Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Has Global Warming Peaked?

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby dissident » Sat 09 Mar 2019, 21:51:41

Keith_McClary wrote:
rockdoc123 wrote:
That is how science works. Someone proposes a theory, others pick it apart and point out the shortcomings and the individual who proposed the original theory can choose to adjust his theory, abandon it and/or create a new one.

That is not how we got Relativity, QM and Plate Tectonics. It was other individuals who had a new theory. Your skeptics have no theory.


They have no observations either. All they have is FUD and are paid to spread it. This includes the same clowns that were hired by the tobacco industry to deny any cancer link.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5607
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 09 Mar 2019, 22:42:58

Sorry if we sound skeptical Rockdoc but we have valid reasons to be so. https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/f ... stry-memos

Decades of misinformation and deception, and much of it from your former employers, the Fossil fuel industry
And we also, cannot help bringing up the pesky real world events happening now that increasingly point to the fact thst we are on the cusp of major climate change. The biggest one being an ice free Arctic. Something that the Science is clear has not been a regular feature of Earth since millions of years back.
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10510
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 00:00:25

They have no observations either. All they have is FUD and are paid to spread it. This includes the same clowns that were hired by the tobacco industry to deny any cancer link


apparently, you are living in a bubble. Who is being paid here? What is your evidence of that? And why in anyone's imagination would a major oil company pay anyone to try and convince someone like you? Oh ....lets spend millions of dollars to get dissident to agree with us...if that doesn't sound stupid to you then you really have a problem.

It is very clear from your posts that you are living in an environment of information decimation that is about 10 years old. Perhaps you need to update your understanding of the issues? :roll:
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7206
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:17:19

For nearly three decades, many of the world's largest fossil fuel companies have knowingly worked to deceive the public about the realities and risks of climate change.

Their deceptive tactics are now highlighted in this set of seven "deception dossiers"—collections of internal company and trade association documents that have either been leaked to the public, come to light through lawsuits, or been disclosed through Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests.

Each collection provides an illuminating inside look at this coordinated campaign of deception, an effort underwritten by ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, Shell, Peabody Energy, and other members of the fossil fuel industry.

UPDATE (July 9, 2015): As this report went to press, a newly discovered email from a former Exxon employee revealed that the company was already factoring climate change into decisions about new fossil fuel extraction as early as 1981.


https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/fi ... ssiers.pdf

Obviously somebody has been paying all these people all those years to spread dis-information .....
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:26:11

Who is being paid here? What is your evidence of that?


Glad you asked;

The documents, obtained through a FOIA request by Greenpeace and the Climate Investigations Center, show that Wei-Hock (“Willie”) Soon received more than $1.2 million in research funding between 2001 and 2012 from fossil fuel interests including ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute (API), the Charles Koch Foundation, and Southern Company, a large electric utility in Atlanta that generates most of its power from coal. Soon, whose background is not in climate science but rather in aerospace engineering, has long used his affiliation with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics to add credence to his climate-related research. Soon has written about many aspects of climate change but is best known for his work on the role of solar variability, research that has broadly overstated the role the sun plays in climate change and has been largely discredited by his scientific peers (see, for example, Mooney 2015; Schmidt 2015; Schmidt 2005; Sanchez 2003).

In response to the Soon revelations, the Smithsonian Institution has launched an investigation into its disclosure and funding policies. As the contracts, proposals, reports, letters, and other documents reveal, Soon relied exclusively on grants from the fossil fuel industry for his entire salary and research budget (Gillis and Schwartz 2015; Smithsonian 2015). Particularly troubling, the Smithsonian Institution entered into funding agreements that gave Soon’s funders the right to review his scientific studies before they were published. The documents also show that the Smithsonian agreed not to disclose the funding arrangement without the funder’s permission (Smithsonian 2008). Soon reported his research articles and even his congressional testimony to his corporate underwriters as “deliverables” (McNeil 2011; Soon 2011).


And yet deniers every so often try to blame solar variability, even though it has been discredited....

That was the reason his "research" was funded in the first place

To have fake discredited talking points for deniers to try to derail any HONEST discussions, with his discredited junk science.
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:36:28

And why in anyone's imagination would a major oil company pay anyone to try and convince someone like you?


