Jimi H.
Paranormal Adept
Yep, it's a pattern.
Just like CO2 gets stored, - which was the point of the article which pduchesne misunderstood. He didn't get that the deep oceans have an 800 year cycle.
Last edited:
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
They Should Tell You Climate change
- Thread starter stonehart
- Start date
Free episodes:
You can crank up the hostility all you want, but you are still wrong. You implied the arctic was never passable and we are experiencing something unique. That simply can't be proven. The fact is that the first time a boat made it through the NW passage was in 1905. I didn't make that up, and it is telling that you want to rewrite history to support your belief system. We have experienced a slight warming recently, but there were similar warming trends in the late 1800s, then again starting around 1920. It is possible that the NW passage in 1905 would have been even more open if there were ice breakers and accompanying oil ships roaming the arctic like they do today. Even if the opening in 2009 was greater than the earlier ones, what does that prove? It was one year in the life of a four billion year old planet. If I were to be equally dishonest I would claim the fact that Lake Superior has more ice than at any time in recorded history is indication of global cooling.
It's not.
And until Greenland gets warmer than it was when the Vikings lived there, I don't think we need to worry about it.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
Again, as stated previously, it took three years to navigate that ship in 1905 hugging the coast line, waiting for warm spells to free a small ship travelling someimes in shallow three feet of water depths. That is not the same as commercially viable open water which is what we're talking about.
When you look at the number of northwest crossings the frequency ramps up as you approach the millennium. What's being talked about regarding own ice and commercial travel is radically different from Amundsen's very labored isolated, multi-year voyage. Apples and oranges.
When you look at the number of northwest crossings the frequency ramps up as you approach the millennium. What's being talked about regarding own ice and commercial travel is radically different from Amundsen's very labored isolated, multi-year voyage. Apples and oranges.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
Actually I'm highly tolerant of most positions unless they are inequitable, anti-diversity and hate-oriented. I also take issue with the fact the planet is getting wiped out by the masses and yet many choose instead to deny the historical facts before us which will ultimately plunge the human populous into chaos, prompting more devestation in a fight over resources in the way that denying the facts of the past created the pathways to genocide in Eastern Europe and all across the African continent.
The phrase, Wake Up Down There, gets echoed frequently in an attempt to correct this malaise but still the denial of environmental devestation persists. So what's a better tact: acknowldge that the human impact on the planet and the species - including us, has been one of horrific proportions or spend time debating the issue in order to rationalize the continued plunder of the life forms and resources on this planet?
Everyone should be shocked by the constant extinction of species, the toxification of all waterways and oceans, not to mention the rise of cancer in the industrial age, and the increase of suicide rates in youth. We have made ourselves sick. But, no let's waste more time debating the climate, ignore all our waste products, the plastics and carcinogens we put in our foodstuffs that we feed to children all for the sake of profit.
That's not drama - it's reality.
So please forgive me if I get hot under the collar while others laugh it off.
nobody laughs it of, but getting all wound uptight about it is futile, theres nothing you can do, thats the the problem with crying wolf too many times, first we were all going to freeze to death in a new ice age, now we are just 20 years later all going to drown, and all predicted by the same idiot proffesionals, 100% reversal.
our destruction of our planet is shameful, and theres no point fretting about that either, the war is lost.
our destruction of our planet is shameful, and theres no point fretting about that either, the war is lost.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
Brother, if we don't fret about it then what we leave for the next lot is damnation. As a parent living in North America my guilt is palpable daily in my 75 km one way commute to work. At the very least I feel compelled to learn how to grow trees from seed and both espouse & model values as I can.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
yes, the world will definitely see the other side of our sad race, but what's quite tragic about it all is that we have the capacity to see to the beginning of time, can imagine new ways of seeing, communicating, building, healing etc. that is absolutely amazing, but we can't take care of the planet because of selfishness. what a self-destructive, immature & ignorant species we are, and yet imbued with so much dynamic potential. a pathetic waste in some ways. *shakes head despondently and walks away to the far end of the field*
Jimi H.
Paranormal Adept
Does it make you feel better if no one else gives a damn either, and resign to depressed fatalism? Or should you encourage them to use their energy for something positive?
I think it's time we asked these questions, in relation to environmental matters.
Personally, I'm a big Nietszche fan, and environmental matters really show me that he was right, the depression of nihilism is widespread.
"Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value."
Nihilism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited:
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Extinction of various species is nothing new. Do an ounce of real research sometime. Facts can be fun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In 1990 the IPCC predicted the end of civilization based on the above red line. If the people of the world didn't have a spiritual conversion and accept environmentalist dogma, and tithe accordingly, Mother Earth would punish them by fire.
The blue line is what actually happened.
Shouldn't it be good news that CO2 didn't have the catastrophic effect that we feared? Shouldn't scientists have scrapped their disproven hypothesis and sought deeper understanding of how the climate really works? And why do questions like these cause people to respond in such angry and hateful ways?
One possible answer can be found in the Wikipedia entry for doomsday cults.
