose, give a funny shit about climate change, while I as a nobody, as someone, who has nothing to lose, no descendants ect, am very concerned about climate change? Yes, it is extremely funny, bwahahaha. Do you believe in JUSTICE? I do:
” Massive Victory for 7 Kids in Climate Change Lawsuit in Washington State
Today, in a surprise ruling from the bench in the critical climate case brought by youths against the State of Washington’s Department of Ecology, King County Superior Court Judge Hollis Hill ordered the Department of Ecology to promulgate an emissions reduction rule by the end of 2016 and make recommendations to the state legislature on science-based greenhouse gas reductions in the 2017 legislative session.”
My analogy was poor. The auto industry manufactures cars knowing that they MIGHT kill. An oil company produces oil knowing that it WILL kill.
A better analogy would be of the smoker who, knowing the risks, dies of cancer. The tobacco industry makes cigarettes knowing that they WILL kill. But the knowledgeable smoker shouldn’t have smoked. And the knowledgeable driver should bike.
As long, as this kinda funny games go on, there is ZERO hope for any change. And another thing:
I can imagine, that at one point, the young generation will REALLY get extremely angry, because it is about their very own future, it is about their naked survival.
Car makers make cars knowing that those who drive cars will kill (of course, only a proportion). Fossil fuel producers produce fossil fuels knowing that the users of those fuels will kill some people. The users of the cars and the users of the fossil fuels don’t intentionally set out the kill but they do know the stats and the science enough to realise that early deaths will result from that use. No analogy is ever perfect but the only thing stopping people using those implements of death is that it is very inconvenient to do so.
All right, that is an oversimplification but we are all to blame for what is happening.
I mean, are we all responsible for 100 years of anthropogenic climate change denial and failed climate mitigation politics? And another very interesting question:
I guess you know, that the biggest oil consumer on the globe is the american military (+ military of all other countries). How will they get independent from oil? NEVER.
For instance, who is to blame for these kinda news I hear since DECADES?! :
” 1.5.2016 – Half of leading investors ignoring climate change: study
Almost half of the world’s top 500 investors are doing nothing to address climate change through their investments, a study showed on Monday.
A report by the Asset Owners Disclosure Project (AODP), a not-for-profit organization aimed at improving the management of climate change, found that just under a fifth of the top investors – or 97 managing a total of $9.4 trillion in assets – were taking tangible steps to mitigate global warming
These include investing in low polluting assets or encouraging the companies they invest in to be greener.
A further 157 investors managing a total of $14.2 trillion were taking “first steps” towards addressing climate change, while 246 managing $14 trillion were doing nothing at all, the report said.”
Mmm, well, I can’t imagine why that would be the case. Maybe you’re right and only a few people who run some large corporations are to blame and the rest of us bear no responsibilities for our actions. Gosh, I can sleep easier, now. Thanks.
Ah, well, you know, I can sleep PERFECTLY all my life. You know why? I ain’t got anything to lose, no children, no grandchildren, no wealth, nothing. Muhahaha. Yeah, I am completely at ease.
This man, pale, walks the flowering lawns,
Dressed in black, cigar between his teeth.
The pale man thinks about the Tuileries
In flower…and at times his dead eye flames.
His twenty years of orgy have made him drink!
He told himself: ‘I will extinguish
Liberty As I put out a candle– softly, politely…’
Liberty lives again! He feels worn out.
They’ve caught him. Now what name trembles
On his silent lips? What quick regret?
No one will know: the Emperor’s eye is dead.
He sees again, perhaps, the man in the pince-nez…
And watches drifting from his lighted cigar,
Like evenings at St. Cloud, a thin blue haze.”
Will, I tend to agree with you. That guy D also said last year would see a record minimum for Arctic sea ice, and he was wrong. Also, I believe most of the methane is anaerobicly oxidized in anoxic sediment: https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm15/webprogram/Paper78877.html.
This would seem to suggest that the excessive acidification doesn’t matter.
Well, if by “agree with me” you mean “always be skeptical when an Internet amateur reads something into a science story that isn’t actually in said story,” then good on you. But I know next to nothing about how methane oxidation works (I know next to nothing about ocean chemistry in general, really), hence my asking after it. That link you provided is news to me, and an interesting read.
After all, Mother Nature gives a shit about who is to blame or who is not to blame. It’s all about physics, all about Natural Laws. I like that. I had a hard time to see through all the smoke and mirrors of the industrial-corporate-military complex all my life. But Mother Nature always gives unmistakable facts without any smoke and mirrors. Damned, I appreciate that very much, because I desperately need clear anouncements in a world full of smoke and mirrors 8-)
Interesting letter from James Hansen to lovely, rather privileged Mr. Warren Buffet:
” 28,4,2016 – Mr. Buffett’s Ark
… We need good national and global energy policies to move the world off fossil fuels onto clean energies. However, the Paris climate accord, signed with pomp and circumstance, is only a precatory agreement, based on the hope that each of 190 nations will choose an effective “cap” for their emissions. But when a U.S. citizen is responsible for 25 times more emissions than an Indian citizen, what cap can we expect India to adapt and how would it be enforced?…”
Nice letter, isn’t it? I like especially this question of James Hansen:
” But when a U.S. citizen is responsible for 25 times more emissions than an Indian citizen, what cap can we expect India to adapt and how would it be enforced?…”
We are all resonsible? Well, uhm, might be, but some obviously are “a little bit” more responsible than others 8-)
See, without global economic JUSTICE, India, China and other underprivileged countries will surely give a shit about climate change (after all, it’s all about the per capita numbers). Oh, uhm, and the more power and money, the more responsibility, damned ;-)
SRM is already happening, I have EYES, I am not stupid, I can see it in my area 100%. Am I responsible, is everybody responsible for this kind of SICK “climate mitigation” ?! Not really. But anyway, good luck with this kind of “strategy”.
Interesting^^ How will you “absolutely” know that? You don’t live in my area and you don’t see what I see^^ Man, I live on planet earth for more than half a century and I have NEVER seen what’s going on now in the sky since ~3 years. On some days the sky is clear and blue, then suddenly hundreds of planes appear during the day, flying absolutely PARALLEL, leaving trails that don’t dissolve, but fill the whole sky, the whole sky is completely dimmed then. Just google for “solar radiation management” and you will get 38.700.000 results.
You’re not the first to try to convince me of this baseless conspiracy theory. Here’s an exhaustive resource to help you see through that nonsense: http://contrailscience.com/
I simply trust my eyes. How will you know, what’s goin on MY area?! No way. And I am not the only one, who can see what’s going on here. Even people, who are not interested in climate change or climate engineering, like I do, see and talk about what’s happening in the sky. So, once again:
YOU can’t tell me, what’s goin on in MY area, thousands of miles away from your own area. Can you?^^
Please stop barking about a “change in trend”. Just a few days ago you correctly stated that El Nino and La Nina don’t change the underlying trend, yet you continue to claim that the current El Nino has… That’s not how this works.
” Please stop barking about a “change in trend”. Just a few days ago you correctly stated that El Nino and La Nina don’t change the underlying trend, yet you continue to claim that the current El Nino has… That’s not how this works.”
Oh yes, there is some talent here on board to turn around and twist what others say. So, can you tell me, when did I say, that “the current El Nino changed the trend”, please?^^ I never said that. I call your claim a failed, poor attempt of rhetoric technique, some call it “strawman”, if I remember right.
If you had read my comments here at fractalplanet, you’d realize the really easy- to- observe FACT, that I DENY any influence of El Nino all the time, dear Scott Johnson :-)
No change in trend? Well, why does NOAA saw a change in trend last year already?
” 5.6.2015 – NOAA Study Confirms Global Warming Speed-Up Is Imminent
… The director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, Thomas Karl, told the UK Guardian that “considering all the short-term factors identified by the scientific community that acted to slow the rate of global warming over the past two decades (volcanoes, ocean heat uptake, solar decreases, predominance of La Niñas, etc.) it is likely the temperature increase would have accelerated in comparison to the late 20th Century increases.” ”
Now we are a year later and gained many, many more global temperature records- remember?^^
How many studies do you want, that say, climate change is accelerating? Here’s another one:
” 21.3.2016 – Climate Change Accelerating At ‘Unprecedented’ Rate
A new report released by the World Meteorological Organization shows that climate change is accelerating at an “unprecedented” rate, warning that actions must be taken “before we pass the point of no return…”
Nemesis, I have a request: Would you please narrow your number of posts down? I see a dozen posts from you to every one or less from everyone else. It’s like the guy in the back of the room who keeps shouting everyone else down. C’mon.
You know, I gotta mousewheel: With a little move of my finger I scroll over any comments I don’t want to see with ease.
Btw: Wanna learn something about Solar Radiation Management? In this video you can hear the statements of pilots, doctors and scientists about Solar Radiation Management and what are contrails and what are no contrails. This video is recorded at an official hearing at the Shasta County Board of Supervisors. These citizens are VERY CONCERNED about Solar Radiation Mangement, so it’s no conspiracy shit
Recently there is also a Lawsuit against SRM in Canada going on. Watch the video about Solar Radiation Management, listen to all these concerned scientists, pilots, doctors and then tell me:
Are WE ALL responsible for this shit going on ?! WHO is responsible for this kind of climate intervention AGAINST the will of the people ?! I can tell you, who is responsible:
The industrial-corporate-military complex is responsible once again.
Ok, no more SRM here at fractalplanet, no problem.
But anyway, it’s rather interesting, that you call all these testimonies of all these scientists, pilots, doctors, biologists ect in the video “ridiculous contrail conspiracy theory stuff”. Anyway, thanks for your statement.
Because it’s just nonsense and fantasy built on a lack of understanding of atmospheric processes. Because it’s unscientific. You can find “scientists, pilots, doctors” etc. that believe in sasquatch, or that the Moon landing was faked—or that climate change is a hoax. That doesn’t create evidence for those claims.
Again, please take advantage of the resource I linked you.
And please don’t conflate SRM and contrails. The latter may be thought of (by conspiracy theorists) as SRM but SRM can be discussed without discussing contrail conspiracies.
If they don’t do/test SRM now on a large scale, they will soon. I don’t say, they are doing it on a regular basis right now. But they are testing. Testing weather/climate manipulation is a long ongoing game, I know that, you know that.
Mmmh, september 2014…? What source is that? Not really fresh, that graph from 2014. The DMI graph I posted is right, serious, you don’t deny that, do you?
See, I don’t want to miscredit the IPCC. But the decline in arctic sea ice is dire. When you look at the recent graphs, you see, that we are in uncharted territory right now, I mean: NOW, not in 2050 or 2080 or 2100.
Btw:
Everybody here on fractalplanet is much more sane, than 99% of the commentators at McPhersons blog.
… but sorry, you are much too optimistic nevertheless. Sorry.
Yes, I have. But did they foresee the status, the arctic sea ice is right now? No, they couldn’t. You know, that we had a record low in winter 2015/2016 and now we have a record low in the melting season:
That’s just fact, with or without IPCC. And they didn’t foresee that, there were more projecting several decades, not a few years.
“Everybody”? Nah, only Bryant/bobcobbblog is optimistic, most everyone else is either realistic or pessimistic about our chances, as I see it.
After all, the COP21 agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming to 1.5C but no efforts have been undertaken to match those words and the el Nino boosted surface temp anomaly is already at that target.
” “Everybody”? Nah, only Bryant/bobcobbblog is optimistic, most everyone else is either realistic or pessimistic about our chances, as I see it.
After all, the COP21 agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming to 1.5C but no efforts have been undertaken to match those words and the el Nino boosted surface temp anomaly is already at that target.”
I’d rather say:
“… and the climate change boosted El Nino boosted surface temp anomaly…”
About COP21: The COP21 “agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming” for many, many decades now, without any real grand scale results so far. We can forget about 1.5°C for sure. Mother Nature gives a shit about playing with numbers.
About optimism/pessimism/realism:
We all know, where life finally ends up, don’t we? That’s my overall guideline, when we talk about future ;-)
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.
The source was a Royal Society conference about the Arctic, and the graph you posted only contains observed extent up to 2012. They both match observations to RCP 4.5 and 8.5; one of them has two extra years.
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
Com on, just take a look at the comparison of El Nino:
” It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
MAN, I just can’t believe what I am reading here !!! YOU (NOT me) said THIS:
” As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail.”
I’m not a climate scientist. I’m not qualified to read anything into that graph other than there have been some very high anomalies. You basically have two data points, with the second not complete (1: the change that the 1997/1998 el Nino provided and 2: the change that the 2015/2016 el Nino provided, with the 2nd data point not yet complete). You can imagine all you like about what that means but I doubt it will be scientifically valid. If you think it is, then perhaps you can submit a paper for peerr review.
Forget about a great ease of global warming due to any La Nina this year. This recent El Nino is a monster, mainly driven by anthropogenic climate change.
Hahahaha, that’s a good one. But nevertheless, I am a musician, so I am quite familiar with these kinda people. But my disguise is much better, no long hair, no freaky clothes, nothing. I look like a perfect John Doe, this prevents from a lot of disadvantages 8-) You know, I prefere these freaky kinda people more than these kinda people:
There is a lot of hatred going on at McPherson’s blog. Hatred against humankind as a whole. Most of the people at that blog want to see mankind croak as soon as possible. They say, that ALL people are responsible to the same amont for the mess, the planet is in, no matter, if beggar of king. So, they have something in common with the people here at fractalplanet.
I don’t want to see humankind to go extinct, I just want to see the people fall, that are after profit without any scruple, the people, who lie and cheat all the time, the people, who financed anthropogenic climate change denial for roughly a century, who governed wars, slavery, exploitation without any scruple. These people thought, that they can rape the planet and humankind and when the planet is done, just move on to another planet. Muhahaha- THIS dream is over. Truth, justice will finally prevail.
” no matter, if beggar of king” should be “no matter, if beggar oR king”.
You know, to say “we are all responsible for the eco-crimes ect” blurs any distinction of right and wrong and therefore blurs reasonable ways for CHANGE. The beggar in the streets, the worker, who got 3 jobs and still struggles for survival, the people who are being exploited and cheated all their life, CAN’T change the evil doing of the industrial-corporate-military complex and therefore they are NOT responsible. I CAN’T change ExxonMobil, can I? I can’t change the ignorant SUV drivers, I can’t change the Wall Street or the Deutsche Bank, I can’t change VW, I can’t change Donald Trump and alike, I can’t change the evil ways of the industrial-corporate-military complex ect ect ect. I can’t change ANYONE- except myself. So, I don’t walk with the herd, I don’t believe in the everyday propaganda of Empire, I don’t believe in consumerism, I don’t believe in the church, I don’t follow the ways of exploitation, war, slavery and I got punished for being a troublemaker all my life. But I achieved peace and freedom, satisfaction inside. So, it was worth it, to go a lonely way, apart from the herd.
Don’t generalise. I believe that only I (“here at fractalplanet”) have claimed that we’re all responsible. But I’m not saying we’re all equally responsible. There is zero chance that developed nations, and increasing portions of developing nations can have the lifestyles they seem to want if all the most responsible people and companies “fall”. In that sense, we’re all in this together. There are always choices that can be made and most people, most of the time, will make the easiest choice (easiest at the moment of making the choice) or the one that gets them the most immediate satisfaction. That’s human nature.
As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail. That would be a very significant challenge for almost every person on this planet, though other species would probably find it a blessing (relative to business as usual).
Uh ah, you want to see civilisation fail ?! Uhm, that’s another point you share with McPherson and his gang :-) Well then, thank god that Monsanto et al couldn’t kill all small farmers so far, because if civilisation fails, industrial farming will fail too. And who do you think will suffer the most ? Yes, the rich western countries will suffer the most. Can you imagine, what happens, when all the SUV drivers ect can’t buy food in the supermarket anymore? WAR, CIVIL WAR, ANARCHY, muhahaha. Ah well, do you have enough FEMA camps and shit in the US so far? I am sure, there are plenty. I don’t think, that your government will accept anarchy. Can you imagine civil war in the US in the 21 century?! This will be real tough shit, chaos ad infinitum, HELL. And imagine all the failing of nuclear plants! No one will be there, to handle this horror nuclear shit, the nuclear plants will just melt down, uh, ah! Do you have children, family and shit? I don’t.