Interesting question ...

The API’s Global Climate Science Communications Team consisted of representatives from the fossil fuel industry, trade associations, and public relations firms. At the time, the team’s attention was focused on derailing the Kyoto Proto-col—the international agreement committing participating countries to binding emissions reductions—that had been adopted by the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December 1997. In response to this development, and to stave off approval of the treaty by the U.S. Senate and other climate action in the United States, the API team’s 1998 memo mapped out a multifaceted deception strategy for the fossil fuel industry that continues to this day—outlining plans to reach the media, the public, and policy makers with a message emphasizing “uncertainties” in climate science. According to the memo (Figure 4, p. 10), “victory” would be achieved for the campaign when “average citizens” and the media were convinced of “uncertainties” in climate science despite overwhelming evidence of the impact of human-caused global warming and nearly unanimous agreement about it in the scientific community.

The fossil fuel companies, mimicking the tobacco companies, adopted a strategy that sought to “manufacture uncertainty” about global warming even in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence that it is human-caused, is accelerating at an alarming rate, and poses myriad public health and environmental dangers. The fossil fuel industry not only took a page from the tobacco playbook in its efforts to defeat action on climate change, it even drew upon a number of the key players who had contributed to the tobacco industry’s deception campaign and a remarkably similar network of public relations firms and nonprofit “front groups,” some of whom continue to actively sow disinforma-tion about global warming today (Oreskes and Conway 2010; Hoggan and Littlemore 2009).


Yes victory muddy the waters so most people aren't quite sure, then the politicians don't have to actually address the currently happening problem because they can claim no "real consensus" ..... because the very same corporations who fund their campaigns fund denier science to hand them the cudgel to stop any meaningful changes that might impact the bottom line or oil and coal corps and their associated industries.
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:39:14

Oh ....lets spend millions of dollars



And they did;

The fossil fuel companies knew that a disinformation cam-paign of the scope they intended would not be cheap. The Global Climate Science Communications Team estimated the budget for the program at $5,900,000, which included a national media program and national outreach as well as a data center (Walker 1998). The roadmap identified an array of fossil fuel industry trade associations and front groups, fossil fuel companies, and free-market think tanks to underwrite and execute the plan, including:• The American Petroleum Institute and its members• The Business Round Table and its members• The Edison Electric Institute and its members• The Independent Petroleum Association of America and its members• The National Mining Association and its members• The American Legislative Exchange Council• Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow • The Competitive Enterprise Institute• Frontiers of Freedom• The Marshall Institute


Damn man, it's almost like you already read the article .........
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:41:45

t is very clear from your posts that you are living in an environment of information decimation that is about 10 years old.


Really

Recent filings with the California secretary of state show that WSPA nearly doubled its lobbying budget in 2014—the year of Reheis-Boyd’s presentation—to nearly $8.9 million. Equally revealing, the vast majority of this spending—some $7.2 million—was reported under a catchall “other” category that requires no detailed disclosure about how the money was spent. The leaked presentation slide strongly suggests where much of this money went: to create and promote astroturf groups


2019-2014=5

and here is a link from as recent as 2018

https://www.desmogblog.com/western-stat ... ssociation

2019-2018=1

and a second one;

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/6 ... ssociation

2019-2018=1


Don't do teh maths much ... eh?
Last edited by clif on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:58:29, edited 1 time in total.
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:51:25

BTW they also like and forge letters.....

