Is this *finally* the moment we wake up to the climate crisis?

[Heyo]

Then why was there vegetation where there wasn't supposed to be vegetation?

"Their results show that most, or all, of Greenland must have been ice-free within the last million years, perhaps even the last few hundred-thousand years."

Surprising Discovery Of Plants Beneath Mile-Deep Greenland Ice | MessageToEagle.com

Or maybe I misunderstood your comment... I realized it could be taken two ways

How did you get from floods in New York to Greenland?

 

[Kenny]

How did you get from floods in New York to Greenland?

cycles. If there is vegetation under glaciers, water levels were up because there was no ice. New York would have been flooded.

 

[Heyo]

cycles. If there is vegetation under glaciers, water levels were up because there was no ice. New York would have been flooded.

Yes. And ...
You don't mind New York getting flooded again?

 

[Windwalker]

There are always dissenting voices:

Sorry, But With Global Warming It's The Sun, Stupid

"It worked! As reported in the Aug. 25 issue of the journal Nature, Jasper Kirkby and his 62 co-authors from 17 institutes in Europe and the U.S. announced that the sun indeed has a significant influence on our planet's temperature. Their "Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets" (CLOUD) experiment proved that its magnetic field does, in fact, act as a gateway for cosmic rays that play a large role in cloud formation. The report stated "Ion-induced nucleation [cosmic ray action] will manifest itself as a steady production of new particles [molecular clusters] that is difficult to isolate in atmospheric observations because of other sources of variability but is nevertheless taking place and could be quite large globally over the troposphere [the lower atmosphere]." In other words, the big influence exists, yet hasn't been factored into climate models."

There are always hacks and frauds and deniers and pseudoscientists. And there is also the twisting of facts, skewing them to hear the things we want to from them and ignoring what challenges us. Who we listen to, and how we listen, speaks of the validity and integrity our faith, IMHO.

Why is it it so many appear to be so consistently attracted to the fringes on a long list of topics? Does it feel self-empowering to be contrary, even if it means embracing irrationality? I wonder why so many are drawn to this like moths to a flame. It's a consistent behavioural phenomenon, and it's a puzzle to me. I see it as a problem.

 

[tas8831]

Let’s all watch the movie “2012”!

(already 9 yrs old)

Great comment....

 

[tas8831]

There seems to be a strong correlation between the Religious right and denial of all kinds.
That is Probably why there is far less denial in Europe than the USA.
There is far less freaky religion, and what there is has no relevance to government.

It seems that some of the fundamental religious types actually welcome Global Warming and disasters of all kinds.
They welcome them as signs of God's disapproval. rather than anything man made. or that they are responsible for.

Sad, isn't it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Secrets Under the Ice

The question isn't "why" but the reality that there are cycles.

There is no doubt about that. But that has nothing to do with AGW. You appear to be conflating natural cycles with ones caused by man

 

[Kenny]

Yes. And ...
You don't mind New York getting flooded again?

Of course.... I mind that hurricanes tumble houses and building at the beach (don't know why they build it there) - but we can't stop hurricanes at this point and we can't stop the impact of the sun on our planet.

 

[England my lionheart]

Is this *finally* the moment we wake up to the climate crisis? - CNNPolitics

(CNN)Record flooding in Philadelphia and New York City. Tornadoes in New Jersey. Fires burning through California and Nevada.

Everywhere you look, extreme weather. Weather the likes of which even meteorologists and other experts say they have never seen before.
What's perhaps more remarkable is that we know why all of this is happening: Our changing climate. As the Earth warms, more extreme weather becomes more of the rule rather than its exception.
In April, the World Meteorological Organization released a report detailing a five-fold increase in the number of extreme weather events over the past five decades. The WMO, which is part of the United Nations, estimated that those extreme weather events have left more than 2 million people around the globe dead and cost $3.64 trillion in total losses.

Alarm had gone off years ago,don’t smoke don’t drink alcohol don’t take drugs and you’ll live longer but live on what,the amount of money wasted on such trivialities compared to the climate and over population is ridiculous

 

[Kenny]

There is no doubt about that. But that has nothing to do with AGW. You appear to be conflating natural cycles with ones caused by man

My point is that all we do is look at man and don't factor in the greater of the problem, the sun, and just relegate the whole thing to man.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My point is that all we do is look at man and don't factor in the greater of the problem, the sun, and just relegate the whole thing to man.

That is not true. This appears to be projection. Climate scientists try to take all causes into consideration. For example we know that it is not the Sun since it goes through cycles of more and less activity and we are in a low period right now. That can be directly measured:

Four decades and counting: New NASA instrument continues measuring solar energy input to Earth – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

The short term cycle is heading for a low right now. If you look longer term it was strongest in 1978 when they began to measure and it has roughly declined since then.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

My point is that all we do is look at man and don't factor in the greater of the problem, the sun, and just relegate the whole thing to man.

Just to confirm what @Subduction Zone has mentioned. Yes, the solar rotation, sun spot cycles, the Milinković cycles, variance in atmospheric volcanic ash and CO2 from volcanoes, etc…etc… have ALL been included into the calculations. No. Those things are not it.
What concerns the scientific climatological groups is what mankind has (and still is) adding ON TOP OF all of those well known natural fluctuations. What they are reporting on is the influence that man has had on climate. That is why it is referred to as AGW (Anthropological Global Warming).