When civilisation fails, then economy will fail too :-) And if that happens, then all the funny rich folks will be fucked like hell. The richer you are, the more you will be fucked. Do you see the pictures of these freaks John posted? These freaks, these outsiders will rule the streets then. The poor crowd, the mass will just walk into the stores, into the real estates of the rich folks and TAKE what they need, muhahaha :-)
” In that sense, we’re all in this together. There are always choices that can be made and most people, most of the time, will make the easiest choice (easiest at the moment of making the choice) or the one that gets them the most immediate satisfaction. That’s human nature.”
You know, I am quite old, I am not in charge for any children and shit, I have nothing to loose. When the cornerstone of civ falls, then I will have a last good smoke, some glass of red wine, I will play and sing “Into the Mystic” from Van Morrison and then I will say goodbye to this cruel world without any regret :-)
Just let Empire do BAU just for a little more time and you will get, what you want:
The total breakdown of civ, back to the stone ages. YEAH, then right or wrong, responsibility and shit doesn’t matter at all anymore. Then animal law will rule, the Law of the Djungle. Not far away anymore 8-)
New Federal Rule Would Permit Thousands of Eagle Deaths
“The Obama administration is revising a federal rule that allows wind-energy companies to operate high-speed turbines for up to 30 years, even if means killing or injuring thousands of federally protected bald and golden eagles.
Killing our National symbol to power up a few more ipads is like the developer who cuts down the trees, levels the hills and diverts the rivers in a wild place to make another shopping mall and then naming it “Elm Tree Plaza or “Golden Hills Mall. Money trumps Life.
There is no technology without pain, without suffering. Actually, there is no life without pain, without suffering. But the question is:
How to reduce unnecessary suffering? When everybody in an economic system strives for as much profit, as much consumerism as possible, then we are doomed quickly. But that’s exactly, what the economic system wants:
As much economic growth as possible, at the cost of extreme ecologic and social im-ballance. The system produces children, human beings en masse. Most of these children are born in very poor countires. And the multinational corporations love these billions of people, because it is a market for immense profit. They’d like to sell them all the consumer shit we have in the rich western countries right now. Imagine, 7 billion poeple striving for more, more, more shit, hahaha. A DREAM for any corporate business (look at China for instance- a capitalist/communist/whatever farce), but it’s a nightmare for the planet. And for humankind. Tell me:
What are the intentions of a stock broker at wall street? I mean these guys, who juggle with millions and billions of dollars, without EVER thinking a single second about the consequences. What are they striving for? Are they trying to make this world a better place? Are they striving for love, peace, justice? No. What they are striving for solely is this:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
You know, I do understand that. But it comes with a price. That’s physics. Everything comes with a price.
I don’t have to tell you about the history of the western world. About the expoloitation of the planet for money and power. I am talking about these guys, who mostly talk behind closed doors, in secrecy. Mother Nater herself will kick these closed doors to pieces sooner or later. No revolution can do that anymore, but Mother Nature will.
The recent positive temp- anomalies in the northern hemisphere are taking their toll- not just in Canada, where 88. 000 citizens had to flee their homes instantly. Here in Germany are also warnings about possible wildfires right now- at the beginning of may. That is very, very unusual. Right now and for next several days we got temperatures up to 27°C in Germany.
Just read all the comments here at fractalplanet carefully and you will know, why Empire will fall. Well, that’s GOOD NEWS for you, mikeroberts2013, because Empire is part of civ and you want to see civ go down. Your wish will com true. Soon.
” It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
MAN, I just can’t believe what I am reading here !!! YOU (NOT me) said THIS:
”As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail.”
I think you said English isn’t your first language and maybe that’s why you can’t see that the two quotes from me are not connected. That civilisation destroys the environment is, as I said, my opinion (“as far as I can tell”) but I’d be surprised if you can find evidence to the contrary. As all species rely on the environment, then it would be a good thing for civilisation to fail, unless you think the environment can take an unlimited beating, with no significant deterioration to the prospects of all species. Uber-doomers don’t care about the evidence (just as deniers don’t) and will come up with their own stories that fit with what they want to see. I definitely don’t do that.
That a failure of civilisation will be tough (yes, an understatement) is undisputed. But would it be better for it to fail earlier, rather than later, since all civilisations must fall as some point, particularly this one (remember that the environmental damage done so far is before climate change has really started to kick in much – for example, with extinctions)? This is really going off on a tangent, of course, so I won’t expand on this further.
So, no, I’m a very long way from the McPherson camp.
” ”As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail.”
That’s a quote of your very own comment and it says, that you want to see civilisation fail. And then you call ME a doomer ?! Man, whatever, there seems to be something seriously wrong in this funny world. And once again:
This is exactly, what McPherson wants: Seeing civilisation fail as soon as possible.
THIS can only somebody want, who lives in a rich, wealthy, western country. Wait until civ fails, then ask yourself again, if you like it. I tell you: It is not about civilisation, it is about greed, corruption, cheating, lies of a global minority. This is exactly, what got us into the mess and it will be exactly, what will bring civ down. WHAT A COSMIC LAUGH:
A dream of omnipotence, a dream of money and power, a dream of controlling humankind, the whole planet, a dream of conquering space, the Universe. A dream of a funny, funny minority. And in the end ?! A cosmic laugh, a cosmic yawn. Well then, whatever may come, it will not be the funny dream of the socalled “elite”. You know what? I like that.
And I got very, very much understanding, for those, who are in rage, who feel the pain of Mother Earth, the pain of Nature. I am in rage too. I am in a deep rage and in a deep, deep hurt, pain, sadness. But you know what? WE are Nature TOO. We got claws and teeth, nature got claws and teeth. It’s not the way, that we are bad and nature is good, no. We are in nature and nature is within us, there is absolutely no difference. We are part of a natural, global, cosmic struggle. Nature is part of a cosmic struggle. Everything, the whole Universe is part of a cosmic struggle. This is what I call a “spiritual” struggle, a dimension, that goes beyond mundane modern everyday life. Modern man lost connection to the Universe (and therefore he builds spaceships), he doesn’t feel at home anymore, he is like Kain in the bible. Kain, the farmer, who killed Abel, the nomad. And so, Kain lost his home, his natural connection to Mother Earth and Kain is always on the run for growth, for more and more and more. Kain is the one, who built cities and hierarchies and temples and palasts and industry and communism and capitalism and catholicism and science, civilisation. He is Gilgamesh, he is Faust, he is modern man. But:
Is Kain, the farmer, the bad man and Abel the good man, divided forever? No. Kain and Abel are both two souls in Homo Sapiens, two souls in Nature herself. There is the ever wandering nomad (like some indigenous people even today) without any real civilisation in the modern sense, without any real histtory and there is modern man, striving for a fixed home in time and space, striving for a history. Both, Kain and Abel, the farmer and the nomad are part of the cosmic drama. And there will always be only one solution, if we want peace and fulfillment:
We need to get in Balance, Nature and civilisation in Balance, we and Nature in Balance. In the end, we are Nature and Nature is us. The image of “evil Nature against us” or “evil Homo Sapiens against good Nature” is a total illusion, a fata morgana, a childish image. We are Nature, Nature is us. That’s reality, no matter, if we survive as a species or not, makes no big difference in the cosmic drama. The cosmic drama will go on. Forever, eternally. That’s why we feel rage and sadness, when we see Mother Earth, Nature suffering:
Because it is about us. What we do to Nature, we do to ourselves. What we do to others, we do to ourselves. We can never run away from ourselves, wherever we go, whatever we do. Modern man needs to go inside, away from too much material stuff. Then he will find peace, even, if he should go extinct or whatever. The ancient people, indigenous, wandering nomads knew/know, that they are part of the cosmic drama, therefore, they are (mostly) in Balance with Nature and in a daily (and nightly) connection with the cosmic drama. Modern man has forgotten his natural roots. But he can never really loose these roots, because man is Nature, Nature is man.
Nah, McPherson “knows” that civilisation will end when humans go extinct. I really don’t see how you can equate my position with McPherson’s. Is it because you dream of an unending civilisation? Good luck with that (nah, I don’t mean that really).
You said, you want to see civilisation fail and that is exactly what Guy McPherson and most of the commentariat at his blog wants to see.
” Is it because you dream of an unending civilisation? Good luck with that (nah, I don’t mean that really).”
Me, personally, I give a shit about civilisation, I had my life, I got older than I ever imagined already anyway. And I repeat:
I don’t have any descendants, so from my very own personal perspective civ may fail tomorrow or in 20 years, it makes not much difference to me, personally. But think about 7 billion other people^^
Nemesis, your comment above in no way shows that I agree with McPherson on all points related to our future and the future of the planet. It is no big deal that both of us want to see civilisation fail (though I’m not even certain McPherson wants that anymore, since his belief that humans will go extinct in 20 years or less is firmly entrenched in his mind. Please stop equating us. I am not a doomer in the sense of McPherson’s doomerism. If you still believe that, then please keep it to yourself as I’ve already denied it multiple times (explaining why) and yet you keep repeating it. Desist.
Honestly, I’ve had the uncomfortable feeling that you were the ultra doomer here, not Mike. Not doomer, hater. Just my opinion but I’m being honest. I certainly don’t presume to speak for anyone else here, I want that to be clear, but my impression to date has been that what Mike wants is to see things get better for ALL of life on earth. LIFE. When I talked about the loss of Eagles as a sacrifice to electricity, you said,
“There is no technology without pain, without suffering.”
It’s clear to most I think, that you’re a very angry person. You attack everyone who has a different opinion from you with multi-layered posts of rage, laying everyone else low with your unrelenting proclamations of doom. You rage here, you rage on McPherson’s blog. But not for the earth it seems, but for ‘economic justice’. Money appears to be your focus, not life. I agree with you that poverty is unfair (I live below the poverty line myself) and I also hope for balance. But when it comes to the earth, you seem just as willing as everyone else to get in line with the corporatists you decry. You’re interest in the environment extends only as far as it can be used to punish the rich in your struggle against class inequalities.
Why don’t you cut us all some slack, read between the lines and stop attacking everything that moves. Unless you’re one of the many people I’ve met in my life who genuinely believe they are Perfect, and there are a lot of them, it might be an idea to remove the beam from your own eye before pointing out the splinters from everyone elses. Only perfection can judge.
So, I am the ultra doomer, not mike, who wants civ to see fail. You know, I give a shit. It’s wonderful weather here in Germany, everything is blooming, the birds are singing, I just enjoy spring now, nothing to gain, nothing to loose, just a happy person. Have fun.
You think, I am a “very angry” person? Why should I? You know, I did always what I wanted, all my life. I left home, when I was 13 years old, I quit funny school, when I was 15. I never did any slave job, I gave/give a shit about any boss, any slave driver, hahaha. Most I learned, I learned on my own. I learned about Empire on my own, I learned about the final outcome of Empire on my own, so I give a shit about politics, I give a shit about monetary achievement, I give shit about living in a tin can, I give a shit about living a second hand life. I get up, whenever I want, I go to sleep whenever I want. I learned to play chess on my own, I learned to play the guitar on my own, I learned to sing on my own, I learned to be really FREE on my own. I arived at home within myself, totally at ease, being one of the happiest person walking on the planet. Do you think, that I am angry because of climate change? Why should I? As I said several times, I realized that mess some 30 years ago and acted accordingly, so I didn’t hoard much material stuff, I didn’t procreate, but instead, I strived for peace, freedom, happiness, things, you cannot buy, no matter, how much money you have. You know, I am just very, very happy, because I took the right way and I took it very early. I wish, I could share some of the happiness, freedom, peace I feel. But at the same time, I know, that everyone has to go his very own way and learn his very own things. I didn’t waste my life with funny material shit and a second hand life, so there is absolutely no reason, to be angry. You know:
You just don’t know me, but it absolutely doesn’t matter at all.
You are just angry, that I saw you on the Fox News road with your claims against wind power and I said it LOUD. Don’t be angry, mate, because anger is just not good for blood pressure ect.
Nemesis, I am dumbfounded that you can equate a desire (wishful thinking) for civilisation to end (as it destroys the environment) with doomers who think the world is about to end. The two ideas are completely orthogonal to each other. Hopefully, enough said.
” Nemesis, I am dumbfounded that you can equate a desire (wishful thinking) for civilisation to end (as it destroys the environment) with doomers who think the world is about to end. The two ideas are completely orthogonal to each other. Hopefully, enough said.”
You said, you want civilisation to fail. And, as I said, that’s exactly, what Guy McPherson and most of the commentariat at his blog wants. Make of it, whatever you prefer. And no, the WORLD will surely not end, if civilisation would fail- but it would cost billions of human lifes, it would cost most human life on Earth. The WORLD as such, the UNIVERSE surely would give a shit about that, because the Universe will just go on. To me, to the Universe, death and extinction is natural, makes no difference. But I repeat:
Think about 7 billion people and your descendants (if you have any), your family (if you have any) will fail too, if civilisation fails.
Nemesis, I care about the planet and about my kids. If they are to have a future and if most species are to have a future, the quicker civilisation fails, the better. Billions will likely die anyway, because of environmental degradation and it will be a larger number the longer civilisation goes on (e.g. how about if its failure comes – as it eventually must – when there are 11-12 billion people on the planet?), provided that civilisation doesn’t degrade the environment quickly enough to ensure that the population will start to level out (but not in a pleasant way).
Mike,
I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that most scientists and well-informed people are pessimistic. That’s not what I’ve gathered from all the interactions I’ve had. If anything, it’s a mix of optimism, realism, and pessimism.
Bryant, I’m not sure where you are getting the idea that I think most scientists and well-informed people are pessimistic. Perhaps it is the post at this link. If so, then you are completely wrong. That post was referring to commenters at this blog and didn’t even claim that all those here other than you were pessimistic. Please read comments before replying to them. If that wasn’t the comment, then accept my apologies and I ask you to point to the comment that you were replying to.
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
Sometimes I do really feel a bit strange because of some comments here at fractalplanet :-) You think, it is only my “believe”, that climate change boosts El Ninos?! You haven’t seen any research on climate change boosting El Nino? Well, maybe it is because, you never investigated that topic? Man, it is just a logical conclusion, that climate change boosts El Nino. See here for instance:
” Increasing frequency of extreme El Niño events due to greenhouse warming
El Niño events are a prominent feature of climate variability with global climatic impacts. The 1997/98 episode, often referred to as ‘the climate event of the twentieth century’ and the 1982/83 extreme El Niño3, featured a pronounced eastward extension of the west Pacific warm pool and development of atmospheric convection, and hence a huge rainfall increase, in the usually cold and dry equatorial eastern Pacific. Such a massive reorganization of atmospheric convection, which we define as an extreme El Niño, severely disrupted global weather patterns, affecting ecosystems, agriculture6, tropical cyclones, drought, bushfires, floods and other extreme weather events worldwide. Potential future changes in such extreme El Niño occurrences could have profound socio-economic consequences. Here we present climate modelling evidence for a doubling in the occurrences in the future in response to greenhouse warming. We estimate the change by aggregating results from climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phases 3 (CMIP3; ref. 10) and 5 (CMIP5; ref. 11) multi-model databases, and a perturbed physics ensemble. The increased frequency arises from a projected surface warming over the eastern equatorial Pacific that occurs faster than in the surrounding ocean waters, facilitating more occurrences of atmospheric convection in the eastern equatorial region…”
And thx again for the ad homiem attack. I like that. You know why? Because it is ALWAYS a proof of unsertainty, when it comes to facts. I just have my fun here and I do REALLY learn so much here, even about human beings and communication tactics. You know, I am a chess player, so I am always interested in tactics and strategies. I just never got any ad hominem attacks during any chess game so far. A good player gives a shit, if he wins or looses, he just enjoys playing- at least, when he got a cool opponent. It is about the game, not about winning or loosing. Therefore, a good player will never attack any opponent with ad hominem attacks.
Uhm, if you want to tell the TRUTH in Empire, then you could be in real danger, yes, you could be KILLED for telling the Truth- therefore, John Doe, the source of the Panama Papers, remains anonymous:
” John Doe’s Manifesto
… Income inequality is one of the defining issues of our time. It affects all of us, the world over. The debate over its sudden acceleration has raged for years, with politicians, academics and activists alike helpless to stop its steady growth despite countless speeches, statistical analyses, a few meagre protests, and the occasional documentary. Still, questions remain: why? And why now?