In 2009, Congress was debating the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (often known as the Waxman-Mar-key climate bill), which proposed to institute a federal carbon emissions reduction plan. Two weeks prior to the vote, Rep. Tom Perriello (VA) received a letter opposing the legislation from Creciendo Juntos, a nonprofit Latino organization based in his Charlottesville district. “My organization, Creciendo Juntos, represents minori-ties in your district,” the letter began. “We ask you to use your important position to help protect minorities and other consumers in your district from higher electricity bills. Please don’t vote to force cost increases on us, especially in this volatile economy.” Only after the vote on the bill did Rep. Perriello learn—from Creciendo Juntos—that the letter was a fraud.As it turns out, the letter on Creciendo Juntos stationery was not the only forgery, and Rep. Perriello was not the only member of Congress to receive forged letters opposing the bill. Forged letters were sent purportedly on behalf of orga-nizations including the National Association of the Advance-ment of Colored People (NAACP) (Figure 6), the American Association of University Women, the American Legion, and the Jefferson Area Board on Aging. Fraudulent letters were also sent to Representatives Kathy Dahlkemper (PA) and Chris Carney (PA) (Perriello 2009).Public exposure of the fraud resulted in a congressional investigation and hearing before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The congres-sional investigation revealed that the fraud was perpetrated by Bonner and Associates, a lobbying firm subcontracted by a front group called the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), composed of and funded primarily by coal industry representatives (Center for Media and Democ-racy 2014a). The ACCCE, which remains in operation today, counts among its corporate members Arch Coal, Murray Energy, and Peabody Energy.


Now why would they have to be soooo deceitful,

if their science was soooo good?
Last edited by clif on Sun 10 Mar 2019, 02:00:19, edited 1 time in total.
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby clif » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 01:57:25

And why in anyone's imagination would a major oil company pay anyone to try and convince someone


Like they are doing here;

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group that purports to stand for free-market principles, provides a venue for industry groups to influence policy makers behind closed doors. Leaked internal documents show that ALEC, backed by many industry groups including many major fossil fuel companies such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Shell, continues to serve as an important conduit for climate misinformation and policy proposals designed to block climate action today. (Figure 8 and Appendix F, p. 42).Like other industry groups, ALEC provides a means for major fossil fuel companies to pay lip service to the realities of climate science in their public-facing materials while their behind-the-scenes memberships and sponsorships support misinformation and block climate action.

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group that purports to stand for free-market principles, provides a venue for industry groups to influence policy makers behind closed doors. Leaked internal documents show that ALEC, backed by many industry groups including many major fossil fuel companies such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Shell, continues to serve as an important conduit for climate misinformation and policy proposals designed to block climate action today. (Figure 8 and Appendix F, p. 42).Like other industry groups, ALEC provides a means for major fossil fuel companies to pay lip service to the realities of climate science in their public-facing materials while their behind-the-scenes memberships and sponsorships support misinformation and block climate action.

Much of ALEC’s lobbying has focused on dismantling, at the state level, policies that have proven effective in reducing carbon pollution and accelerating the transition to clean energy.

ALEC has honed several tools in the fossil fuel industry’s lobbying and public relations toolbox: closed-door access to public policy makers—including more than 2,000 state legislators and a network that includes many members of Congress—and the development of industry-friendly sample legislation intended to be used as templates in state legislatures across the country.Sponsoring Misinformation ALEC’s current official position obscures climate change by calling it a “historical phenomenon,” ignoring the primary driver of climate change today—the burning of fossil fuels—and asserts that “the debate will continue on the significance of natural and anthropogenic contributions” (ALEC 2015a).

While downplaying the impacts of climate change, ALEC has been working to block climate action at the federal and state level since the 1990s and was named in the API roadmap memo (Dossier #2, p. 9) as a participating organization or “fund allocator” (Walker 1998).Leaked internal documents reveal the extent of ALEC’s misinformation. For example, ALEC’s 2014 annual meeting in Dallas featured a presentation by Joseph Bast, president of the Heartland Institute, a group with a long history of mis-representing science that is probably best known for posting a billboard likening people who accept climate science to the “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski. The billboard featured a mug shot of a disheveled Kaczynski with the text: “I still believe in Global Warming. Do you?”


Do ya kinda get it yet?
How cathartic it is to give voice to your fury, to wallow in self-righteousness, in helplessness, in self-serving self-pity.
User avatar
clif
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue 11 Aug 2009, 12:04:10

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 04:42:09

Yes, Thanks Clif. So, in a few words all quite crystal clear. The FF industry rakes in as much or more than any industry. So, the disinformation/deception campaign would have actually signified peanuts compared to their potential lost income.
You know what tgey say about crime, attorneys look for 3 things:Means, motive and opportunity. Well, we know the motive is money, the opportunity stems from the corrupt political system and a underinformed/misinformed public. Finally the means is front companies, think tanks and paid off shills from both the business world and Academia ie. scientists
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10510
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby dissident » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 09:34:49

Indeed, thanks for the detailed rebuttal of the resident denier shill.

