Global Warming

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
112,864
Reaction score
24,145
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
There is no science that describes how atmospheric CO2 can warm the deep oceans.

None
True. But how is that relevant? The stirring time of earth's oceans is about 1,000 years whereas the current emergency involves decades. Surface ocean temperatures are of more relevance right now - would you agree? OK, I am going offline for awhile. I hope when I return someone else will actually post scientific evidence. Is that hope realistic? Time will tell!

Btw - ocean pollution is also a serious problem - try researching plastics!

You all - please remember the warning in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will bring to ruin those ruining the earth.
Ocean pollution is a problem caused largely by Asia and Africa. Ocean "warming" is simply beyond our control
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
There is no science that describes how atmospheric CO2 can warm the deep oceans.

None
True. But how is that relevant? The stirring time of earth's oceans is about 1,000 years whereas the current emergency involves decades. Surface ocean temperatures are of more relevance right now - would you agree? OK, I am going offline for awhile. I hope when I return someone else will actually post scientific evidence. Is that hope realistic? Time will tell!

Btw - ocean pollution is also a serious problem - try researching plastics!

You all - please remember the warning in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will bring to ruin those ruining the earth.
Ocean pollution is a problem caused largely by Asia and Africa. Ocean "warming" is simply beyond our control
Can you document those points?

Take plastics as pollutants of the world's oceans for just one example - from our literature:


"Going after what they see as a tasty jellyfish meal, the ocean’s leatherback turtles often consume floating plastic bags instead. One study indicates that 44 percent of these largest marine reptiles have death-dealing plastic material in their digestive tracts. Scientists believe that one factor behind the leatherbacks’ dwindling numbers is plastic pollution spread by water enthusiasts. “For their own benefit, swimmers and boaters should realize that these sea turtles help control the jellyfish that plague them in the summer,” says the director of the International Center for Endangered Species."


Excerpt:

"Plastics pollution has a direct and deadly effect on wildlife. Thousands of seabirds and sea turtles, seals and other marine mammals are killed each year after ingesting plastic or getting entangled in it. Endangered wildlife like Hawaiian monk seals and Pacific loggerhead sea turtles are among nearly 700 species that eat and get caught in plastic litter."

Here is an extensive Britannica article on plastic pollution on oceans and on land:

 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
3,568
Reaction score
551
Points
140
Thanks for giving a crap. I'll save you further wasted effort. You've arrived at a hopeless dead end. I disagree with your primary reason for caring, but it sure beats outright denying science as most here seem bent upon doing daily. OMG, supported by governments and officials answerable to the public? Why not trust all these corporate, special interest funded, hack science sites that are constantly popping up and disappearing when inevitably exposed as frauds for fun and profit instead? Actually think about things scientifically? Know what that even means? Are you crazy? Good luck making progress elsewhere. It is what it is.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
From Post one quotes:

"I'll let you all study this entire 2008 article - I will simply start with this introduction:"

No link, thus useless.

=======

"Is Planet Earth Under Threat?

GLOBAL WARMING has been described as the greatest threat facing humanity. What worries researchers, says the journal Science, “is the prospect that we’ve started a slow-moving but relentless avalanche of change.” Skeptics question this assertion. True, many agree that the earth is warming, but they are uncertain of both the causes and the consequences. Human activities may be a factor, they say, but not necessarily the primary one. Why the disagreement?

For one thing, the physical processes that underlie global climate systems are complex and not fully understood. In addition, interest groups tend to put their own spin on the scientific data, such as that used to show why temperatures are rising."

So, what do you all think - is it hard to find the truth amidst the "spins" of various interest groups? There are so many factors, but I hope to concentrate on two points for starters:"

===

A spin of its own that completely leaves out the history of the Holocene, to make this rootless statement.

Hardly anyone dispute the warming, but only skeptics seem to look at the big picture (Last 10,000 years) while warmist/Alarmists look at the small picture (the last 100 or just the last 41 years) which is why warmist'alarmists are frequently illogical, since they ignore past climates to wail over a short slice of the recent past.

Warmists/alarmists put most of their argument over a single trace gas, that has at best a very small heat budget effect. That is why they fail, they leave out too many possible warming factors.

They run their belief system over a bunch of unverifiable emission/temperature modeling scenarios that run to year 2050, 2100 and 3100.

Not going to bother with a manipulated Childs numerous unsupported drivel.

You asked question that well known answers abounds in the literature, what is your motivation for doing it?

"1. Either extinctions are occurring or they are not occurring.

2. Either sea level is rising, or it isn't rising. The lives of people living on low elevation islands is a reason this is important."