The Panama Papers provide a compelling answer to these questions: massive, pervasive corruption. And it’s not a coincidence that the answer comes from a law firm. More than just a cog in the machine of “wealth management,” Mossack Fonseca used its influence to write and bend laws worldwide to favour the interests of criminals over a period of decades…”
As long as this global corruption shit goes on, it will be very interesting, to see, if massive global corruption is a good base for climate mitigation… I just can’t help it, I got some serious doubt here 8-)
Uhm, if you really want to see civilisation fail, you need to get rid of all these lying, cheating, threatening rich folks, because they will do EVERYTHING, to keep the system alive- they know, as soon, as the system fails, all their funny money will be worth nothing anymore, muhahahaha 8-)
“… Other recent studies have suggested that climate models may not be accurately assessing the balance of water and ice in clouds in some circumstances.
The new paper suggests the effects of a flaw in the model could be serious: Based on its analysis of one model of climate change, the cloud error could mean an additional 1.3 degrees Celsius of warming than expected.
Negotiators at last year’s climate talks in Paris approved a target of keeping temperatures from rising by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius over average temperatures in the preindustrial era. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that keeping global average temperatures from rising by more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) could prevent some of the disastrous effects of climate change from occurring.
The new paper, then, if proved correct, would narrow the range left for the climate panel’s goal to 0.7 degree, and the Paris target to just 0.2 degree Celsius…”
Yeah, other papers have done similar things—found that the models that best simulated some particular cloud process tended to have higher sensitivity—but I gathered this paper was weaker than the others. At any rate, these studies go into the mix that help us zero in on the best estimate of climate sensitivity, but since there are many papers in that mix already no one paper really moves the best estimate.
We had the issue about climate models of the IPCC here at fractalplanet recently, There is a critical new post by Gavin Schmidt at realclimate.org, investigating the models:
” Literally every paper I’ve written about models has discussed the need for improvements. In my TED talk I specifically said (pace Box) that all models are wrong…”
Nemesis, you continue to amaze me with your selectivity and willingness to jump to conclusions.
Mai, here is a link to Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist who knows clouds pretty well: https://mobile.twitter.com/andrewdessler
Note the entries on April 7 in regard to the cloud study.
Have you ever noticed the very interesting thread about “Conservative Scientists and it’s Consequences” at the highly respected http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php ?
Com on, while you keep repeating “No, not that bad! Not that fast! Not that hot!”, science keeps repeating “Underestimated! Faster! Hotter!”- have you ever noticed?
The fires in Canada could burn for months, the regular fire season is still ahead. The fires at the heart of the canadian oil industries, that replaced 88.000 citizens, are growing right now and their are heading to Sasketchuan. I have seen such pictures in Siberia in 2014 and 2015. It really has the taste of Dante’s Inferno:
And when you look at the forecast for the northern hemisphere, it still looks just dire. Almost no rain on the northamerican continent, huge positive anomalies (+20°C) up in the north way up right into the arctic region, as well as on Greenland (again) and notice the twisted, cluttered, very strange Jet Stream:
The default among some here at FP is that things are much better than the news stories would have us believe. They ignore or downplay any stories they don’t like. Those are our Optimists. Others may feel the exactly the opposite, our Pessimists, and still others will attempt as best they can to interpret the information for themselves, good or bad, without bias, our Realists. Most, I’m guessing, of those who want to convince others of their particular POV are really trying to convince themselves. What any of us ultimately decide to believe may well have everything to do with where we are in our lives and nothing to do with reality.
As long, as global politics goes on the way it always did, anthropogenic climate change will just get worse and worse, no matter, what is being discussed at fractalplanet or elsewhere, no matter, if climate models fit to reality or not. For now, politics goes on praising consumerism and ignorance in the media all day long, while climate news get maybe 5 minutes per week. I just have to look at the direction a society is heading to and I know, where it will end up (history gives countless lessons about that). I just look at politics today and I can tell about temperatures and climate desasters tomorrow. So, without reasonable politics, even the best science, best models, best predictions won’t save us at all. That’s dead simple. People like James Hansen realized that too, therefore, he fights criminal politics and the destruction of the future of the young generations legally.
When I go to Google and search for “luxury”, then I get 783.000.000 results, hahahaha. I don’t need to know more than that. Funny “luxury” just does not fit to the Darwinian struggle for survival, no way.
A slap in the face for anybody, who believed, that a single El Nino would ease the California drought significantly:
” 9.5.2016 – Gov. Jerry Brown orders long-term conservation measures as California drought persists
Gov. Jerry Brown issued a sweeping executive order Monday that permanently prohibits certain forms of water waste and makes monthly water-use reporting an ongoing requirement.
The order comes as some urban water suppliers have suggested the drought is over and called for the state’s drought rules to be weakened or eliminated. Brown’s order, though, rebuffs the notion that California can ever fully escape from drought.
“Californians stepped up during this drought and saved more water than ever before,” Brown said in a statement. “But now we know that drought is becoming a regular occurrence and water conservation must be a part of our everyday life…”
” 5.5.2016 – Infographic 229 drought maps show just how thirsty California has become
The majority of California is experiencing extreme to exceptional drought despite El Niño-related precipitation in recent weeks and the latest U.S. Drought Monitor report said the state’s drought situation still remains “very serious.”
The Drought Monitor, which collects data from 50 different weather indicators, have shown an increasingly red California since 2011, the last time the drought map was clear…”
I leave your usual street jargon out and just concentrate on what’s left of your comments. Well, you “knew that stuff already”? Cool. For how long do you know? Can’t be that long, because, when I talked about the California drought and the Ridiculously Resilient Ridge, you played it down and doubted, that the RRR will be really resilient:
” And how common and long-lasting the RRR will be in the future is far from certain from everything I’ve read.”
” There’s one thing you’re missing though, and that’s El Nino. Super El Ninos are expected to become more common in the future, so the ridge will go away when such an event occurs.”
But the RRR and the California drought is still resilient, the El Nino didn’t ease Californias drought significantly and the drought will just go on: Quote Sen. Brown:
” “But now we know that drought is becoming a regular occurrence…”
Kindly point out where I said the El Nino would eliminate the drought. And guess what, the blob is gone: http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/oceanographer-pacific-ocean-blob-is-gone-but-will-return
That means the ridge is with it. Case closed.
As for your question on whether our current governmental/economic system can deal with climate change, my answer is a resounding yes. Look at what China’s doing to cut emissions or Obama rapid string of regulations to cut down on CO2 and CH4 emissions.
Ooooh, yeees, China is a perfect example of honest politics o_o, just like Amerika is another PERFECT example of honest politics.
And, sure, the blob is gone, the RRR is gone. And it will NEVER come back. Case closed.
But, please allow one more naive question:
WHAT the Hell are we doing here at fractalplanet and elsewhere ?! All these climate discussions, all that fear about climate change, for what ?! I mean, everything just looks so rosy. Honest politics all over, everybody is cutting emissions like Hell ect ect ect. So, why don’t we close the whole topic? Hallelujah!
I don’t mean to suggest that realists can’t be optimistic or pessimistic or whathaveyou. I certainly wouldn’t say that an Optimist can’t be a Realist by definition. Non-sequitur. One has nothing to do with the other.
The question lies rather in why anyone believes as they do about anything. Because they prefer to or because they believe after an honest review of the information at hand, good and bad, that their POV is the most accurate. That doesn’t mean that the realist is correct in his assessments. None of us knows enough about anything to suggest that any view we hold dear are infallible. Just that we’ve made an honest attempt to be fair. One definition of an fallible realist.
As I said, I look at it from a systemic POV, therefore I don’t just look into the physics of climate change, but also into the political/economic physics, that is causing climate change. It has been proven a million times, that the political system is corrupted through and through. Serious question:
Do you think, that a corrupt political/economic system will solve climate change or even adapt to it properly?
Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system. Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic. For what it’s worth.
” Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system.”
So you think, the slaves, who were born into a corrupted slave system and are depenendent on it for survival, are all corrupt, because they are forced to live in that system? A baby then is corrupted as soon as it born in a corrupt system? Sorry, but that sounds like corrupted Empire ideology to me.IF YOUR CLAIM IS TRUE, THEN I CAN GIVE A FUNNY S.H.I.T. ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSIBILITY AND JUST ENJOY LIFE LIKE TRUMP AND IDIOTS, BECAUSE WE ARE ALL CORRUPT ANYWAY !
You know, there is a reason, why I drive just a bike, why I don’t have any shadow company in Panama, there is a reason, why I don’t spread lies and cheating like ExxonMobil et al. Wanna know the reason? I can tell you:
I watch in a mirror every morning, when I got up and wash my face. And I want to see a straight and honest person, when I look in the mirror at morning, just because I got a consciousness. And because of that, I did not procreate and I sleep like an angel at night.
You know, whatever you might say about corruption, cheating, lies:
I don’t have children like Trump, the Koch brothers or the Rokefellas ect. CHILDREN, grandchildren and their children will have to live with the results of a corrupt system, a system of lies, cheating and brainwash. These children, brought to life by corrupt individuals will have to live with the desastrous consequences of climate change and ecological destruction/exploitation.
But NOT my children, they won’t face anything of that shit, because I did not procreate for very good reasons. You know, no matter if everybody is corrupt (as you claim) or not:
Just that fact gives me satisfaction, gives me confidence and peace of mind :-)
Btw, if your claim is true and we are all corrupt anyway, then please tell me the difference of you, the Koch Brothers, Donald Trump, Gavin Schmidt or James Hansen…
I don’t actually remember saying that we’re all corrupt. You seem to be rather liberal in your interpretations of what other people actually say. You might want to go back and reread that post just a bit more carefully.
A little humor along with a reason why we should look for consensus when trying to determine our approach to a subject with as much gravitas as change climate.
Maybe I misunderstood your comment. But to me it sounds like we are all currupted:
” Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system.”
When I accused the oil industries, you said:
” Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.
As I’ve said before, I’m not pointing any fingers.”
I have to wear clothes too and I ride on roads layerd with oil with my bike. The heating in the house where I live for rent is fueled with oil. The products I eat are made with the help of oil, every single packaging of food is made of oil. There is fuckin oil in my computer and fuckin oil in my guitar strings and fuckin oil in the wheels of my bike. Even sun panels are made of oil, wind power plants are made of oil. But am I corrupted? I would starve to death, if I would ban all oil. I couldn’t even walk on any street, because all streets are made of oil, so I could’t leave the house anymore. But does that mean that I am corrupted? Then I’d be corrupted whatever I do. Then everybody would be corrupted, whatever he does. But then I and everybody else can give a shit about climate change, because we are all corrupted anyway, no matter, what we do or don’t do. Then I am no better, than any SUV driver or anyone who flies with his own private jet.
But there is a very bad downside in this kind of thinking:
That we are all corrupted anyway, is exactly, what all the ignorant consumer sheeples say all day. And so they give a shit about climate change and consume like hell as much as they can and they sing in a choir “Every beggar is just as ignorant, as I am, because even a beggar depends on oil!” on their way to extinction.
This funny Empire game of “we are all corrupt anyway, so let’s eat and drink, tomorrow we will be dead anyway!” is a very funny game, isn’t it? It is the PERFECT recipe for a TOTAL desaster.
Yes, the next record low in summer arctic sea ice and the first blue ocean event in the Arctic is knocking at your door, dear bobcobbblog, can’t you hear it? :-)
Hey nemesis,
I just call out the fools like I see them, many of which are present at the sea ice blog. Can you hear it, the first blue ocean event isn’t happening this year or anytime soon? ;)
Com on, the arctic sea iceblog is one of the BEST blogs on the internet, otherwise YOU wouldn’t be there too ;-)
About the Arctic:
I told you, that this summer 2016 there will be a new record low in arctic sea ice and
THEN there will be not much ice left, that could prevent a blue ocean event in the very near future :-)
About fools:
I feel very much like a fool (I said that already), as I am surrounded by optimists like you are all my life. Optimists, like the ever growing bunch of SUV drivers ect.
Not to get into an argument with you, no interest in that, but you had asked the question,
“Do you think, that a corrupt political/economic system will solve climate change or even adapt to it properly?”
To which I answered,
“No, I don’t.
“Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system. Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic. For what it’s worth.”
I was answering your question about being part of a corrupt political/economic system. Which is why I went on to say,
“Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic.”
I was referring to Power Players. Most people are not Power Players and I wasn’t referring to them. Enough said.
@Anybody, who thinks, China’s CO 2 emissions are significantly declining:
” 4.5.2016 – Scenario analysis of CO2 emissions from China’s civil aviation industry through 2030
Highlights
– CO2 emissions from China’s aviation transport would almost double from 2013 to 2030.
Key impact factors include jet fuel substitute, fuel intensity and traffic demand.
Air traffic demand has the most significant influence on the CO2 emissions.
Policy suggestions include carbon tax, enhanced R&D policy and carbon offset etc.
Abstract
… Despite its importance, an analysis of CO2 emissions with the future development of this industry and the impacts of crucial factors is missing from the literature. To bridge this gap, this study conducts scenario analysis of CO2 emissions from this sector through 2030 and assesses the influences from the key influential factors, including the adoption of low carbon jet fuel, the improvement of fuel intensity due to technological advancements of aircraft, and the increase of air traffic demand. The results show that the air traffic demand has the most significant influence on emissions…”
Well, and this article fits perfectly to the paper above:
” 10.5.2016 – China and US set for airline emissions clash
Responsibilities of rich and emerging economies at issue in Montreal meeting to thrash out aviation’s contribution to international climate action
China and the US are set for a fight over the split of responsibilities for cutting airline emissions at a UN meet this week.
The outcome is critical to the environmental integrity of the sector’s main contribution to international climate efforts: a carbon offsetting scheme.
Green groups warn that draft proposals by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) exempt nearly half the sector’s emissions.
In a submission ahead of the Montreal summit Wednesday to Friday, China called for rich countries to take on steeper cuts.
“China notes with concern the reluctance of some of the developed countries to take the lead to reduce their international aviation emissions dramatically to leave room for the growth of developing countries,” it said.
The US, on the other hand, stressed the market-based measure should “achieve the widest possible coverage”.
It is a re-run of arguments in climate talks that were laid to rest with the adoption of the Paris Agreement, under which national governments determined their own commitments…
Flightpath 1.5, a coalition of NGOs, estimates the emissions gap at 7.8 billion tonnes of CO2 between 2020 and 2040. If, as they urge, the sector sets more ambitious emissions curbs in line with the Paris, the gulf widens.
Yet 40% of emissions in the first five years will not be covered, due to carve-outs for poor and small markets, said WWF’s Brad Schallert.
“With that level of exemptions in the text, the aviation industry is really undermining its own target and any credibility.” “
How does this undermine the fact that China’s emissions IN TOTAL HAVE GONE DOWN?! God, you’re a blockhead.
And the blog itself is fine, but some of the commenter are less than impressive.
Now will you do everyone a favor and shut up!!!!!!
Yes, yes, I hear that for decades now. Man, it is no problem, to fiddle with numbers. The economic system does it all the time, fiddlig the numbers is SYSTEM IMMANENT in the economic global system. But anyway, have you even read the Abstract of the paper above? It says:
“… Despite its importance, an analysis of CO2 emissions with the future development of this industry and the impacts of crucial factors is missing from the literature… The results show that the air traffic demand has the most significant influence on emissions…”
” 28.3.2016 – Uncertainties around reductions in China’s coal use and CO2 emissions
Chinese coal consumption dropped 2.9% in 2014 according to preliminary official statistics released in 2015. This was hailed as historic after China’s meteoric growth in the 2000s. The International Energy Agency used it to estimate ~1.5% reduction in Chinese fossil CO2 emissions for 2014, and an unprecedented 0.2% reduction in global emissions. Similar preliminary coal consumption statistics are announced every year, and will be watched closely after China’s recent slowdown in emissions growth and pledge to peak emissions in 2030 or earlier. However, Chinese energy statistics are frequently revised and often contain large anomalies, implying high uncertainty. For example, BP used different Chinese data to estimate a 0.9% increase in 2014 CO2 emissions. Here, we analyse these preliminary announcements, with an approach that can be used to assess the robustness of similar future announcements. We show that the preliminary 2.9% reduction in coal consumption is inappropriate for estimating CO2 emissions, that coal-derived energy consumption stayed flat but is likely to have decreased in 2015, and that Chinese fossil CO2 emissions probably increased ~0.8% in 2014. We also analyse recent revisions of official energy statistics, and find that they imply 925 MtCO2 (11.2%) higher emissions for 2013, and 7.6 GtCO2 (9.2%) higher total emissions for 2000–2013…“
And what does the New York Times say about China’a CO2 emissions from coal plants?:
” 3.11.2015 – China Burns Much More Coal Than Reported, Complicating Climate Talks
China, the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases from coal, has been burning up to 17 percent more coal a year than the government previously disclosed, according to newly released data. The finding could complicate the already difficult efforts to limit global warming.
