Bill Gates backs climate scientists lobbying for large-scale geoengineering

[whitehall]

This is a perfect example of the UK newspaper taking an issue and twisting it like a pretzel to come up with a story. Gates's funding is for strictly technical research and scientific journals. There is no evidence that Gates supports crazy schemes to sprinkle the atmosphere with chemicals.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, for once you have something correct, Whitey.

Gates is supporting studies that will give us an idea of what the actual effects of some of the geo-engineering ideas would be. We need those studies. The present effects of the increase in GHGs, and the resulting temperature increase, far exceed the predictions of the scientists labeled as 'alarmists'.

 

[daveman]

It will be the governments of the world that will have to agree on this course. And by the time that happens, the reason for it will be more than apparent to everybody. And you will pay your share, or go to jail.

I hope like hell that such actions are never neccessary, but we have been poking the beast with a stick for a long time.

If you had science on your side, you wouldn't have to resort to emotionalism and fear-mongering.

 

[daveman]

God, what a stupid fuck you are. Social engineering has been hugely successful. We created social institutions that created the climate for schools, capitalism, farming co-ops, and so many other benefits of our modern life. The fact that you are too blind to see that the whole of our present society is the result of social engineering merely speaks of the level of willfull ignorance that you subscribe to.

No, not run the entire ecosystem, but rather, try to ameliorate the effects created by dumb fucks like you.

I'll bet you still irresponsibly and selfishly exhale the deadly gas CO2.

You bastard.

 

[Old Rocks]

science

AGW Observer

 

[konradv]

BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

I say "narcissist" and look who is the first asshole to chime in!!

Like shooting fish in a barrel....

Project much?

 

[daveman]

science

AGW Observer

About « AGW Observer

About author:
- Name: Ari Jokimäki
- Location: Espoo, Finland
- Year of birth: 1967
- Education: Bachelor’s degree in computer engineering
- Other hobbies: Astronomy, observing and documenting nature, guitar & bass playing, soccer​

Using the AGW cult's own credibility standards, this guy's dismissed.

 

[Oddball]

BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

I say "narcissist" and look who is the first asshole to chime in!!

Like shooting fish in a barrel....

Project much?

I'm not the one who believes that I can save the whole goddamn planet by stuffing a curly fry light bulb thingy in my household lamps and driving around a death trap shit box..That's the ralm of arcissistic enviroloons like you.

Try again.

 

[Old Rocks]

science

AGW Observer

About « AGW Observer

About author:
- Name: Ari Jokimäki
- Location: Espoo, Finland
- Year of birth: 1967
- Education: Bachelor’s degree in computer engineering
- Other hobbies: Astronomy, observing and documenting nature, guitar & bass playing, soccer​

Using the AGW cult's own credibility standards, this guy's dismissed.

Hey dumb fuck, all he does is gather abstracts from peer reviewed journals, some of which link to the full articles. But that would be beneath you to actually bother to read real scientists, wouldn't it? Much better to get one's science from an obese junkie on the radio.

AGW Observer

Yet another weekly paper batch, oh, isn’t that nice…

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Permafrost carbon feedback amplifies global warming

Estimating the near-surface permafrost-carbon feedback on global warming – von Deimling et al. (2012) [FULL TEXT]



Abstract: “Thawing of permafrost and the associated release of carbon constitutes a positive feedback in the climate system, elevating the effect of anthropogenic GHG emissions on global-mean temperatures. Multiple factors have hindered the quantification of this feedback, which was not included in climate carbon-cycle models which participated in recent model intercomparisons (such as the Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate Model Intercomparison Project – C4MIP) . There are considerable uncertainties in the rate and extent of permafrost thaw, the hydrological and vegetation response to permafrost thaw, the decomposition timescales of freshly thawed organic material, the proportion of soil carbon that might be emitted as carbon dioxide via aerobic decomposition or as methane via anaerobic decomposition, and in the magnitude of the high latitude amplification of global warming that will drive permafrost degradation. Additionally, there are extensive and poorly characterized regional heterogeneities in soil properties, carbon content, and hydrology. Here, we couple a new permafrost module to a reduced complexity carbon-cycle climate model, which allows us to perform a large ensemble of simulations. The ensemble is designed to span the uncertainties listed above and thereby the results provide an estimate of the potential strength of the feedback from newly thawed permafrost carbon. For the high CO2 concentration scenario (RCP8.5), 33–114 GtC (giga tons of Carbon) are released by 2100 (68 % uncertainty range). This leads to an additional warming of 0.04–0.23 °C. Though projected 21st century permafrost carbon emissions are relatively modest, ongoing permafrost thaw and slow but steady soil carbon decomposition means that, by 2300, about half of the potentially vulnerable permafrost carbon stock in the upper 3 m of soil layer (600–1000 GtC) could be released as CO2, with an extra 1–4 % being released as methane. Our results also suggest that mitigation action in line with the lower scenario RCP3-PD could contain Arctic temperature increase sufficiently that thawing of the permafrost area is limited to 9–23 % and the permafrost-carbon induced temperature increase does not exceed 0.04–0.16 °C by 2300.”

Citation: Schneider von Deimling, T., Meinshausen, M., Levermann, A., Huber, V., Frieler, K., Lawrence, D. M., and Brovkin, V.: Estimating the near-surface permafrost-carbon feedback on global warming, Biogeosciences, 9, 649-665, doi:10.5194/bg-9-649-2012, 2012

 

[Old Rocks]

BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

I say "narcissist" and look who is the first asshole to chime in!!

Like shooting fish in a barrel....

Project much?

I'm not the one who believes that I can save the whole goddamn planet by stuffing a curly fry light bulb thingy in my household lamps and driving around a death trap shit box..That's the ralm of arcissistic enviroloons like you.

Try again.

LOL. No, you are just one of the dumbest bastards on this planet. And prove it daily with your yap-yap posts. Saving energy is not only wise, it is becoming a neccessity as we are using more of it as the population increases.

But continue your idiotic responses. They really deliniate the intellectual capacity of you 'Conservatives'.

 

[PredFan]

1. Man made global warming is a scam.
2. Bill Gates can spend his money any way he wants to.
3. Seldom do we delve into an area of science without something good coming out of it.

I'm all for his support of geo-engineering. I doubt he's doing it to prevent us from driving SUVs. I have a wait and see attitude about this.

 

[daveman]

science

AGW Observer

About « AGW Observer

About author:
- Name: Ari Jokimäki
- Location: Espoo, Finland
- Year of birth: 1967
- Education: Bachelor’s degree in computer engineering
- Other hobbies: Astronomy, observing and documenting nature, guitar & bass playing, soccer​

Using the AGW cult's own credibility standards, this guy's dismissed.

Hey dumb fuck, all he does is gather abstracts from peer reviewed journals, some of which link to the full articles.

He's a blogger. Dismissed.

Man, you really hate it when your own standards are applied to you, don't you?

 

[Oddball]

Project much?

I'm not the one who believes that I can save the whole goddamn planet by stuffing a curly fry light bulb thingy in my household lamps and driving around a death trap shit box..That's the ralm of arcissistic enviroloons like you.

Try again.

LOL. No, you are just one of the dumbest bastards on this planet. And prove it daily with your yap-yap posts. Saving energy is not only wise, it is becoming a neccessity as we are using more of it as the population increases.

But continue your idiotic responses. They really deliniate the intellectual capacity of you 'Conservatives'.

Energy can neither be "saved" nor spent, only converted from one form to another...If you were 1/10th as smart as you would have liked to believe you were, you'd have known that.

That said, the topic of the thread is egocentric blowhards believing that they can control the weather, not "saving energy".