“Hey, Dr. Williams. Did you factor in the reflective nature of water over 3/4 of the Earth’s surface?” “D’OH!!”
Hey, Dr. Merrigold. Did you account for the temperature fluctuations between winter and summer?” “Drat!!”

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just to confirm what @Subduction Zone has mentioned. Yes, the solar rotation, sun spot cycles, the Milinković cycles, variance in atmospheric volcanic ash and CO2 from volcanoes, etc…etc… have ALL been included into the calculations. No. Those things are not it.
What concerns the scientific climatological groups is what mankind has (and still is) adding ON TOP OF all of those well known natural fluctuations. What they are reporting on is the influence that man has had on climate. That is why it is referred to as AGW (Anthropological Global Warming).

“Hey, Dr. Williams. Did you factor in the reflective nature of water over 3/4 of the Earth’s surface?” “D’OH!!”
Hey, Dr. Merrigold. Did you account for the temperature fluctuations between winter and summer?” “Drat!!”

One thing that helps me on this is that I used to be a skeptic. Now I was a skeptic with an agenda so I was close to being a denier, but there is a big difference between a denier and a skeptic. When I argued with others and they made claims I checked out their claims. Far too often I found out that their claims were correct. And the flaws in my arguments were becoming clear to me. A denier never tries to understand the evidence brought against them. They simply decide it is not enough without looking into it even though it will refute their arguments. Finally two key bits of evidence convinced me that I was wrong. The Arctic Sea Ice Volume Death Spiral graphs made the change obvious.

And the second was Lord Monckton. He was lecturing and clearly distorting evidence. At this point I realized that even he probably knew that he was wrong. If one is right there is no need to rely on dishonest debating techniques. He was almost exactly like a creationist and at that point I could not longer deny the fact of AGW. Even though I did not want it to be true.

 

[England my lionheart]

My point is that all we do is look at man and don't factor in the greater of the problem, the sun, and just relegate the whole thing to man.

well you can’t miss pointing at humans,there are almost 8 billion of us,we are the straw that broke the camels back,it’s so obvious really.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

My point is that all we do is look at man and don't factor in the greater of the problem, the sun, and just relegate the whole thing to man.

The temperature related to the sun has been virtually constant during the time man has been on the planet.
The changes that are happening now are related to human activity.

So what is your point?


In a good few millions of years the sun will swell and devour all the inner planets, but that is a totally different phenomena, and is inevitable in the life cycle of a sun.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The temperature related to the sun has been virtually constant during the time man has been on the planet.
The changes that are happening now are related to human activity.

So what is your point?


In a good few millions of years the sun will swell and devour all the inner planets, but that is a totally different phenomena, and is inevitable in the life cycle of a sun.

 

[Kenny]

That is not true. This appears to be projection. Climate scientists try to take all causes into consideration. For example we know that it is not the Sun since it goes through cycles of more and less activity and we are in a low period right now. That can be directly measured:

Four decades and counting: New NASA instrument continues measuring solar energy input to Earth – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

The short term cycle is heading for a low right now. If you look longer term it was strongest in 1978 when they began to measure and it has roughly declined since then.

"It worked! As reported in the Aug. 25 issue of the journal Nature, Jasper Kirkby and his 62 co-authors from 17 institutes in Europe and the U.S. announced that the sun indeed has a significant influence on our planet's temperature. Their "Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets" (CLOUD) experiment proved that its magnetic field does, in fact, act as a gateway for cosmic rays that play a large role in cloud formation. The report stated "Ion-induced nucleation [cosmic ray action] will manifest itself as a steady production of new particles [molecular clusters] that is difficult to isolate in atmospheric observations because of other sources of variability but is nevertheless taking place and could be quite large globally over the troposphere [the lower atmosphere]." In other words, the big influence exists, yet hasn't been factored into climate models."

I prefer the conclusion given by 62 co-authors in 17 Institutes from Europe and the US. I believe it is a more comprehensive approach

 

[Kenny]

well you can’t miss pointing at humans,there are almost 8 billion of us,we are the straw that broke the camels back,it’s so obvious really.

I don't think so...

Although we can affect where we live, there is about 16 billion acres of habitable land which equate to one person per 2 acres.

There is 57 billion square miles on the earth which means there is almost 8 square miles of total of earth Capacity per person. I think the earth is a lot stronger than what we think.

 

[Kenny]

The temperature related to the sun has been virtually constant during the time man has been on the planet.
The changes that are happening now are related to human activity.

So what is your point?


In a good few millions of years the sun will swell and devour all the inner planets, but that is a totally different phenomena, and is inevitable in the life cycle of a sun.

So, what caused Greenland from being fertile land for planting to become glacier ice?

 

[Heyo]

Of course.... I mind that hurricanes tumble houses and building at the beach (don't know why they build it there) - but we can't stop hurricanes at this point and we can't stop the impact of the sun on our planet.

Yes, that's true, the sun is getting hotter and will go into it's red giant phase - in 5 billion years. CO2 is building up in the atmosphere now. A Milankovic cycle between ice ages and interglacials is about 100,000 years - we have changes in temperature measurable in decades.
And actually we don't have to do anything - we have to stop doing something, namely burning fossil fuel.