Even for a country of China’s size, the scale of the correction is immense. The sharp upward revision in official figures means that China has released much more carbon dioxide — almost a billion more tons a year according to initial calculations — than previously estimated.
The increase alone is greater than the whole German economy emits annually from fossil fuels…”
After all, it does not make me wonder, that China is dreaming of a fleet of nuclear power plants at sea (like John said above) right now 8-)
About shutting up:
I will shut up as soon as I give up the climate discussion completely. But for now, there is ~1% hope left in my mind. But with a little help of yours and alike, this 1% will soon be annihilated and then you get your silence. Not far away anymore ;-)
And another one for you, bobcobbblog (got that from whatsupwiththat, hahaha):
” 5.5.2016 – Plans for coal-fired power in Asia are ‘disaster for planet’ warns World Bank
Experts have offered stark warnings that proposed power plants in India, China, Vietnam and Indonesia would blow Paris climate deal if they move ahead…”
If if this man gets president, then you can forget the US climate discussion and the END will be near. This man incorporates the perfect Capitalist in a perfect performance.
We can learn from history, that, when the times get tough, the mass calls for “strong hardliner guys” like Mr. Trump et al.
Trump is one of those Power Players, John mentioned. Imgagine:
The perfect capitalist as president of the United States. He doesn’t need the backup of Rockefellas et al, like all the other candites at the right and the left. With Trump, you’d get the perfect capitalist Oligarch, standing completely on his own money, like Putin for instance. Then money and power, ultimate capitalism combined with anti-science agitation, anti-muslim fighting, anti-abortion ect ect, back to the middle ages, fast forward to free capitalism, free global market for every Power Player individual. Let’s privatize the whole planet !… it’s happening already, it’s called “Globalisation”.
But Trump is nothing compared to chinese capitalism. Today I saw a documentary about a chinese corporation, a complete city with 57 000 workers, all in a yellow uniform, singing the hymn of the corporation every morning, all living in the corporation city with husband/wife and children, all working for nothing compared to american income, capitalism a la military, army-style, capitalism like WAR, GLOBAL WAR against the planet, against humankind. This is the near future, the final stage of global capitalism.
Fractal Planet 
Bryant, I would. Unfortunately I don’t think the measure that needs to be on the ballot will be on time. Man, as a whole, needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to a conclusion and so we are. Downsizing on a drastic level is the only thing that will answer the problem in the long term. Long term being years, perhaps decades. Instead, we keep trying to figure out how to keep the paradigm in motion another year, another decade, one more century longer. We keep cutting down, digging up, and leaving our wastes behind on a planet that is simply too small to accommodate the wants of our burgeoning population. It’s a numbers game.
Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.
As I’ve said before, I’m not pointing any fingers. I have no right to. I live that way as well. The deck has been stacked. Given the billions of us walking around on this planet, this is the only way the system will work. Trying to live any other way will eventually result in imprisonment or death. Just ask any homeless person. I offer no solutions. The system is the problem. It is what it is.
LikeLike
@John
” Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.”
Yes, I said that already several times. Most sheeples in the rich countries give a shit. But I have to repeat myself:
These sheeples are in no way responsible for a whole century of anthropogenic climate change denial and all the propaganda against renewable energy and shit. You know, Jimmy Carter for instance once put a solar panel on the white house and Ronald Reagan took it off again. Do I REALLY have to school you in the politics of the militarty-industrial complex, resp. the fossil industries ?! Do you realize, that you claim indirectly, that Exxon is in a lawsuit for no reason ?! The whole fuckin system could be driven by renewable energy for many centuries already! NO?! Gush, then we are fucked anyway.
LikeLike
Correction:
” The whole fuckin system could be driven by renewable energy for many centuries already!” should be:
” The whole fuckin system could be driven by renewable energy for many, many DECADES already!”
LikeLike
I posted about VW, praising e-cars on their webpage, while at the very same time they try to BLOCK e-cars in the EU:
” All the data, all the facts: The five e-models from Volkswagen
Volkswagen places a top priority on things like perfection and tradition
when it comes to electric vehicles. When we develop electric cars and
plug-in hybrids our guiding principle is to achieve sustainable transport
without making any compromises. Here is a look at all the vehicles
in our portfolio…”
http://emobility.volkswagen.de/int/en/private/cars.html
” 28.4.2016 – VW and Shell try to block EU push for electric cars
Industry giants’ call for biofuels over electric and fuel-efficient cars puts Europe’s carbon emissions targets at risk…”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/28/vw-and-shell-try-to-block-eu-push-for-cleaner-cars
I could go on FOREVER with such examples of double-brain-fuck in the corporate system. It’s not just VW, it’s the whole automobil industry, it is called LOBBYISM- ever heard about that?^^ Here’s another example, among MILLIONS of examples:
LikeLike
I mean, even the ROCKEFFELRS, who own/owned ExxonMobil, are now opponents of ExxonMobil- so PLEASE, don’t tell me, that you want to defend Exxon in any sense, like “we are all responsible, because we consume their oil”!:
” 15.4.2016 – ExxonMobil, Rockefellers face off in climate battle
US energy giant ExxonMobil is facing an onslaught from environmentalists and some shareholders alleging it hid what it knew about the effects of fossil fuels on climate change.
In an ironic twist: among the opponents is the Rockefeller Family Fund, built on the fortune amassed by John D. Rockefeller, founder of Standard Oil, which became Esso, then Exxon and then, in 1999, ExxonMobil.
The RFF met last January, in secret, in Manhattan with environmental nongovernmental groups “to establish in the public’s mind that Exxon is a corrupt institution that has pushed humanity (and all creation) towards climate chaos and grave harm,” according to an internal document on the meeting seen by AFP…”
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-04-exxonmobil-rockefellers-climate.html#jCp
LikeLike
GET THAT:
” Exxon is a corrupt institution that has pushed humanity (and all creation) towards climate chaos and grave harm”
http://phys.org/news/2016-04-exxonmobil-rockefellers-climate.html#jCp
LikeLike
SURE, we are all just human beings, even these suckerz of ExxonMobil et al- BUT TRUTH IS TRUTH AND A LIE IS A LIE. If we don’t manage to sort that out, we are done.
LikeLike
You don’t need 10 posts to make 1 point. Once again, you seem to be forcing an argument on me I have not made. Who is defending Exxon? My point is that I think your argument greatly oversimplifies reality in a way that pretends the rest of us bear no responsibility. People don’t buy oil because Exxon told them to. People buy oil to enjoy the advantages it provides them. I just don’t think this “evil them vs. good us” argument is useful or realistic. Energy makes things possible. Companies made money selling that energy to people who wanted it. Those companies also did some things they rightly deserve blame for. But oil companies didn’t change the climate—oil use did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Scott Johnson, THIS is not “my” point, it is the point of an OFFICIAL LAWSUIT:
” Exxon is a corrupt institution that has pushed humanity (and all creation) towards climate chaos and grave harm”
http://phys.org/news/2016-04-exxonmobil-rockefellers-climate.html#jCp
I didn’t sue ExxonMobil. Get that?! You have to tell your claim to the Rockefellers opponents of ExxonMobil ect, who charge ExxonMobil, not me. I am just a nobody, I just quote the message, nope else. So, if you think, this lawsuit is not proper, not honest, then I am the simply wrong recipient, I am just a nobody, thank god.
LikeLike
And one more:
I am in no way about “good vs. evil”, I give shit about “good vs. evil”. But I give very much about CAUSE AND EFFECT, because that is a Natural Law. If we don’t give a shit about cause and effect, then this game will go on forever and any further bla bla about climate mitigation is nothing but a JOKE, a suicidal joke.
LikeLike
@SJ
I mean, you are the one, who posted this on your twitter- and you did that for reasonable reasons, didn’t you?:
” 3.7.1977 – Climate Peril May Force Limits On Coal and Oil, Carter Aide Says
To avoid accumulation in the air of sufficient carbon dioxide to cause major climate changes, it may ultimately be necessary to restrict the burning of coal and other fossil fuels, according to Dr. William D. Nordhaus of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers…”
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C04E4DD1E39E334BC4B53DFB066838C669EDE
There are people out there, who twist the truth, who hide the truth, who think, they can fiddle cause and effect to their very own purposes and then leave the mess to the coming generations. If this game of doublespeak, doublethink does not stop, then what?! Finito. We just can’t afford things like the VW scandal forever, can we?! But it’s exactly, what’s going on all over the planet. Remember the fuckin Panama Papers shit. ONE little company in Panama maintained 250 000 (two hundred and fifty thousand) phantom companies alone. Now start to calculate: Panama, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Caiman Islands, Germany (yes) and so on and so on… what do you think, how many of these phantom companies are there on the planet? MILLIONS. Do you think, there will ever be any reasonable climate mitigation, any reasonable politics ect at all, as long, as this kinda game is going on?
You know, I am not speaking for myself, I don’t have much to lose. I am speaking for Mother Earth and the coming generations. And another thing:
I do highly repect your patience with me, you let me speak and I really appreciate that. Thank you.
LikeLike
Yes, good points. It is the users of fossil fuels who use fossil fuels. Of course, the producers of fossil fuels are also users of fossil fuels and, because their profits rely on people buying those fuels, they will promote their use. But the users can’t absolve themselves from blame just because someone else sold them the fuel (or products containing/embedding the fuel). Of course, it is extremely difficult to avoid using fossil fuels in some way but that is our excuse, not the FF companies.
And the other point of Nemesis not needing to post myriads of comments to make one comment is also good. As I’d asked before, Nemesis, please pause before hitting submit to make sure you’ve added all the ideas you want to get across in the comment, instead of following up with multiple further snippets. I subscribe, to keep up to date and every comment comes into my e-mail inbox.
LikeLike
Of interest,
The Arctic is facing a decline in sea ice that might equal the negative record of 2012
“Sea ice physicists from the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), are anticipating that the sea ice cover in the Arctic Ocean this summer may shrink to the record low of 2012. The scientists made this projection after evaluating current satellite data about the thickness of the ice cover. The data show that the arctic sea ice was already extraordinarily thin in the summer of 2015. Comparably little new ice formed during the past winter. Today Dr Marcel Nicolaus, expert on sea ice, has presented these findings at a press conference during the annual General Assembly of the European Geosciences Union in Vienna.”
https://www.awi.de/nc/en/about-us/service/press/press-release/der-arktis-droht-ein-meereisverlust-wie-im-negativrekordjahr-2012.html
1.5°C vs 2°C global warming – new study shows why half a degree matters
“European researchers have found substantially different climate change impacts for a global warming of 1.5°C and 2°C by 2100, the two temperature limits included in the Paris climate agreement. The additional 0.5°C would mean a 10-cm-higher global sea-level rise by 2100, longer heat waves, and would result in virtually all tropical coral reefs being at risk. The research is published today (21 April) in Earth System Dynamics, an open access journal of the European Geosciences Union (EGU), and is presented at the EGU General Assembly.”
http://www.egu.eu/news/230/15c-vs-2c-global-warming-new-study-shows-why-half-a-degree-matters/
Widespread loss of ocean oxygen to become noticeable in 2030s
“BOULDER—A reduction in the amount of oxygen dissolved in the oceans due to climate change is already discernible in some parts of the world and should be evident across large regions of the oceans between 2030 and 2040, according to a new study led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
“Scientists know that a warming climate can be expected to gradually sap the ocean of oxygen, leaving fish, crabs, squid, sea stars, and other marine life struggling to breathe. But it’s been difficult to determine whether this anticipated oxygen drain is already having a noticeable impact.
“Loss of oxygen in the ocean is one of the serious side effects of a warming atmosphere, and a major threat to marine life,” said NCAR scientist Matthew Long, lead author of the study. “Since oxygen concentrations in the ocean naturally vary depending on variations in winds and temperature at the surface, it’s been challenging to attribute any deoxygenation to climate change. This new study tells us when we can expect the impact from climate change to overwhelm the natural variability.”
https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/20721/widespread-loss-of-ocean-oxygen-become-noticeable-in-2030s
Just a half degree of separation
“The planet is a lot closer to 2 degrees Celsius of warming than official temperature records indicate.”
https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/perspective/19348/just-half-degree-separation
11 nuke facility workers checked for chemical vapor exposure
“The double-walled tanks were presumed to be much safer.
The latest estimate to finish the cleanup of Hanford is $107.7 billion and the work will take until 2060.”
http://www.chron.com/news/article/11-Hanford-workers-checked-for-chemical-vapor-7382474.php
Climate change impact and risks of concrete infrastructure deterioration
“Atmospheric CO2 is a major cause of reinforcement corrosion in bridges, buildings, wharves, and other concrete infrastructure in Australia, United States, United Kingdom and most other countries. The increase in CO2 levels associated with global warming will increase the likelihood of carbonation-induced corrosion. Moreover, temperature rises will increase corrosion rates. Clearly, the impact of climate change on existing and new infrastructure is considerable, as corrosion damage is disruptive to society and costly to repair.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141029611000241
As for the little ones we’ve dismissed as unworthy and unimportant,
Despite their small brains, ravens and crows may be just as clever as chimps, research suggests
“A new study suggests that ravens can be as clever as chimpanzees, despite having much smaller brains, indicating that rather than the size of the brain, the neuronal density and the structure of the birds’ brains play an important role in terms of their intelligence.”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160426101527.htm
LikeLike
” As for the little ones we’ve dismissed as unworthy and unimportant,”
YES, thank you very much to speak that out.
LikeLike
Last comment for today:
In the romantic old school days it was about “good vs. evil”, but NOW it is about survival together or extinction together.
LikeLike
SJ,
I wanted to get a quick comment from you about the post near the end of the page by D in response to the Siberian Shelf acidification study. He mentions methane not blaring oxidized: http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2016/04/cryosat-2-confirms-sea-ice-volume-is-low.html#comments
What do you think?
LikeLike
I’ll second that request. The study in question was this: http://www.adn.com/article/20160424/siberian-erosion-river-runoff-speed-arctic-ocean-acidification
And the comment was “acidic ocean = methane’s not oxidized and gets to the air.” The paper was a Shakhova/Semiletov study, but they don’t seem to mention methane at all.
LikeLike
D is adding a concept onto that in an area where I’m not sure it’s relevant. Anoxia is absolutely a thing that happens where some rivers reach the sea, largely because of fertilizer/nutrient runoff, and areas with larger organic matter inputs will have lower oxygen at the bottom. (Though you might have higher oxygen in the surface layer if phytoplankton are being fertilized.) Judging from this paper, that area sees some of this. But does it reach the level of inhibiting bacterial methane consumption? Over what kind of area? I don’t know.
And if the worry is that there’s a small area of the shelf where oxidation will be reduced, that strikes me as much less important than what’s going on with the actual release from the sediment across the broader area.
LikeLike
SJ,
But doesn’t the study link I provided on anaerobic oxidation of methane in that area kind of put the kibosh on fears of large-scale release from that area? I tend to think so, but I’ll defer to you on this.
You’re a hydrogeologist, so I figure you might like this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/30/another-typical-day-for-greenland-scientists-find-more-reasons-it-will-melt-faster/?postshare=21462036619269&tid=ss_tw
Any thoughts from your hydrogeologist hat?
LikeLike
No, it’s not that simple. Unless we’re talking about a Wadhams-style “methane bomb”, which we don’t need to be.
Yeah, we have a tendency to lump all these outlet glaciers together, but the fine details in each of those fjords can be really important. If only we had the money, resources, and people to study the hell out of all of them…
LikeLike
Nemesis,
If a drunk driver kills a guy on a bike, who is responsible? You have several options.
LikeLike
For the dead bike driver it makes no difference, who is responsible or not. Btw, as a bike driver you are in high danger every day, you are worth nothing as a bike driver in Germany, car drivers hate bike drivers. You are a hero, when you drive a fat SUV or Mercedes, but as a bike driver you are worth a piece of shit. Therefore many bike drivers get killed in Germany every year.