"See also: When Prophecy Fails
Social scientists have found that while some group members will leave after the date for a doomsday prediction by the leader has passed uneventfully, others actually feel their belief and commitment to the group strengthened. Often when a group's doomsday prophecies or predictions fail to come true, the group leader will simply set a new date for impending doom, or predict a different type of catastrophe on a different date.[23] Niederhoffer and Kenner say: "When you have gone far out on a limb and so many people have followed you, and there is much "sunk cost," as economists would say, it is difficult to admit you have been wrong."[24]
In Experiments With People: Revelations from Social Psychology, Abelson, Frey and Gregg explain this further: "..continuing to proselytize on behalf of a doomsday cult whose prophecies have been disconfirmed, although it makes little logical sense, makes plenty of psychological sense if people have already spent months proselytizing on the cult's behalf. Persevering allows them to avoid the embarrassment of how wrong they were in the first place."[25] The common-held belief in a catastrophic event occurring on a future date can have the effect of ingraining followers with a sense of uniqueness and purpose.[26] In addition, after a failed prophecy members may attempt to explain the outcome through rationalization and dissonance reduction.[18][27][28]
Explanations may include stating that the group members had misinterpreted the leader's original plan, that the cataclysmic event itself had been postponed to a later date by the leader, or that the activities of the group itself had forestalled disaster.[18] In the case of the Festinger study, when the prophecy of a cataclysmic flood was proved false, the members pronounced that their faith in God had prevented the event.[21] They then proceeded to attempt to convert new members with renewed strength.[21]"
Social scientists have found that while some group members will leave after the date for a doomsday prediction by the leader has passed uneventfully, others actually feel their belief and commitment to the group strengthened. Often when a group's doomsday prophecies or predictions fail to come true, the group leader will simply set a new date for impending doom, or predict a different type of catastrophe on a different date.[23] Niederhoffer and Kenner say: "When you have gone far out on a limb and so many people have followed you, and there is much "sunk cost," as economists would say, it is difficult to admit you have been wrong."[24]
In Experiments With People: Revelations from Social Psychology, Abelson, Frey and Gregg explain this further: "..continuing to proselytize on behalf of a doomsday cult whose prophecies have been disconfirmed, although it makes little logical sense, makes plenty of psychological sense if people have already spent months proselytizing on the cult's behalf. Persevering allows them to avoid the embarrassment of how wrong they were in the first place."[25] The common-held belief in a catastrophic event occurring on a future date can have the effect of ingraining followers with a sense of uniqueness and purpose.[26] In addition, after a failed prophecy members may attempt to explain the outcome through rationalization and dissonance reduction.[18][27][28]
Explanations may include stating that the group members had misinterpreted the leader's original plan, that the cataclysmic event itself had been postponed to a later date by the leader, or that the activities of the group itself had forestalled disaster.[18] In the case of the Festinger study, when the prophecy of a cataclysmic flood was proved false, the members pronounced that their faith in God had prevented the event.[21] They then proceeded to attempt to convert new members with renewed strength.[21]"
Nuff said.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
I love CO2, more would be good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jimi H.
Paranormal Adept
Check this:
Trends in global CO2 emissions: 2013 report - PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
"Actual global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) reached a new record of 34.5 billion tonnes in 2012. Yet, the increase in global CO2 emissions in that year slowed down to 1.1% (or 1.4%, not accounting the extra day in the leap year), which was less than half the average annual increase of 2.9% over the last decade. This development signals a shift towards less fossil-fuel-intensive activities, more use of renewable energy and increased energy saving."
So, emissions are still increasing, but slower than they used to. I guess that's good news, but it's not good enough..
Trends in global CO2 emissions: 2013 report - PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
"Actual global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) reached a new record of 34.5 billion tonnes in 2012. Yet, the increase in global CO2 emissions in that year slowed down to 1.1% (or 1.4%, not accounting the extra day in the leap year), which was less than half the average annual increase of 2.9% over the last decade. This development signals a shift towards less fossil-fuel-intensive activities, more use of renewable energy and increased energy saving."
So, emissions are still increasing, but slower than they used to. I guess that's good news, but it's not good enough..
In 1990 co2 was about 300 ppm. Now co2 is about 400 ppm. The temperature is up about 0.2C. Nobody knows how much of that small increase in temp is due to co2, but at that rate it is going to take 200 years for earth to get to its ideal temperature.
I can't tell if you are just being flippant to have fun with certain individuals, but...
Until CO2 became a political football, the earth was considered to be CO2 deprived. Plant life, and therefor all life, thrives best with CO2 at 1200-1500 ppm. That would equate to about a 2 degree C increase in global temperature, which would be about perfect. We won't be alive to see these levels, but the earth is already getting greener as a result of more CO2 in the air.
that is true, in the dinosaur era, oxygen levels were 20% higher than today, due to carbon transition thru plant/tree life, it was a volcanic era, as the earth cooled so the dinosaur perished over the millenia, alittle here alittle there as the air/oxygen thinned the predators got that little bit less efficient, due to have no diaphragm's, until the asteriod finished them off.
all predators that survived had diaphragm's to pump oxygen, infact if memory serves me right only animals with diaphragms survived the ice age.
i will tell how they could measure the oxygen content from all those millions of years ago, bubbles trapped in amber.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
I am being honest. More CO2 would be good. You are stating things perfectly.. Btw I was banned once while discussing this topic.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
Far from getting greener, the planet is just getting browner, or closer to the colour of sand, more and more each day. And of course as the lungs of the planet disappear, without them to properly complete the carbon cycle, or slow wind, and then of course as water warms it also accelerates wind and that's what helps to give us all the lovely extreme weather. So while some may have this fantasy theoretical view of the planet happily basking in its extra dense shroud of CO2 what you actually will get is more and more of a wasteland to live in. You will have less plants, less animals, less food and a really crappy weather forecast for the end times. But hey, blow up the balloons, call the caterers and let's have a party. Pixel - you're buying the first round, I take it?