If we were dealing with the health care sector, then the sort of activity that the deniers and their sponsors are engaged in would be criminal. What they are doing is the equivalent of giving false medical advice. Interestingly, the same sort of constraints are in place for investment advice. But the most important policy subject in the history of humanity, that being its very existence, is left to unqualified riffraff as if it has no consequence.

Climate science is actually vastly more clear on the impact of green house gases on the livability of this planet, than the accepted medical knowledge of the impacts of diet. So doctors pimp the industry-concocted food pyramid as if it has universal value to patients who have insulin resistance (a genetic issue) and doom them to Type II diabetes and likely heart disease and Alzheimer's as well. But the law protects this false advice. Meanwhile, climate science gets dragged through the dirt by paid propaganda from voodoo peddlers who do not have even the right education to engage in their advocacy.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5607
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby dissident » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 09:41:58

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-w ... -timeline/

https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/e ... ier-groups

https://www.desmogblog.com/exxonmobil-f ... nce-denial

Clearly Exxon is spending a lot of money to convince somebody, retarded questions from the denier shill notwithstanding.

And this is Exxon alone! Exxon is part of the larger oil and gas industry and associated industry. Clearly the people who run these companies think that tobacco industry style denial of science is part of their normal business activity. After all, they have a business model and anything that challenges it (including reality) must be undermined.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5607
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 11:58:57

You folks need to get your arguments straight. On the one hand, you are arguing that oil companies are not making any profits, that they are all going out of business and in almost the same breath you are arguing that they are incredibly wealthy and have money to burn so they are throwing it around paying people to make stuff up. So which is it? :roll:

Your logic is basically laughable. If the science of Climate Change was settled and very simple as some here would seem to want everyone to believe then I’m sure it could weather the storm of some criticism whether it was offered up free of charge or someone paid for it. The fact that you throw a wobbly anytime someone questions any aspect of the new religion tells me you just aren’t as confident in the veracity of your argument as you would like everyone to believe.

But my point still holds….nobody in the industry cares about anyone on this or any other discussion boards views or opinions, and they certainly aren’t going to pay someone to convince a bunch of people on a Peak Oil site about anything. If you think otherwise I'm sure there are some conspiracy sites that you will enjoy.

And by the way, using Greenpeace or Desmogblog as your source of "credible" information doesn't help your case. :roll:
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7206
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby jawagord » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 12:34:55

clif wrote:
by jawagord » Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:04 pm

rockdoc123 wrote:

That is not how we got Relativity, QM and Plate Tectonics. It was other individuals who had a new theory. Your skeptics have no theory.


.....I can't comment directly on the evolution of the theory of relatively other than to state....is there anyone out there in the press calling someone a denier because they are questioning certain aspects of the theory? Are there scientists still looking into aspects of relativity? The answer is yes, just do a perusal of the literature. Are there scientists who feel uncomfortable about questioning aspects of Einsteins theory? The answer is no as far as I can tell. Completely different.



Rocdoc you are too well versed in the subject of geology for this group. And I’m sure you know more about these other disciplines than most? Relativity is not my subject either but when holes appear it’s still being challenged, as good science should be, on the other hand doomsday cults require us to look away and unquestioningly drink the koolaid. Can you imagine what 100 years of challenge will do to Climate Science theory!

AP) -- For more than a century, everyone from physicists to the Nazi Party - which encouraged the publication of the tract "One Hundred Authors Against Einstein" - has tried to find cracks in his work.

On Thursday, the world's biggest physics lab unveiled a shocking finding: that one type of subatomic particle was clocked going faster than the speed of light. If true - a big if, even the scientists there concede - it could undercut Einstein's theories. Physicist Michio Kaku of City College of New York called it "the biggest challenge to relativity in 100 years."

Antonio Ereditato, who participated in the European experiment as head of the Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics in Bern, knows what is at stake. After his team fielded two hours of technical questions, some a bit sharp, from a skeptical audience Friday, Ereditato had a beer in hand and was asked about the idea that his work was challenging the secular saint of modern physics. "Yes, that's why I'm concerned," he said with a laugh.