LikeLike
Btw: Most killed bike drivers are children and women.
LikeLike
Isn’t it extremly FUNNY, that all those SUV and Mercedes drivers, who mostly have children and wealth, who have much to lose, give a funny shit about climate change, while I as a nobody, as someone, who has nothing to lose, no descendants ect, am very concerned about climate change? Yes, it is extremely funny, bwahahaha. Do you believe in JUSTICE? I do:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_(mythology)
LikeLike
Justice:
” Massive Victory for 7 Kids in Climate Change Lawsuit in Washington State
Today, in a surprise ruling from the bench in the critical climate case brought by youths against the State of Washington’s Department of Ecology, King County Superior Court Judge Hollis Hill ordered the Department of Ecology to promulgate an emissions reduction rule by the end of 2016 and make recommendations to the state legislature on science-based greenhouse gas reductions in the 2017 legislative session.”
http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/04/29/massive-victory-7-kids-climate-change-lawsuit-washington-state
LikeLike
My analogy was poor. The auto industry manufactures cars knowing that they MIGHT kill. An oil company produces oil knowing that it WILL kill.
A better analogy would be of the smoker who, knowing the risks, dies of cancer. The tobacco industry makes cigarettes knowing that they WILL kill. But the knowledgeable smoker shouldn’t have smoked. And the knowledgeable driver should bike.
LikeLike
Maybe take that as an answer, among millions of answers:
LikeLike
As long, as this kinda funny games go on, there is ZERO hope for any change. And another thing:
I can imagine, that at one point, the young generation will REALLY get extremely angry, because it is about their very own future, it is about their naked survival.
LikeLike
Car makers make cars knowing that those who drive cars will kill (of course, only a proportion). Fossil fuel producers produce fossil fuels knowing that the users of those fuels will kill some people. The users of the cars and the users of the fossil fuels don’t intentionally set out the kill but they do know the stats and the science enough to realise that early deaths will result from that use. No analogy is ever perfect but the only thing stopping people using those implements of death is that it is very inconvenient to do so.
All right, that is an oversimplification but we are all to blame for what is happening.
LikeLike
If we are all to blame, then why is there a lawsuit against ExxonMobil, but no lawsuit against all of us? :-)
LikeLike
I mean, are we all responsible for 100 years of anthropogenic climate change denial and failed climate mitigation politics? And another very interesting question:
I guess you know, that the biggest oil consumer on the globe is the american military (+ military of all other countries). How will they get independent from oil? NEVER.
LikeLike
For instance, who is to blame for these kinda news I hear since DECADES?! :
” 1.5.2016 – Half of leading investors ignoring climate change: study
Almost half of the world’s top 500 investors are doing nothing to address climate change through their investments, a study showed on Monday.
A report by the Asset Owners Disclosure Project (AODP), a not-for-profit organization aimed at improving the management of climate change, found that just under a fifth of the top investors – or 97 managing a total of $9.4 trillion in assets – were taking tangible steps to mitigate global warming
These include investing in low polluting assets or encouraging the companies they invest in to be greener.
A further 157 investors managing a total of $14.2 trillion were taking “first steps” towards addressing climate change, while 246 managing $14 trillion were doing nothing at all, the report said.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-investors-idUSKCN0XS1NO
Are we really all to blame for this kind of persistant, purely profit driven ignorance?
LikeLike
Mmm, well, I can’t imagine why that would be the case. Maybe you’re right and only a few people who run some large corporations are to blame and the rest of us bear no responsibilities for our actions. Gosh, I can sleep easier, now. Thanks.
LikeLike
See, just let these corporations make their funny profit and everything will be just fine, soon. I garantee that.
LikeLike
” Gosh, I can sleep easier, now. Thanks.”
Ah, well, you know, I can sleep PERFECTLY all my life. You know why? I ain’t got anything to lose, no children, no grandchildren, no wealth, nothing. Muhahaha. Yeah, I am completely at ease.
LikeLike
” Paroxysms of Caesars
This man, pale, walks the flowering lawns,
Dressed in black, cigar between his teeth.
The pale man thinks about the Tuileries
In flower…and at times his dead eye flames.
His twenty years of orgy have made him drink!
He told himself: ‘I will extinguish
Liberty As I put out a candle– softly, politely…’
Liberty lives again! He feels worn out.
They’ve caught him. Now what name trembles
On his silent lips? What quick regret?
No one will know: the Emperor’s eye is dead.
He sees again, perhaps, the man in the pince-nez…
And watches drifting from his lighted cigar,
Like evenings at St. Cloud, a thin blue haze.”
– Arthur Rimbaud
LikeLike
Will, I tend to agree with you. That guy D also said last year would see a record minimum for Arctic sea ice, and he was wrong. Also, I believe most of the methane is anaerobicly oxidized in anoxic sediment: https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm15/webprogram/Paper78877.html.
This would seem to suggest that the excessive acidification doesn’t matter.
LikeLike
Well, if by “agree with me” you mean “always be skeptical when an Internet amateur reads something into a science story that isn’t actually in said story,” then good on you. But I know next to nothing about how methane oxidation works (I know next to nothing about ocean chemistry in general, really), hence my asking after it. That link you provided is news to me, and an interesting read.
LikeLike
After all, Mother Nature gives a shit about who is to blame or who is not to blame. It’s all about physics, all about Natural Laws. I like that. I had a hard time to see through all the smoke and mirrors of the industrial-corporate-military complex all my life. But Mother Nature always gives unmistakable facts without any smoke and mirrors. Damned, I appreciate that very much, because I desperately need clear anouncements in a world full of smoke and mirrors 8-)
LikeLike
Interesting letter from James Hansen to lovely, rather privileged Mr. Warren Buffet:
” 28,4,2016 – Mr. Buffett’s Ark
… We need good national and global energy policies to move the world off fossil fuels onto clean energies. However, the Paris climate accord, signed with pomp and circumstance, is only a precatory agreement, based on the hope that each of 190 nations will choose an effective “cap” for their emissions. But when a U.S. citizen is responsible for 25 times more emissions than an Indian citizen, what cap can we expect India to adapt and how would it be enforced?…”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/mr-buffetts-ark_b_9793872.html
Nice letter, isn’t it? I like especially this question of James Hansen:
” But when a U.S. citizen is responsible for 25 times more emissions than an Indian citizen, what cap can we expect India to adapt and how would it be enforced?…”
We are all resonsible? Well, uhm, might be, but some obviously are “a little bit” more responsible than others 8-)
See, without global economic JUSTICE, India, China and other underprivileged countries will surely give a shit about climate change (after all, it’s all about the per capita numbers). Oh, uhm, and the more power and money, the more responsibility, damned ;-)
LikeLike
And another thing is:
SRM is already happening, I have EYES, I am not stupid, I can see it in my area 100%. Am I responsible, is everybody responsible for this kind of SICK “climate mitigation” ?! Not really. But anyway, good luck with this kind of “strategy”.
LikeLike
No, it isn’t happening. It absolutely isn’t.
LikeLike
Interesting^^ How will you “absolutely” know that? You don’t live in my area and you don’t see what I see^^ Man, I live on planet earth for more than half a century and I have NEVER seen what’s going on now in the sky since ~3 years. On some days the sky is clear and blue, then suddenly hundreds of planes appear during the day, flying absolutely PARALLEL, leaving trails that don’t dissolve, but fill the whole sky, the whole sky is completely dimmed then. Just google for “solar radiation management” and you will get 38.700.000 results.
LikeLike
You’re not the first to try to convince me of this baseless conspiracy theory. Here’s an exhaustive resource to help you see through that nonsense: http://contrailscience.com/
LikeLike
I simply trust my eyes. How will you know, what’s goin on MY area?! No way. And I am not the only one, who can see what’s going on here. Even people, who are not interested in climate change or climate engineering, like I do, see and talk about what’s happening in the sky. So, once again:
YOU can’t tell me, what’s goin on in MY area, thousands of miles away from your own area. Can you?^^
LikeLike
No change in trend?
” 2.5.2016 – The Russian Hydrometeorological Center says that since May 2015 every month has been the warmest in history….”
http://siberiantimes.com/other/others/news/n0674-ob-serving-climate-change-in-siberia/
LikeLike
Please stop barking about a “change in trend”. Just a few days ago you correctly stated that El Nino and La Nina don’t change the underlying trend, yet you continue to claim that the current El Nino has… That’s not how this works.
LikeLike
@SJ
” Please stop barking about a “change in trend”. Just a few days ago you correctly stated that El Nino and La Nina don’t change the underlying trend, yet you continue to claim that the current El Nino has… That’s not how this works.”
Oh yes, there is some talent here on board to turn around and twist what others say. So, can you tell me, when did I say, that “the current El Nino changed the trend”, please?^^ I never said that. I call your claim a failed, poor attempt of rhetoric technique, some call it “strawman”, if I remember right.
LikeLike
If you had read my comments here at fractalplanet, you’d realize the really easy- to- observe FACT, that I DENY any influence of El Nino all the time, dear Scott Johnson :-)
LikeLike
No change in trend? Well, why does NOAA saw a change in trend last year already?
” 5.6.2015 – NOAA Study Confirms Global Warming Speed-Up Is Imminent
… The director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, Thomas Karl, told the UK Guardian that “considering all the short-term factors identified by the scientific community that acted to slow the rate of global warming over the past two decades (volcanoes, ocean heat uptake, solar decreases, predominance of La Niñas, etc.) it is likely the temperature increase would have accelerated in comparison to the late 20th Century increases.” ”
Now we are a year later and gained many, many more global temperature records- remember?^^
LikeLike
Link for the citation in my last comment:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/06/05/3666286/global-warming-speed-up/
LikeLike
How many studies do you want, that say, climate change is accelerating? Here’s another one:
” 21.3.2016 – Climate Change Accelerating At ‘Unprecedented’ Rate
A new report released by the World Meteorological Organization shows that climate change is accelerating at an “unprecedented” rate, warning that actions must be taken “before we pass the point of no return…”
http://www.hngn.com/articles/190937/20160321/climate-change-accelerating-at-unprecedented-rate.htm
Want more?
LikeLike
The way of Empire is plastered with smoke and mirros, downplay, cheating, lies until it’s very end. And I really like that.
LikeLike
Nemesis, I have a request: Would you please narrow your number of posts down? I see a dozen posts from you to every one or less from everyone else. It’s like the guy in the back of the room who keeps shouting everyone else down. C’mon.
LikeLike
No problem, I said everything I had to say for today. Summation:
Accelerated climate change, smoke and mirrors all around, SRM. See you tommorow for more pretty news.
LikeLike
SJ, can you just ban him and be done with it?
LikeLike
Hahaha, can’t you stand the truth anymore?^^
LikeLike
See, you can ban me, but you can never ever ban the Truth, Reality. I like that. I like the Truth, I like Reality, because it is 100% unbiased 3:-)
LikeLike
No, the excessive posting
LikeLike
@bobcobbblog
You know, I gotta mousewheel: With a little move of my finger I scroll over any comments I don’t want to see with ease.
Btw: Wanna learn something about Solar Radiation Management? In this video you can hear the statements of pilots, doctors and scientists about Solar Radiation Management and what are contrails and what are no contrails. This video is recorded at an official hearing at the Shasta County Board of Supervisors. These citizens are VERY CONCERNED about Solar Radiation Mangement, so it’s no conspiracy shit
Short version:
Long version:
LikeLike
Here is a recent scientific paper about the really ugly sideeffects of SRM:
” Assessing the direct occupational and public health impacts of solar radiation management with stratospheric aerosols”
http://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-016-0089-0
LikeLike
Recently there is also a Lawsuit against SRM in Canada going on. Watch the video about Solar Radiation Management, listen to all these concerned scientists, pilots, doctors and then tell me:
Are WE ALL responsible for this shit going on ?! WHO is responsible for this kind of climate intervention AGAINST the will of the people ?! I can tell you, who is responsible:
The industrial-corporate-military complex is responsible once again.
We are living in a DEMOCRACY, don’t we ?!^^
LikeLike
No more of this ridiculous contrail conspiracy theory stuff here. I’m not hosting a forum for that imaginary nonsense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@SJ
Ok, no more SRM here at fractalplanet, no problem.
But anyway, it’s rather interesting, that you call all these testimonies of all these scientists, pilots, doctors, biologists ect in the video “ridiculous contrail conspiracy theory stuff”. Anyway, thanks for your statement.
LikeLike
Because it’s just nonsense and fantasy built on a lack of understanding of atmospheric processes. Because it’s unscientific. You can find “scientists, pilots, doctors” etc. that believe in sasquatch, or that the Moon landing was faked—or that climate change is a hoax. That doesn’t create evidence for those claims.
Again, please take advantage of the resource I linked you.
Also, thank you for agreeing to my request.
LikeLike
And please don’t conflate SRM and contrails. The latter may be thought of (by conspiracy theorists) as SRM but SRM can be discussed without discussing contrail conspiracies.
LikeLike
@SJ
If they don’t do/test SRM now on a large scale, they will soon. I don’t say, they are doing it on a regular basis right now. But they are testing. Testing weather/climate manipulation is a long ongoing game, I know that, you know that.
End of SRM story on fractalplanet. For now.
LikeLike
@SJ
” Request: I need one of those calming “Here’s why Trump can’t win the general election” stories every morning until Nov. 9th. Thank you.”
Yes yes, I like that! Trump is one of the biggest a…holes in american history, he is insane and a stupid anthropogenic climate change denier as well.
Thumbs up.
LikeLike
The next please:
Eric Holthaus and NASA about the April global temperature:
” April 2016 was very likely warmest April on record. ~0.25°C above 2nd place; a landslide”
LikeLike
Here you can see, how seriously all IPCC models underestimated arctic sea ice extent loss:
Source:
” 3.5.2016 – Defunding Our Eyes on the Planet”
https://climatecrocks.com/2016/05/03/defunding-our-eyes-on-the-planet/
LikeLike
LikeLike
Mmmh, september 2014…? What source is that? Not really fresh, that graph from 2014. The DMI graph I posted is right, serious, you don’t deny that, do you?
LikeLike
See, I don’t want to miscredit the IPCC. But the decline in arctic sea ice is dire. When you look at the recent graphs, you see, that we are in uncharted territory right now, I mean: NOW, not in 2050 or 2080 or 2100.
Btw:
Everybody here on fractalplanet is much more sane, than 99% of the commentators at McPhersons blog.
… but sorry, you are much too optimistic nevertheless. Sorry.
LikeLike
Have you ever sat down to read anything from the IPCC reports? Do you know what they actually say about sea ice?
LikeLike
@SJ
Yes, I have. But did they foresee the status, the arctic sea ice is right now? No, they couldn’t. You know, that we had a record low in winter 2015/2016 and now we have a record low in the melting season:
That’s just fact, with or without IPCC. And they didn’t foresee that, there were more projecting several decades, not a few years.
LikeLike
“Everybody”? Nah, only Bryant/bobcobbblog is optimistic, most everyone else is either realistic or pessimistic about our chances, as I see it.
After all, the COP21 agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming to 1.5C but no efforts have been undertaken to match those words and the el Nino boosted surface temp anomaly is already at that target.
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
” “Everybody”? Nah, only Bryant/bobcobbblog is optimistic, most everyone else is either realistic or pessimistic about our chances, as I see it.
After all, the COP21 agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming to 1.5C but no efforts have been undertaken to match those words and the el Nino boosted surface temp anomaly is already at that target.”
I’d rather say:
“… and the climate change boosted El Nino boosted surface temp anomaly…”
About COP21: The COP21 “agreed to pursue all efforts to limit warming” for many, many decades now, without any real grand scale results so far. We can forget about 1.5°C for sure. Mother Nature gives a shit about playing with numbers.
About optimism/pessimism/realism:
We all know, where life finally ends up, don’t we? That’s my overall guideline, when we talk about future ;-)
LikeLike
“…the climate change boosted El Nino…”
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.
LikeLike
The source was a Royal Society conference about the Arctic, and the graph you posted only contains observed extent up to 2012. They both match observations to RCP 4.5 and 8.5; one of them has two extra years.
LikeLike
Whatever- like I said:
The observations will soon match a blue ocean event in the arctic. Very soon.
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
” “…the climate change boosted El Nino…”
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
Com on, just take a look at the comparison of El Nino:
Whatever you claim, this graph speaks for itself.