Then you write this:

"Feel free to post evidence. I will start with the more current speech by Greta Thunberg - first a written transcript here:"

Skeptics commonly use real evidence, while warmist/alarmist use mostly climate models.

You seem smitten over a girl who doesn't show understanding over a topic she babbles over, it is why I don't give a shit what she thinks anymore, as she has been repeatedly exposed as a liar, hypocrite and a galoot!

What are you really after?
Yes I quoted Greta - to repeat the quote in my OP from the speech:

"We need to bring the science into the conversation."

I believe that counsel was and is wise - and that is one thing I am after. Note please that I quoted science sources.

The other thing 'I am after' is to repeat to the warning in the Bible - Revelation 11:18
- that God will destroy the destroyers of the earth.

The good news is that after Armageddon, the meek will inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5; Psalms 37:10,11) and live forever on it (Psalms 37:29) in paradise on earth (Isaiah 11:7-9).

And, yes, I know man is ruining the earth morally as well. But for this thread I wish to stay with the scientific research on global warming and other more important ways man is -ruining the earth;
 

Sunsettommy

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
2,692
Points
1,050
Now your ignorance is becoming crystal clear when YOU fell for Greta's bullshit:

"Yes I quoted Greta - to repeat the quote in my OP from the speech:

"We need to bring the science into the conversation."
I have posted HUNDREDS of science papers on Global warming here in the forum, the science has been long a part of the conversation, going back YEARS before that Swedish ignoramus embarrass her self at the U, N,

I have posted science stuff in other forums and blogs for over 15 years now, the girl was a baby when I was actively debating the science with warmist/alarmists

There has been a lengthy science based conversation over many forums and blogs for 20 years now, did you wake up in a hospital from a deep coma, a year ago?

You claim you are hot on science research, which is fine, but you are off to a poor start with the side issues of Hypocrite Greta and the useless bible quotes.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
Thanks for giving a crap. I'll save you further wasted effort. You've arrived at a hopeless dead end. I disagree with your primary reason for caring, but it sure beats outright denying science as most here seem bent upon doing daily. OMG, supported by governments and officials answerable to the public? Why not trust all these corporate, special interest funded, hack science sites that are constantly popping up and disappearing when inevitably exposed as frauds for fun and profit instead? Actually think about things scientifically? Know what that even means? Are you crazy? Good luck making progress elsewhere. It is what it is.
I agree it is what it is. Those of my faith are warned to check the accuracy of statements - this is what I am doing.

Yes, for the world it is hopeless - Revelation 11:18 will be fulfilled. But we as individuals can do many things to avoid personally polluting this planet physically and morally.

For example, my wife and I are organic gardeners. We do not burn branches, etc but compost what we can if we can't recycle. Burning adds CO2 to the atmosphere; composting locks it into the soil and thus increases top soil and fertility.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
Now your ignorance is becoming crystal clear when YOU fell for Greta's bullshit:

"Yes I quoted Greta - to repeat the quote in my OP from the speech:

"We need to bring the science into the conversation."
I have posted HUNDREDS of science papers on Global warming here in the forum, the science has been long a part of the conversation, going back YEARS before that Swedish ignoramus embarrass her self at the U, N,

I have posted science stuff in other forums and blogs for over 15 years now, the girl was a baby when I was actively debating the science with warmist/alarmists

There has been a lengthy science based conversation over many forums and blogs for 20 years now, did you wake up in a hospital from a deep coma, a year ago?

You claim you are hot on science research, which is fine, but you are off to a poor start with the side issues of Hypocrite Greta and the useless bible quotes.
This is the first time I have posted on the Environment section of this forum - I am not aware of previous threads. So, please link to some of those threads. Thank you in advance.

Nice pun on 'hot on science research' btw!

Many of the quotes from our literature are from over 20 years ago. Problems like plastic pollution keep getting worse!

I think one of Greta's goals was to have leaders listen to the scientific evidence and act on this. Problem is, she doesn't realize why world leaders are unable to solve the problems that concern her. So, what are some of the errors in her speech to the UN? Please be specific.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
59,129
Reaction score
8,717
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
My other main point (besides the above evidence of sea level rise): extinctions.

First from our literature:


"From South Africa to India, coral reefs in the Indian Ocean are in big trouble, says The Economist. Marine biologists recently made the alarming discovery that “50-95% of the ocean’s coral reefs have died in the past two years.” The reason is coral’s inability to tolerate a sea temperature rise of over 2 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit [1 to 2 degrees Centigrade] for more than a few weeks. “In 1998, the temperature around the Seychelles was 3°C [5°F] above seasonal norms for several weeks,” says the report. The researchers believe that this provides “dramatic evidence of global warming.” