Climate change discussion

1,044 posts in this topic

47 minutes ago, jeremytwo said:

Okay okay I've changed it. It was a sarcastic comment!

No it wasnt ... it down right racist and offensive...  

 

Quote

Look, If I was American

 

 

If you were American, there is a pretty good change your neighbors will have shot you or beaten the crap out of you... 

 

 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, jeremytwo said:

And as for what chocolate Jesus did for gun rights in the US

1 hour ago, fraufruit said:

Racist pig!

 

1 hour ago, jeremytwo said:

Okay okay I've changed it. It was a sarcastic comment!

 

1 hour ago, El Jeffo said:

5c6587f7f28cb_wEhXGrr1.png.a070395940756

 

1 hour ago, hooperski said:

Twas only banter, my dear,

 

1 hour ago, fraufruit said:

You forgot gentle. Gentle banter. :rolleyes:

 

He's a condescending asshole and needs to be banned.

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Metall said:

He's a condescending asshole and needs to be banned.

 

You and several others would simply put him on ignore if you didn't enjoy your regular fix of outrage porn.  

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only looked at his post after mine after betting myself a glass of wine that he would mention Deep State in there somewhere due to the topic.

 

I got my wine.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fraufruit said:

I only looked at his post after mine after betting myself a glass of wine that he would mention Deep State in there somewhere due to the topic.

 

I got my wine.

 

 

If you bet against yourself, doesn't that mean you get a glass of wine no matter what?   LOL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both balticus and J2 on full ignore. It's surprising how much you get to see just from what other people quote and what the overview page shows.

*yawns and wanders off the thread*

 

(oh btw, no way balticus is a real Estonian. He's fake.)

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Climate change played a hand in the deadly floods in the U.S. upper Midwest that have damaged crops and drowned livestock, scientists said on Thursday, while a Trump administration official said more homework was needed before making that link.

The "bomb cyclone" that dumped rain on Nebraska, Iowa and Missouri and killed at least four people now threatens a wider region downstream of swollen rivers and smashed levees.

Manmade greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, warming the oceans and making the air above them more humid, scientists said. When a storm picks up and eventually spits out that moisture, it can be devastating for people caught below.

"The atmosphere is pretty close to fully saturated, it's got all the water it can take," said Michael Wehner, a senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Big storms like the bomb cyclone and Hurricane Harvey, which smacked Houston in 2017 with record downpours, are where the impact of climate change can most clearly be seen, he said, adding that climate change's fingerprints were all over the recent storm.

 

 

more

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a very interesting article. 

CO2 makes up 0.04% of the Earths atmosphere. Most of this CO2 was not manmade and has likely existed there for thousands of years. The amount of this most often cited as "Manmade CO2" is around 10%. Man has had 0.004% effect of the Earths atmosphere in terms of CO2.

 

Lets say that most of that effect occurred during the last 50 years. That gives us an average effect of 0.00008% on the atmosphere per year. How are we even able to measure this?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fromm said:

That's a very interesting article. 

CO2 makes up 0.04% of the Earths atmosphere. Most of this CO2 was not manmade and has likely existed there for thousands of years. The amount of this most often cited as "Manmade CO2" is around 10%. Man has had 0.004% effect of the Earths atmosphere in terms of CO2.

No, it is around 30%.

 

9 hours ago, Fromm said:

 

Lets say that most of that effect occurred during the last 50 years. That gives us an average effect of 0.00008% on the atmosphere per year. How are we even able to measure this?

...with sensors? You are massaging data to make it look meaningless.

First, it is 3x larger than you said. So it is 0.00026%. But you actually dont need that precision, you can measure a trend over the years.

There are several ways to measure CO2. Satellite measurement is one. Another is pumping air through filters in balloons or at sea level.

Let´s assume the later. If you pump 1000 liters of air through a sensor, it would measure 0.4 liters of carbon dioxide. doesn´t sound so hard.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Measuring CO2 is easy.  Ensuring that your measurements are representative of the atmosphere as a whole isnt, but its also not impossible,

 

Man produces around 3% os the CO2 released into the atmosphere each year. 

 

Current CO2 levels are about 400 ppm, and in the 19 century the level was around 280 ppm. 

 

In other words atmospheric CO2 is currently around 40% higher than before the industrial revolution.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MikeMelga

 

What is around 30%?  The amount of mans contribution to the total of CO2 that is currently in the Earth's atmosphere? You quoted 3 different figures I gave.

11 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

 

 

First, it is 3x larger than you said. So it is 0.00026%. But you actually dont need that precision, you can measure a trend over the years.

 

 

 

Sure, I see what you mean here. We can say 150 years instead of 50. So in the last 150 years, man has had a effect of 0.00026% on the Earths atmosphere, per annum, in terms of C02. This is NOT a meaningless number.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, zwiebelfisch said:

Measuring CO2 is easy.  Ensuring that your measurements are representative of the atmosphere as a whole isnt, but its also not impossible,

 

Man produces around 3% os the CO2 released into the atmosphere each year. 

 

Current CO2 levels are about 400 ppm, and in the 19 century the level was around 280 ppm. 

 

In other words atmospheric CO2 is currently around 40% higher than before the industrial revolution.

You are a smart fisch.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Attenborough climate change TV show a 'call to arms'

 

Quote

Sir David Attenborough's new BBC documentary on climate change has been praised by TV critics.

 

Climate Change - The Facts, shown on BBC One on Thursday, was a "rousing call to arms", said the Guardian.

In a four-star review, the Times said the veteran presenter "took a sterner tone... as though his patience was nearly spent".

Sir David, 92, has called global warming "our greatest threat in thousands of years".

 

In its review, The Arts Desk said: "Devastating footage of last year's climactic upheavals makes surreal viewing.

 

"While Earth has survived radical climactic changes and regenerated following mass extinctions, it's not the destruction of Earth that we are facing, it's the destruction of our familiar, natural world and our uniquely rich human culture.

 

"In the 20 years since I first started talking about the impact of climate change on our world, conditions have changed far faster than I ever imagined," Sir David said in the film.

 

"It may sound frightening, but the scientific evidence is that if we have not taken dramatic action within the next decade, we could face irreversible damage to the natural world and the collapse of our societies."

 

"A panoply of profs line up to explain that the science on climate change is now unequivocal, never mind the brief clip of Donald Trump prating: 'It's a hoax, it's a hoax, OK'."

But it added: "Fortunately for our nerves the last 20 minutes focuses on what needs to be - and can be - done on an international and personal level."

 

Sir David's concern over the impacts of climate change has become a major focus for the naturalist in recent years and has been a theme of his Our Planet series on Netflix.

 

BBC

 

Let this finally quell the deniers... (fat fucking chance)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article is spot on, but unless the whole world acts as one, then the experts are shouting into an empty room.

Countries like China and India will never stop using fossil fuels, America could, but all the time Dickhead Donny is in charge they won't stop.

The writing is on the wall.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, except for the China part. China is actually making efforts to reduce fossil fuel dependency and transition to electric transport.

 

Quote

On a per-capita basis, it was the world's 42nd largest emitter of greenhouse gases in 2014.[7]

China is also the world's largest renewable energy producer.[8] China is the largest producer of hydroelectricity, solar power and wind power in the world.

 

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

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now