LikeLike
Btw:
You want to see civilisation fail, at least, that’s what you said. So, this graph is a very good start for civ to fail soon enough ;-)
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
” It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
MAN, I just can’t believe what I am reading here !!! YOU (NOT me) said THIS:
” As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail.”
https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/discussions/general-climate-discussion-4/comment-page-6/#comment-7880
And now YOU are telling ME shit about “uber-doomers” ?! Bwahaha :-D
LikeLike
I’m not a climate scientist. I’m not qualified to read anything into that graph other than there have been some very high anomalies. You basically have two data points, with the second not complete (1: the change that the 1997/1998 el Nino provided and 2: the change that the 2015/2016 el Nino provided, with the 2nd data point not yet complete). You can imagine all you like about what that means but I doubt it will be scientifically valid. If you think it is, then perhaps you can submit a paper for peerr review.
LikeLike
About RCP projections yet again, from another perspective:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1053.0;attach=28916;image
LikeLike
This graph is a slap in the face of ANY projection.
LikeLike
@bobcobbblog
When you look at this graph from DMI, what are your thoughts, please?:
LikeLike
I can tell you, what I think:
Forget about a great ease of global warming due to any La Nina this year. This recent El Nino is a monster, mainly driven by anthropogenic climate change.
LikeLike
“Everybody here on fractalplanet is much more sane, than 99% of the commentators at McPhersons blog.”
There might be a reason for that,
LikeLike
Hahahaha, that’s a good one. But nevertheless, I am a musician, so I am quite familiar with these kinda people. But my disguise is much better, no long hair, no freaky clothes, nothing. I look like a perfect John Doe, this prevents from a lot of disadvantages 8-) You know, I prefere these freaky kinda people more than these kinda people:
LikeLike
There is a lot of hatred going on at McPherson’s blog. Hatred against humankind as a whole. Most of the people at that blog want to see mankind croak as soon as possible. They say, that ALL people are responsible to the same amont for the mess, the planet is in, no matter, if beggar of king. So, they have something in common with the people here at fractalplanet.
I don’t want to see humankind to go extinct, I just want to see the people fall, that are after profit without any scruple, the people, who lie and cheat all the time, the people, who financed anthropogenic climate change denial for roughly a century, who governed wars, slavery, exploitation without any scruple. These people thought, that they can rape the planet and humankind and when the planet is done, just move on to another planet. Muhahaha- THIS dream is over. Truth, justice will finally prevail.
LikeLike
Correction
” no matter, if beggar of king” should be “no matter, if beggar oR king”.
You know, to say “we are all responsible for the eco-crimes ect” blurs any distinction of right and wrong and therefore blurs reasonable ways for CHANGE. The beggar in the streets, the worker, who got 3 jobs and still struggles for survival, the people who are being exploited and cheated all their life, CAN’T change the evil doing of the industrial-corporate-military complex and therefore they are NOT responsible. I CAN’T change ExxonMobil, can I? I can’t change the ignorant SUV drivers, I can’t change the Wall Street or the Deutsche Bank, I can’t change VW, I can’t change Donald Trump and alike, I can’t change the evil ways of the industrial-corporate-military complex ect ect ect. I can’t change ANYONE- except myself. So, I don’t walk with the herd, I don’t believe in the everyday propaganda of Empire, I don’t believe in consumerism, I don’t believe in the church, I don’t follow the ways of exploitation, war, slavery and I got punished for being a troublemaker all my life. But I achieved peace and freedom, satisfaction inside. So, it was worth it, to go a lonely way, apart from the herd.
LikeLike
Don’t generalise. I believe that only I (“here at fractalplanet”) have claimed that we’re all responsible. But I’m not saying we’re all equally responsible. There is zero chance that developed nations, and increasing portions of developing nations can have the lifestyles they seem to want if all the most responsible people and companies “fall”. In that sense, we’re all in this together. There are always choices that can be made and most people, most of the time, will make the easiest choice (easiest at the moment of making the choice) or the one that gets them the most immediate satisfaction. That’s human nature.
As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail. That would be a very significant challenge for almost every person on this planet, though other species would probably find it a blessing (relative to business as usual).
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
Uh ah, you want to see civilisation fail ?! Uhm, that’s another point you share with McPherson and his gang :-) Well then, thank god that Monsanto et al couldn’t kill all small farmers so far, because if civilisation fails, industrial farming will fail too. And who do you think will suffer the most ? Yes, the rich western countries will suffer the most. Can you imagine, what happens, when all the SUV drivers ect can’t buy food in the supermarket anymore? WAR, CIVIL WAR, ANARCHY, muhahaha. Ah well, do you have enough FEMA camps and shit in the US so far? I am sure, there are plenty. I don’t think, that your government will accept anarchy. Can you imagine civil war in the US in the 21 century?! This will be real tough shit, chaos ad infinitum, HELL. And imagine all the failing of nuclear plants! No one will be there, to handle this horror nuclear shit, the nuclear plants will just melt down, uh, ah! Do you have children, family and shit? I don’t.
When civilisation fails, then economy will fail too :-) And if that happens, then all the funny rich folks will be fucked like hell. The richer you are, the more you will be fucked. Do you see the pictures of these freaks John posted? These freaks, these outsiders will rule the streets then. The poor crowd, the mass will just walk into the stores, into the real estates of the rich folks and TAKE what they need, muhahaha :-)
” In that sense, we’re all in this together. There are always choices that can be made and most people, most of the time, will make the easiest choice (easiest at the moment of making the choice) or the one that gets them the most immediate satisfaction. That’s human nature.”
You know, I am quite old, I am not in charge for any children and shit, I have nothing to loose. When the cornerstone of civ falls, then I will have a last good smoke, some glass of red wine, I will play and sing “Into the Mystic” from Van Morrison and then I will say goodbye to this cruel world without any regret :-)
Just let Empire do BAU just for a little more time and you will get, what you want:
The total breakdown of civ, back to the stone ages. YEAH, then right or wrong, responsibility and shit doesn’t matter at all anymore. Then animal law will rule, the Law of the Djungle. Not far away anymore 8-)
LikeLike
The price of technology,
New Federal Rule Would Permit Thousands of Eagle Deaths
“The Obama administration is revising a federal rule that allows wind-energy companies to operate high-speed turbines for up to 30 years, even if means killing or injuring thousands of federally protected bald and golden eagles.
“Under the plan announced Wednesday, wind companies and other power providers could kill or injure up to 4,200 bald eagles a year without penalty — nearly four times the current limit.”
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/apnewsbreak-rule-permit-thousands-eagle-deaths-38874448
Killing our National symbol to power up a few more ipads is like the developer who cuts down the trees, levels the hills and diverts the rivers in a wild place to make another shopping mall and then naming it “Elm Tree Plaza or “Golden Hills Mall. Money trumps Life.
LikeLike
Fox News is with you:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/05/31/492467/myths-and-facts-about-wind-power-debunking-foxs-abysmal-wind-coverage/
LikeLike
There is no technology without pain, without suffering. Actually, there is no life without pain, without suffering. But the question is:
How to reduce unnecessary suffering? When everybody in an economic system strives for as much profit, as much consumerism as possible, then we are doomed quickly. But that’s exactly, what the economic system wants:
As much economic growth as possible, at the cost of extreme ecologic and social im-ballance. The system produces children, human beings en masse. Most of these children are born in very poor countires. And the multinational corporations love these billions of people, because it is a market for immense profit. They’d like to sell them all the consumer shit we have in the rich western countries right now. Imagine, 7 billion poeple striving for more, more, more shit, hahaha. A DREAM for any corporate business (look at China for instance- a capitalist/communist/whatever farce), but it’s a nightmare for the planet. And for humankind. Tell me:
What are the intentions of a stock broker at wall street? I mean these guys, who juggle with millions and billions of dollars, without EVER thinking a single second about the consequences. What are they striving for? Are they trying to make this world a better place? Are they striving for love, peace, justice? No. What they are striving for solely is this:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
You know, I do understand that. But it comes with a price. That’s physics. Everything comes with a price.
I don’t have to tell you about the history of the western world. About the expoloitation of the planet for money and power. I am talking about these guys, who mostly talk behind closed doors, in secrecy. Mother Nater herself will kick these closed doors to pieces sooner or later. No revolution can do that anymore, but Mother Nature will.
LikeLike
The recent positive temp- anomalies in the northern hemisphere are taking their toll- not just in Canada, where 88. 000 citizens had to flee their homes instantly. Here in Germany are also warnings about possible wildfires right now- at the beginning of may. That is very, very unusual. Right now and for next several days we got temperatures up to 27°C in Germany.
LikeLike
Advice:
Just read all the comments here at fractalplanet carefully and you will know, why Empire will fall. Well, that’s GOOD NEWS for you, mikeroberts2013, because Empire is part of civ and you want to see civ go down. Your wish will com true. Soon.
LikeLike
Nemesis,
I think you said English isn’t your first language and maybe that’s why you can’t see that the two quotes from me are not connected. That civilisation destroys the environment is, as I said, my opinion (“as far as I can tell”) but I’d be surprised if you can find evidence to the contrary. As all species rely on the environment, then it would be a good thing for civilisation to fail, unless you think the environment can take an unlimited beating, with no significant deterioration to the prospects of all species. Uber-doomers don’t care about the evidence (just as deniers don’t) and will come up with their own stories that fit with what they want to see. I definitely don’t do that.
That a failure of civilisation will be tough (yes, an understatement) is undisputed. But would it be better for it to fail earlier, rather than later, since all civilisations must fall as some point, particularly this one (remember that the environmental damage done so far is before climate change has really started to kick in much – for example, with extinctions)? This is really going off on a tangent, of course, so I won’t expand on this further.
So, no, I’m a very long way from the McPherson camp.
LikeLike
What I see, is this:
” ”As far as I can tell, civilisation destroys the environment so I want civilisation to fail.”
That’s a quote of your very own comment and it says, that you want to see civilisation fail. And then you call ME a doomer ?! Man, whatever, there seems to be something seriously wrong in this funny world. And once again:
This is exactly, what McPherson wants: Seeing civilisation fail as soon as possible.
THIS can only somebody want, who lives in a rich, wealthy, western country. Wait until civ fails, then ask yourself again, if you like it. I tell you: It is not about civilisation, it is about greed, corruption, cheating, lies of a global minority. This is exactly, what got us into the mess and it will be exactly, what will bring civ down. WHAT A COSMIC LAUGH:
A dream of omnipotence, a dream of money and power, a dream of controlling humankind, the whole planet, a dream of conquering space, the Universe. A dream of a funny, funny minority. And in the end ?! A cosmic laugh, a cosmic yawn. Well then, whatever may come, it will not be the funny dream of the socalled “elite”. You know what? I like that.
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
And I got very, very much understanding, for those, who are in rage, who feel the pain of Mother Earth, the pain of Nature. I am in rage too. I am in a deep rage and in a deep, deep hurt, pain, sadness. But you know what? WE are Nature TOO. We got claws and teeth, nature got claws and teeth. It’s not the way, that we are bad and nature is good, no. We are in nature and nature is within us, there is absolutely no difference. We are part of a natural, global, cosmic struggle. Nature is part of a cosmic struggle. Everything, the whole Universe is part of a cosmic struggle. This is what I call a “spiritual” struggle, a dimension, that goes beyond mundane modern everyday life. Modern man lost connection to the Universe (and therefore he builds spaceships), he doesn’t feel at home anymore, he is like Kain in the bible. Kain, the farmer, who killed Abel, the nomad. And so, Kain lost his home, his natural connection to Mother Earth and Kain is always on the run for growth, for more and more and more. Kain is the one, who built cities and hierarchies and temples and palasts and industry and communism and capitalism and catholicism and science, civilisation. He is Gilgamesh, he is Faust, he is modern man. But:
Is Kain, the farmer, the bad man and Abel the good man, divided forever? No. Kain and Abel are both two souls in Homo Sapiens, two souls in Nature herself. There is the ever wandering nomad (like some indigenous people even today) without any real civilisation in the modern sense, without any real histtory and there is modern man, striving for a fixed home in time and space, striving for a history. Both, Kain and Abel, the farmer and the nomad are part of the cosmic drama. And there will always be only one solution, if we want peace and fulfillment:
We need to get in Balance, Nature and civilisation in Balance, we and Nature in Balance. In the end, we are Nature and Nature is us. The image of “evil Nature against us” or “evil Homo Sapiens against good Nature” is a total illusion, a fata morgana, a childish image. We are Nature, Nature is us. That’s reality, no matter, if we survive as a species or not, makes no big difference in the cosmic drama. The cosmic drama will go on. Forever, eternally. That’s why we feel rage and sadness, when we see Mother Earth, Nature suffering:
Because it is about us. What we do to Nature, we do to ourselves. What we do to others, we do to ourselves. We can never run away from ourselves, wherever we go, whatever we do. Modern man needs to go inside, away from too much material stuff. Then he will find peace, even, if he should go extinct or whatever. The ancient people, indigenous, wandering nomads knew/know, that they are part of the cosmic drama, therefore, they are (mostly) in Balance with Nature and in a daily (and nightly) connection with the cosmic drama. Modern man has forgotten his natural roots. But he can never really loose these roots, because man is Nature, Nature is man.
LikeLike
Nah, McPherson “knows” that civilisation will end when humans go extinct. I really don’t see how you can equate my position with McPherson’s. Is it because you dream of an unending civilisation? Good luck with that (nah, I don’t mean that really).
LikeLike
You said, you want to see civilisation fail and that is exactly what Guy McPherson and most of the commentariat at his blog wants to see.
” Is it because you dream of an unending civilisation? Good luck with that (nah, I don’t mean that really).”
Me, personally, I give a shit about civilisation, I had my life, I got older than I ever imagined already anyway. And I repeat:
I don’t have any descendants, so from my very own personal perspective civ may fail tomorrow or in 20 years, it makes not much difference to me, personally. But think about 7 billion other people^^
LikeLike
Nemesis, your comment above in no way shows that I agree with McPherson on all points related to our future and the future of the planet. It is no big deal that both of us want to see civilisation fail (though I’m not even certain McPherson wants that anymore, since his belief that humans will go extinct in 20 years or less is firmly entrenched in his mind. Please stop equating us. I am not a doomer in the sense of McPherson’s doomerism. If you still believe that, then please keep it to yourself as I’ve already denied it multiple times (explaining why) and yet you keep repeating it. Desist.
LikeLike
Nemesis,
Honestly, I’ve had the uncomfortable feeling that you were the ultra doomer here, not Mike. Not doomer, hater. Just my opinion but I’m being honest. I certainly don’t presume to speak for anyone else here, I want that to be clear, but my impression to date has been that what Mike wants is to see things get better for ALL of life on earth. LIFE. When I talked about the loss of Eagles as a sacrifice to electricity, you said,
“There is no technology without pain, without suffering.”
It’s clear to most I think, that you’re a very angry person. You attack everyone who has a different opinion from you with multi-layered posts of rage, laying everyone else low with your unrelenting proclamations of doom. You rage here, you rage on McPherson’s blog. But not for the earth it seems, but for ‘economic justice’. Money appears to be your focus, not life. I agree with you that poverty is unfair (I live below the poverty line myself) and I also hope for balance. But when it comes to the earth, you seem just as willing as everyone else to get in line with the corporatists you decry. You’re interest in the environment extends only as far as it can be used to punish the rich in your struggle against class inequalities.
Why don’t you cut us all some slack, read between the lines and stop attacking everything that moves. Unless you’re one of the many people I’ve met in my life who genuinely believe they are Perfect, and there are a lot of them, it might be an idea to remove the beam from your own eye before pointing out the splinters from everyone elses. Only perfection can judge.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, I am the ultra doomer, not mike, who wants civ to see fail. You know, I give a shit. It’s wonderful weather here in Germany, everything is blooming, the birds are singing, I just enjoy spring now, nothing to gain, nothing to loose, just a happy person. Have fun.