Harvard University science historian Peter Galison said Einstein's relativity theories have been challenged and "pushed on as hard as any theory in the history of physical sciences ever" and they have survived.


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2011-09-einstein-venture.html#jCp


ya know there used to be a radio personality call ed Paul harvey, who used a line;

The rest of the story.......

and here it is;

The supposed faster than speed of light neutrino experiment ...... did NOT prove Einstein's theory wrong at all.

Neutrinos not faster than light

ICARUS experiment contradicts controversial claim. Neutrinos obey nature's speed limit, according to new results from an Italian experiment. The finding, posted to the preprint server arXiv.org, contradicts a rival claim that neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light.


And the people making the original claims admitted as such;

https://www.nature.com/news/neutrinos-n ... ht-1.10249

In 2011, the OPERA experiment mistakenly observed neutrinos appearing to travel faster than light. Even before the mistake was discovered, the result was considered anomalous because speeds higher than that of light in a vacuum are generally thought to violate special relativity, a cornerstone of the modern understanding of physics for over a century.

OPERA scientists announced the results of the experiment in September 2011 with the stated intent of promoting further inquiry and debate.<b> Later the team reported two flaws in their equipment set-up that had caused errors far outside their original confidence interval: a fiber optic cable attached improperly, which caused the apparently faster-than-light measurements, and a clock oscillator ticking too fast. </b>The errors were first confirmed by OPERA after a Science Insider report; accounting for these two sources of error eliminated the faster-than-light results.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-th ... no_anomaly

So the only thing actually factual about your post is;

Relativity is not my subject, neither does it seem to be climate science......

Hint when you post a link from 2011 to make some obscure point, make sure the actual science hasn't been updated since with better data even if that data says the original claim was incorrect because of less than rigorous science .....

Well Clif, you have a special insight, I didn’t think it was possible for anyone to not understand the post was about challenging science to make science better and not about the challenge itself. The point is when we have Relativity the most celebrated theory in the history of the world still being challenged 100+ years after the fact and its still considered a theory despite all the accumulated proofs, how can anyone say with honesty the science is settled on climate change?

Don’t be a denier of the scientific method Clif!
Don't deny the peak!
jawagord
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon 29 May 2017, 09:49:17

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 16:46:27

Once again. The ice in the glaciers and ice caps is retreating and has been for a decade or more. The warming trend is real and we will have to deal with it. You can debate the cause and effect and what to do about it all you want but anyone that thinks it is not happening is a moron.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9818
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 17:10:21

The really dire situation is in the Arctic which is experiencing the greatest temp changes. Once you get a prolonged period of ice free conditions you can have rapid thawing of permafrost and outgassing of the potent GHG methane
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10510
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 17:25:39

onlooker wrote:The really dire situation is in the Arctic which is experiencing the greatest temp changes. Once you get a prolonged period of ice free conditions you can have rapid thawing of permafrost and outgassing of the potent GHG methane

I think that is a gross over statement or prediction if you prefer. Ice free conditions will be measured in weeks between seasons not prolonged periods and the ice free arctic that lasts longer then the period between late August and the end of September is a long long way into the future. Any out gassing will also be confined to that short "summer maximum" window.
You are just not going to have ice free conditions in the " just as long as it ever was" arctic night.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9818
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 10 Mar 2019, 18:06:48

Vts, recommend you read about Abrupt Climate Change on this site or google it. So, I am not so sure about what you are saying. What do other posters say?
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10510
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Has Global Warming Peaked?

Unread postby Fredrik » Mon 11 Mar 2019, 05:00:05

onlooker wrote:The really dire situation is in the Arctic which is experiencing the greatest temp changes. Once you get a prolonged period of ice free conditions you can have rapid thawing of permafrost and outgassing of the potent GHG methane


If we're talking subsea permafrost, it's not that literally rapid. Most methane reservoirs are dozens and hundreds of meters deep beneath the sea bottom, and even with water warming quickly, it takes quite some time for the heat to permeate the seabed.
"Only scarcity and effort make life worth living."
"A fundamental, devastating error is to set up a political system based on [individual] desires." -Pentti Linkola
User avatar
Fredrik
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun 05 Nov 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Finland

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tuike and 9 guests