LikeLike
@John
You think, I am a “very angry” person? Why should I? You know, I did always what I wanted, all my life. I left home, when I was 13 years old, I quit funny school, when I was 15. I never did any slave job, I gave/give a shit about any boss, any slave driver, hahaha. Most I learned, I learned on my own. I learned about Empire on my own, I learned about the final outcome of Empire on my own, so I give a shit about politics, I give a shit about monetary achievement, I give shit about living in a tin can, I give a shit about living a second hand life. I get up, whenever I want, I go to sleep whenever I want. I learned to play chess on my own, I learned to play the guitar on my own, I learned to sing on my own, I learned to be really FREE on my own. I arived at home within myself, totally at ease, being one of the happiest person walking on the planet. Do you think, that I am angry because of climate change? Why should I? As I said several times, I realized that mess some 30 years ago and acted accordingly, so I didn’t hoard much material stuff, I didn’t procreate, but instead, I strived for peace, freedom, happiness, things, you cannot buy, no matter, how much money you have. You know, I am just very, very happy, because I took the right way and I took it very early. I wish, I could share some of the happiness, freedom, peace I feel. But at the same time, I know, that everyone has to go his very own way and learn his very own things. I didn’t waste my life with funny material shit and a second hand life, so there is absolutely no reason, to be angry. You know:
You just don’t know me, but it absolutely doesn’t matter at all.
Love,
Nemesis
LikeLike
You are just angry, that I saw you on the Fox News road with your claims against wind power and I said it LOUD. Don’t be angry, mate, because anger is just not good for blood pressure ect.
LikeLike
Nemesis, I am dumbfounded that you can equate a desire (wishful thinking) for civilisation to end (as it destroys the environment) with doomers who think the world is about to end. The two ideas are completely orthogonal to each other. Hopefully, enough said.
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
” Nemesis, I am dumbfounded that you can equate a desire (wishful thinking) for civilisation to end (as it destroys the environment) with doomers who think the world is about to end. The two ideas are completely orthogonal to each other. Hopefully, enough said.”
You said, you want civilisation to fail. And, as I said, that’s exactly, what Guy McPherson and most of the commentariat at his blog wants. Make of it, whatever you prefer. And no, the WORLD will surely not end, if civilisation would fail- but it would cost billions of human lifes, it would cost most human life on Earth. The WORLD as such, the UNIVERSE surely would give a shit about that, because the Universe will just go on. To me, to the Universe, death and extinction is natural, makes no difference. But I repeat:
Think about 7 billion people and your descendants (if you have any), your family (if you have any) will fail too, if civilisation fails.
LikeLike
Nemesis, I care about the planet and about my kids. If they are to have a future and if most species are to have a future, the quicker civilisation fails, the better. Billions will likely die anyway, because of environmental degradation and it will be a larger number the longer civilisation goes on (e.g. how about if its failure comes – as it eventually must – when there are 11-12 billion people on the planet?), provided that civilisation doesn’t degrade the environment quickly enough to ensure that the population will start to level out (but not in a pleasant way).
LikeLike
Mike,
I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that most scientists and well-informed people are pessimistic. That’s not what I’ve gathered from all the interactions I’ve had. If anything, it’s a mix of optimism, realism, and pessimism.
LikeLike
Bryant, I’m not sure where you are getting the idea that I think most scientists and well-informed people are pessimistic. Perhaps it is the post at this link. If so, then you are completely wrong. That post was referring to commenters at this blog and didn’t even claim that all those here other than you were pessimistic. Please read comments before replying to them. If that wasn’t the comment, then accept my apologies and I ask you to point to the comment that you were replying to.
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
” “…the climate change boosted El Nino…”
Well, currently, that’s a belief statement. Yes, it could be that el Nino is affected by climate change but it’s far too early to say if that’s true and I’ve seen no research on that yet. What we do know is that el Nino boosts surface temps. That’s the realism (not jumping to conclusions, no matter how compelling you think that conclusion is but, at the same time, not ruling out anything that seems possible). It’s this that sets the uber-doomers apart; they are always looking for the worst story, often ignoring counter evidence or simply extrapolating without good cause, or even misinterpreting science to get the story they want.”
https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/discussions/general-climate-discussion-4/comment-page-6/#comment-7879
Sometimes I do really feel a bit strange because of some comments here at fractalplanet :-) You think, it is only my “believe”, that climate change boosts El Ninos?! You haven’t seen any research on climate change boosting El Nino? Well, maybe it is because, you never investigated that topic? Man, it is just a logical conclusion, that climate change boosts El Nino. See here for instance:
” Increasing frequency of extreme El Niño events due to greenhouse warming
El Niño events are a prominent feature of climate variability with global climatic impacts. The 1997/98 episode, often referred to as ‘the climate event of the twentieth century’ and the 1982/83 extreme El Niño3, featured a pronounced eastward extension of the west Pacific warm pool and development of atmospheric convection, and hence a huge rainfall increase, in the usually cold and dry equatorial eastern Pacific. Such a massive reorganization of atmospheric convection, which we define as an extreme El Niño, severely disrupted global weather patterns, affecting ecosystems, agriculture6, tropical cyclones, drought, bushfires, floods and other extreme weather events worldwide. Potential future changes in such extreme El Niño occurrences could have profound socio-economic consequences. Here we present climate modelling evidence for a doubling in the occurrences in the future in response to greenhouse warming. We estimate the change by aggregating results from climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phases 3 (CMIP3; ref. 10) and 5 (CMIP5; ref. 11) multi-model databases, and a perturbed physics ensemble. The increased frequency arises from a projected surface warming over the eastern equatorial Pacific that occurs faster than in the surrounding ocean waters, facilitating more occurrences of atmospheric convection in the eastern equatorial region…”
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n2/full/nclimate2100.html
And thx again for the ad homiem attack. I like that. You know why? Because it is ALWAYS a proof of unsertainty, when it comes to facts. I just have my fun here and I do REALLY learn so much here, even about human beings and communication tactics. You know, I am a chess player, so I am always interested in tactics and strategies. I just never got any ad hominem attacks during any chess game so far. A good player gives a shit, if he wins or looses, he just enjoys playing- at least, when he got a cool opponent. It is about the game, not about winning or loosing. Therefore, a good player will never attack any opponent with ad hominem attacks.
LikeLike
Correction:
“unsertainty” should be “unCertainty”.
LikeLike
Uhm, if you want to tell the TRUTH in Empire, then you could be in real danger, yes, you could be KILLED for telling the Truth- therefore, John Doe, the source of the Panama Papers, remains anonymous:
” John Doe’s Manifesto
… Income inequality is one of the defining issues of our time. It affects all of us, the world over. The debate over its sudden acceleration has raged for years, with politicians, academics and activists alike helpless to stop its steady growth despite countless speeches, statistical analyses, a few meagre protests, and the occasional documentary. Still, questions remain: why? And why now?
The Panama Papers provide a compelling answer to these questions: massive, pervasive corruption. And it’s not a coincidence that the answer comes from a law firm. More than just a cog in the machine of “wealth management,” Mossack Fonseca used its influence to write and bend laws worldwide to favour the interests of criminals over a period of decades…”
http://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/articles/572c897a5632a39742ed34ef/
As long as this global corruption shit goes on, it will be very interesting, to see, if massive global corruption is a good base for climate mitigation… I just can’t help it, I got some serious doubt here 8-)
LikeLike
@mikeroberts2013
Uhm, if you really want to see civilisation fail, you need to get rid of all these lying, cheating, threatening rich folks, because they will do EVERYTHING, to keep the system alive- they know, as soon, as the system fails, all their funny money will be worth nothing anymore, muhahahaha 8-)
LikeLike
Any thoughts on this study reported by the Independent? Cannot find the original source and don’t know what to make of it as it is: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/global-warming-to-be-far-worse-than-anyone-had-predicted-new-cloud-analysis-study-says-a6975141.html
LikeLike
That article you refer to is valid, see here for instance:
http://www.bitsofscience.org/real-global-temperature-trend-cloud-feedbacks-climate-sensitivity-7051/
https://eos.org/research-spotlights/modeling-the-effects-of-clouds-on-climate
LikeLike
Actually, Mai, it was only one model they did. For a more reasoned perspective (because Rolf Schuttenhelm leaves a lot to be desired), see this link: https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2016/04/07/ecs-too-low/
LikeLike
No no, it’s not just Schuttenhelm, but also W. Yan:
” Yan, W. (2016), Modeling the effects of clouds on climate, Eos, 97, doi:10.1029/2016EO049999. Published on 11 April 2016″
https://eos.org/research-spotlights/modeling-the-effects-of-clouds-on-climate
And also Ivy Tan et al:
” 8.4.2016 – Observational constraints on mixed-phase clouds imply higher climate sensitivity”
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6282/224
Btw: Here we have that issue about climate models I mentioned again^^
LikeLike
Quote from science.mag:
“… Other recent studies have suggested that climate models may not be accurately assessing the balance of water and ice in clouds in some circumstances.
The new paper suggests the effects of a flaw in the model could be serious: Based on its analysis of one model of climate change, the cloud error could mean an additional 1.3 degrees Celsius of warming than expected.
Negotiators at last year’s climate talks in Paris approved a target of keeping temperatures from rising by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius over average temperatures in the preindustrial era. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that keeping global average temperatures from rising by more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) could prevent some of the disastrous effects of climate change from occurring.
The new paper, then, if proved correct, would narrow the range left for the climate panel’s goal to 0.7 degree, and the Paris target to just 0.2 degree Celsius…”
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6282/224
LikeLike
Mai-
Yeah, other papers have done similar things—found that the models that best simulated some particular cloud process tended to have higher sensitivity—but I gathered this paper was weaker than the others. At any rate, these studies go into the mix that help us zero in on the best estimate of climate sensitivity, but since there are many papers in that mix already no one paper really moves the best estimate.
LikeLike
@All
We had the issue about climate models of the IPCC here at fractalplanet recently, There is a critical new post by Gavin Schmidt at realclimate.org, investigating the models:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/05/comparing-models-to-the-satellite-datasets/
Some inline response of Gavin Schmidt:
” Literally every paper I’ve written about models has discussed the need for improvements. In my TED talk I specifically said (pace Box) that all models are wrong…”
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/05/comparing-models-to-the-satellite-datasets/#comment-651715
LikeLike
Nemesis, you continue to amaze me with your selectivity and willingness to jump to conclusions.
Mai, here is a link to Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist who knows clouds pretty well: https://mobile.twitter.com/andrewdessler
Note the entries on April 7 in regard to the cloud study.
LikeLike
Hahaha, now you have to quote some random tweeds to proof your claims?^^ Gimme scientific PAPERS, not tweeds :-)
Btw:
The amusement is still on my side ;-)
LikeLike
@bobcobbblog
Have you ever noticed the very interesting thread about “Conservative Scientists and it’s Consequences” at the highly respected http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php ?
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1053.0.html
LikeLike
That thread is almost entirely dominated by a single poster, who often extrapolates from the links he posts claims never made in the original study.
LikeLike
@Will
” who often extrapolates from the links he posts claims never made in the original study.”
Could you refer to any concrete example, where I ” extrapolated from the links I posted claims never made in the original study”, please?
LikeLike
The real problem I see, is not any gap between models and reality, but the gap between science and politics.
LikeLike
I never claimed you did. The ASIF member who dominates that thread does.
LikeLike
@Will
” I never claimed you did.”
Ah, ok, then it was just a misunderstanding.
LikeLike
Hey dumbass,
All you did was cite the paper itself.
LikeLike
Uhm, don’t you understand the quote of the paper? Want explanations?^^
Btw, I have to repeat myself:
Ad hominem attacks like “dumbass” are NO scientific prooves of whatever, it’s just a sign of uncertainty :-)
LikeLike
Com on, while you keep repeating “No, not that bad! Not that fast! Not that hot!”, science keeps repeating “Underestimated! Faster! Hotter!”- have you ever noticed?
LikeLike
LikeLike
The fires in Canada could burn for months, the regular fire season is still ahead. The fires at the heart of the canadian oil industries, that replaced 88.000 citizens, are growing right now and their are heading to Sasketchuan. I have seen such pictures in Siberia in 2014 and 2015. It really has the taste of Dante’s Inferno:
LikeLike
And when you look at the forecast for the northern hemisphere, it still looks just dire. Almost no rain on the northamerican continent, huge positive anomalies (+20°C) up in the north way up right into the arctic region, as well as on Greenland (again) and notice the twisted, cluttered, very strange Jet Stream:
http://cci-reanalyzer.org/Forecasts/#NH-SAT
This is climate change in real time.
LikeLike
The default among some here at FP is that things are much better than the news stories would have us believe. They ignore or downplay any stories they don’t like. Those are our Optimists. Others may feel the exactly the opposite, our Pessimists, and still others will attempt as best they can to interpret the information for themselves, good or bad, without bias, our Realists. Most, I’m guessing, of those who want to convince others of their particular POV are really trying to convince themselves. What any of us ultimately decide to believe may well have everything to do with where we are in our lives and nothing to do with reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I got a special approach:
As long, as global politics goes on the way it always did, anthropogenic climate change will just get worse and worse, no matter, what is being discussed at fractalplanet or elsewhere, no matter, if climate models fit to reality or not. For now, politics goes on praising consumerism and ignorance in the media all day long, while climate news get maybe 5 minutes per week. I just have to look at the direction a society is heading to and I know, where it will end up (history gives countless lessons about that). I just look at politics today and I can tell about temperatures and climate desasters tomorrow. So, without reasonable politics, even the best science, best models, best predictions won’t save us at all. That’s dead simple. People like James Hansen realized that too, therefore, he fights criminal politics and the destruction of the future of the young generations legally.
LikeLike
When I go to Google and search for “luxury”, then I get 783.000.000 results, hahahaha. I don’t need to know more than that. Funny “luxury” just does not fit to the Darwinian struggle for survival, no way.
LikeLike
A slap in the face for anybody, who believed, that a single El Nino would ease the California drought significantly:
” 9.5.2016 – Gov. Jerry Brown orders long-term conservation measures as California drought persists
Gov. Jerry Brown issued a sweeping executive order Monday that permanently prohibits certain forms of water waste and makes monthly water-use reporting an ongoing requirement.
The order comes as some urban water suppliers have suggested the drought is over and called for the state’s drought rules to be weakened or eliminated. Brown’s order, though, rebuffs the notion that California can ever fully escape from drought.
“Californians stepped up during this drought and saved more water than ever before,” Brown said in a statement. “But now we know that drought is becoming a regular occurrence and water conservation must be a part of our everyday life…”
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-water-conservation-20160509-story.html
” 5.5.2016 – Infographic 229 drought maps show just how thirsty California has become
The majority of California is experiencing extreme to exceptional drought despite El Niño-related precipitation in recent weeks and the latest U.S. Drought Monitor report said the state’s drought situation still remains “very serious.”
The Drought Monitor, which collects data from 50 different weather indicators, have shown an increasingly red California since 2011, the last time the drought map was clear…”
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-g-california-drought-map-htmlstory.html
@bobcobbblog
See, here are the scientific facts. Yes, we all love scientific facts.
LikeLike
Oh my god, I’m shaking in my boots at stuff I already knew. El stupido you are
LikeLike
–
@bobcobbblog
“… stuff I already knew…”
I leave your usual street jargon out and just concentrate on what’s left of your comments. Well, you “knew that stuff already”? Cool. For how long do you know? Can’t be that long, because, when I talked about the California drought and the Ridiculously Resilient Ridge, you played it down and doubted, that the RRR will be really resilient:
” And how common and long-lasting the RRR will be in the future is far from certain from everything I’ve read.”
https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/discussions/general-climate-discussion-4/comment-page-1/#comment-6839
” There’s one thing you’re missing though, and that’s El Nino. Super El Ninos are expected to become more common in the future, so the ridge will go away when such an event occurs.”
https://fractalplanet.wordpress.com/discussions/general-climate-discussion-4/comment-page-1/#comment-6848
But the RRR and the California drought is still resilient, the El Nino didn’t ease Californias drought significantly and the drought will just go on: Quote Sen. Brown:
” “But now we know that drought is becoming a regular occurrence…”
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-water-conservation-20160509-story.html
LikeLike
Kindly point out where I said the El Nino would eliminate the drought. And guess what, the blob is gone: http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/oceanographer-pacific-ocean-blob-is-gone-but-will-return
That means the ridge is with it. Case closed.
As for your question on whether our current governmental/economic system can deal with climate change, my answer is a resounding yes. Look at what China’s doing to cut emissions or Obama rapid string of regulations to cut down on CO2 and CH4 emissions.
LikeLike
Ooooh, yeees, China is a perfect example of honest politics o_o, just like Amerika is another PERFECT example of honest politics.
And, sure, the blob is gone, the RRR is gone. And it will NEVER come back. Case closed.
But, please allow one more naive question:
WHAT the Hell are we doing here at fractalplanet and elsewhere ?! All these climate discussions, all that fear about climate change, for what ?! I mean, everything just looks so rosy. Honest politics all over, everybody is cutting emissions like Hell ect ect ect. So, why don’t we close the whole topic? Hallelujah!
LikeLike
Btw, this statement of mine was a JOKE:
” And, sure, the blob is gone, the RRR is gone. And it will NEVER come back. Case closed.”
You will see soon, what will happen to California, the lovely Heart of honest turbo capitalism. Very soon.
LikeLike
I don’t mean to suggest that realists can’t be optimistic or pessimistic or whathaveyou. I certainly wouldn’t say that an Optimist can’t be a Realist by definition. Non-sequitur. One has nothing to do with the other.
The question lies rather in why anyone believes as they do about anything. Because they prefer to or because they believe after an honest review of the information at hand, good and bad, that their POV is the most accurate. That doesn’t mean that the realist is correct in his assessments. None of us knows enough about anything to suggest that any view we hold dear are infallible. Just that we’ve made an honest attempt to be fair. One definition of an fallible realist.
LikeLike
As I said, I look at it from a systemic POV, therefore I don’t just look into the physics of climate change, but also into the political/economic physics, that is causing climate change. It has been proven a million times, that the political system is corrupted through and through. Serious question:
Do you think, that a corrupt political/economic system will solve climate change or even adapt to it properly?
LikeLike
No, I don’t.
Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system. Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic. For what it’s worth.
LikeLike
@John
” Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system.”
So you think, the slaves, who were born into a corrupted slave system and are depenendent on it for survival, are all corrupt, because they are forced to live in that system? A baby then is corrupted as soon as it born in a corrupt system? Sorry, but that sounds like corrupted Empire ideology to me. IF YOUR CLAIM IS TRUE, THEN I CAN GIVE A FUNNY S.H.I.T. ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSIBILITY AND JUST ENJOY LIFE LIKE TRUMP AND IDIOTS, BECAUSE WE ARE ALL CORRUPT ANYWAY !
You know, there is a reason, why I drive just a bike, why I don’t have any shadow company in Panama, there is a reason, why I don’t spread lies and cheating like ExxonMobil et al. Wanna know the reason? I can tell you:
I watch in a mirror every morning, when I got up and wash my face. And I want to see a straight and honest person, when I look in the mirror at morning, just because I got a consciousness. And because of that, I did not procreate and I sleep like an angel at night.
LikeLike
–
@John
You know, whatever you might say about corruption, cheating, lies:
I don’t have children like Trump, the Koch brothers or the Rokefellas ect. CHILDREN, grandchildren and their children will have to live with the results of a corrupt system, a system of lies, cheating and brainwash. These children, brought to life by corrupt individuals will have to live with the desastrous consequences of climate change and ecological destruction/exploitation.
But NOT my children, they won’t face anything of that shit, because I did not procreate for very good reasons. You know, no matter if everybody is corrupt (as you claim) or not:
Just that fact gives me satisfaction, gives me confidence and peace of mind :-)
LikeLike
SJ, a question, this is the first time I’ve heard this term, “Omega Block”. Here’s an article referring that term.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/05/04/omega-block-behind-searing-heat-inflaming-fort-mcmurray-wildfire/
Is this a real condition or something dreamed up by a pseudo-scientist? The term sounds a bit crafty to me.
LikeLike
Another nifty idea via China,
Fukushima at sea? China wants a fleet of floating nuclear power plants
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/opinions/china-floating-nuclear-reactors/index.html
Solomons sinking: Five Pacific reef islands swallowed by rising sea levels
https://www.rt.com/news/342227-solomon-islands-sinking-reef/
LikeLike
” Fukushima at sea? China wants a fleet of floating nuclear power plants”
Com on, ANYTHING goes, I learned that from honest capitalism.
LikeLike
Btw, if your claim is true and we are all corrupt anyway, then please tell me the difference of you, the Koch Brothers, Donald Trump, Gavin Schmidt or James Hansen…
LikeLike
Do you ever shut the fuck up?
LikeLike
Your style of talking sometimes reminds me of the Ghetto, where I grew up.
LikeLike
The most effective way to fight corrupted Empire, to fight the corrupted system, is, to fight it within.
Good luck.
LikeLike
I don’t actually remember saying that we’re all corrupt. You seem to be rather liberal in your interpretations of what other people actually say. You might want to go back and reread that post just a bit more carefully.
A little humor along with a reason why we should look for consensus when trying to determine our approach to a subject with as much gravitas as change climate.
LikeLike
Maybe I misunderstood your comment. But to me it sounds like we are all currupted:
” Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system.”
When I accused the oil industries, you said:
” Nemesis, your standard of living is the exception, not the rule. Most people in richer nations, of which Germany is one, drive. Most people in those countries buy products manufactured from dwindling resources, live in homes manufactured from dwindling resources, wear clothes manufactured from dwindling resources, use public facilities manufactured from dwindling resources, and get around on roads layered with oil. And we do do at the expense of every other living thing and the environment itself. In that sense, we’re all responsible.
As I’ve said before, I’m not pointing any fingers.”
I have to wear clothes too and I ride on roads layerd with oil with my bike. The heating in the house where I live for rent is fueled with oil. The products I eat are made with the help of oil, every single packaging of food is made of oil. There is fuckin oil in my computer and fuckin oil in my guitar strings and fuckin oil in the wheels of my bike. Even sun panels are made of oil, wind power plants are made of oil. But am I corrupted? I would starve to death, if I would ban all oil. I couldn’t even walk on any street, because all streets are made of oil, so I could’t leave the house anymore. But does that mean that I am corrupted? Then I’d be corrupted whatever I do. Then everybody would be corrupted, whatever he does. But then I and everybody else can give a shit about climate change, because we are all corrupted anyway, no matter, what we do or don’t do. Then I am no better, than any SUV driver or anyone who flies with his own private jet.
But there is a very bad downside in this kind of thinking:
That we are all corrupted anyway, is exactly, what all the ignorant consumer sheeples say all day. And so they give a shit about climate change and consume like hell as much as they can and they sing in a choir “Every beggar is just as ignorant, as I am, because even a beggar depends on oil!” on their way to extinction.
LikeLike
This funny Empire game of “we are all corrupt anyway, so let’s eat and drink, tomorrow we will be dead anyway!” is a very funny game, isn’t it? It is the PERFECT recipe for a TOTAL desaster.
LikeLike
Wow, that’s a really “cool” animated graph, it reminds me of the graph of the “arctic death spiral”, just the other way around:
https://robertscribbler.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/global-warming-since-1850.gif?w=1557&h=559
LikeLike
@bobcobbblog
LOVE your discussion at neven’s blog! And, uhm, sorry, mate, I repeat what I said some weeks ago:
Arctic sea ice will reach a record low this summer and very soon there will be the first blue ocean 8-)
Here’s your ticket for the next 7 days in the arctic:
LikeLike
From another perspective- temperatures in the Arctic way ABOVE ZERO for the next 7 days:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1493.0;attach=29148;image
Yes, the next record low in summer arctic sea ice and the first blue ocean event in the Arctic is knocking at your door, dear bobcobbblog, can’t you hear it? :-)
LikeLike
Hey nemesis,
I just call out the fools like I see them, many of which are present at the sea ice blog. Can you hear it, the first blue ocean event isn’t happening this year or anytime soon? ;)
LikeLike
Com on, the arctic sea iceblog is one of the BEST blogs on the internet, otherwise YOU wouldn’t be there too ;-)
About the Arctic:
I told you, that this summer 2016 there will be a new record low in arctic sea ice and
THEN there will be not much ice left, that could prevent a blue ocean event in the very near future :-)
About fools:
I feel very much like a fool (I said that already), as I am surrounded by optimists like you are all my life. Optimists, like the ever growing bunch of SUV drivers ect.
LikeLike
Not to get into an argument with you, no interest in that, but you had asked the question,
“Do you think, that a corrupt political/economic system will solve climate change or even adapt to it properly?”
To which I answered,
“No, I don’t.
“Nor do I believe that any group of humans anywhere on this planet, however good their initial motivations might have been at the beginning, can remain uncorrupt once they’re firmly esconsed in a corrupt system. Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic. For what it’s worth.”
I was answering your question about being part of a corrupt political/economic system. Which is why I went on to say,
“Therefore expecting answers from that quarter, answers which could threaten their power structure, is unrealistic.”
I was referring to Power Players. Most people are not Power Players and I wasn’t referring to them. Enough said.
LikeLike
” I was referring to Power Players.”
Well, then we are on the same side. It is about the Power Players, not about the ordinary, average Joe.
LikeLike
@Anybody, who thinks, China’s CO 2 emissions are significantly declining:
” 4.5.2016 – Scenario analysis of CO2 emissions from China’s civil aviation industry through 2030
Highlights
– CO2 emissions from China’s aviation transport would almost double from 2013 to 2030.
Key impact factors include jet fuel substitute, fuel intensity and traffic demand.
Air traffic demand has the most significant influence on the CO2 emissions.
Policy suggestions include carbon tax, enhanced R&D policy and carbon offset etc.
Abstract
… Despite its importance, an analysis of CO2 emissions with the future development of this industry and the impacts of crucial factors is missing from the literature. To bridge this gap, this study conducts scenario analysis of CO2 emissions from this sector through 2030 and assesses the influences from the key influential factors, including the adoption of low carbon jet fuel, the improvement of fuel intensity due to technological advancements of aircraft, and the increase of air traffic demand. The results show that the air traffic demand has the most significant influence on emissions…”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261916305864
Well, and this article fits perfectly to the paper above:
” 10.5.2016 – China and US set for airline emissions clash
Responsibilities of rich and emerging economies at issue in Montreal meeting to thrash out aviation’s contribution to international climate action
China and the US are set for a fight over the split of responsibilities for cutting airline emissions at a UN meet this week.
The outcome is critical to the environmental integrity of the sector’s main contribution to international climate efforts: a carbon offsetting scheme.
Green groups warn that draft proposals by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) exempt nearly half the sector’s emissions.
In a submission ahead of the Montreal summit Wednesday to Friday, China called for rich countries to take on steeper cuts.
“China notes with concern the reluctance of some of the developed countries to take the lead to reduce their international aviation emissions dramatically to leave room for the growth of developing countries,” it said.
The US, on the other hand, stressed the market-based measure should “achieve the widest possible coverage”.
It is a re-run of arguments in climate talks that were laid to rest with the adoption of the Paris Agreement, under which national governments determined their own commitments…
Flightpath 1.5, a coalition of NGOs, estimates the emissions gap at 7.8 billion tonnes of CO2 between 2020 and 2040. If, as they urge, the sector sets more ambitious emissions curbs in line with the Paris, the gulf widens.
Yet 40% of emissions in the first five years will not be covered, due to carve-outs for poor and small markets, said WWF’s Brad Schallert.
“With that level of exemptions in the text, the aviation industry is really undermining its own target and any credibility.” “
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/10/china-and-us-set-for-airline-emissions-clash/
LikeLike
How does this undermine the fact that China’s emissions IN TOTAL HAVE GONE DOWN?! God, you’re a blockhead.
And the blog itself is fine, but some of the commenter are less than impressive.
Now will you do everyone a favor and shut up!!!!!!
LikeLike
” emissions IN TOTAL HAVE GONE DOWN “
Yes, yes, I hear that for decades now. Man, it is no problem, to fiddle with numbers. The economic system does it all the time, fiddlig the numbers is SYSTEM IMMANENT in the economic global system. But anyway, have you even read the Abstract of the paper above? It says:
“… Despite its importance, an analysis of CO2 emissions with the future development of this industry and the impacts of crucial factors is missing from the literature… The results show that the air traffic demand has the most significant influence on emissions…”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261916305864
Want more? No problem:
” 28.3.2016 – Uncertainties around reductions in China’s coal use and CO2 emissions
Chinese coal consumption dropped 2.9% in 2014 according to preliminary official statistics released in 2015. This was hailed as historic after China’s meteoric growth in the 2000s. The International Energy Agency used it to estimate ~1.5% reduction in Chinese fossil CO2 emissions for 2014, and an unprecedented 0.2% reduction in global emissions. Similar preliminary coal consumption statistics are announced every year, and will be watched closely after China’s recent slowdown in emissions growth and pledge to peak emissions in 2030 or earlier. However, Chinese energy statistics are frequently revised and often contain large anomalies, implying high uncertainty. For example, BP used different Chinese data to estimate a 0.9% increase in 2014 CO2 emissions. Here, we analyse these preliminary announcements, with an approach that can be used to assess the robustness of similar future announcements. We show that the preliminary 2.9% reduction in coal consumption is inappropriate for estimating CO2 emissions, that coal-derived energy consumption stayed flat but is likely to have decreased in 2015, and that Chinese fossil CO2 emissions probably increased ~0.8% in 2014. We also analyse recent revisions of official energy statistics, and find that they imply 925 MtCO2 (11.2%) higher emissions for 2013, and 7.6 GtCO2 (9.2%) higher total emissions for 2000–2013…“
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2963.html
And what does the New York Times say about China’a CO2 emissions from coal plants?:
” 3.11.2015 – China Burns Much More Coal Than Reported, Complicating Climate Talks
China, the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases from coal, has been burning up to 17 percent more coal a year than the government previously disclosed, according to newly released data. The finding could complicate the already difficult efforts to limit global warming.
Even for a country of China’s size, the scale of the correction is immense. The sharp upward revision in official figures means that China has released much more carbon dioxide — almost a billion more tons a year according to initial calculations — than previously estimated.
The increase alone is greater than the whole German economy emits annually from fossil fuels…”
After all, it does not make me wonder, that China is dreaming of a fleet of nuclear power plants at sea (like John said above) right now 8-)
About shutting up:
I will shut up as soon as I give up the climate discussion completely. But for now, there is ~1% hope left in my mind. But with a little help of yours and alike, this 1% will soon be annihilated and then you get your silence. Not far away anymore ;-)
LikeLike
Link for the New York Times article above:
LikeLike
And another one for you, bobcobbblog (got that from whatsupwiththat, hahaha):
” 5.5.2016 – Plans for coal-fired power in Asia are ‘disaster for planet’ warns World Bank
Experts have offered stark warnings that proposed power plants in India, China, Vietnam and Indonesia would blow Paris climate deal if they move ahead…”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/05/climate-change-coal-power-asia-world-bank-disaster
Believe it or not:
This fiddling and fighting about NUMBERS will go on forever. WHY ?! Because we live in a purely PROFITORIENTED economic system. Question:
Have you ever played Poker? The first rule of Poker:
Never let the opponent take a look at your cards. Well, so far about numbers and CO2 emissions.
LikeLike
@SJ
” Ignorant Trump claims hair spray doesn’t work anymore because of ozone damage he doesn’t believe in”
Com on, show compassion, this beautiful guy needs lots and lots of hair spray, can’t you see?:
LikeLike
If if this man gets president, then you can forget the US climate discussion and the END will be near. This man incorporates the perfect Capitalist in a perfect performance.
We can learn from history, that, when the times get tough, the mass calls for “strong hardliner guys” like Mr. Trump et al.
LikeLike
Nemesis, a lot of times you piss me off, but the Donald Trump thing made me laugh
LikeLike
Trump is one of those Power Players, John mentioned. Imgagine:
The perfect capitalist as president of the United States. He doesn’t need the backup of Rockefellas et al, like all the other candites at the right and the left. With Trump, you’d get the perfect capitalist Oligarch, standing completely on his own money, like Putin for instance. Then money and power, ultimate capitalism combined with anti-science agitation, anti-muslim fighting, anti-abortion ect ect, back to the middle ages, fast forward to free capitalism, free global market for every Power Player individual. Let’s privatize the whole planet !… it’s happening already, it’s called “Globalisation”.
LikeLike
But Trump is nothing compared to chinese capitalism. Today I saw a documentary about a chinese corporation, a complete city with 57 000 workers, all in a yellow uniform, singing the hymn of the corporation every morning, all living in the corporation city with husband/wife and children, all working for nothing compared to american income, capitalism a la military, army-style, capitalism like WAR, GLOBAL WAR against the planet, against humankind. This is the near future, the final stage of global capitalism.
LikeLike
Correction:
There are 86 000 workers in that chinese corporation city. 86 000 capitalist soldiers, capitalists slaves in a global, economic war.
LikeLike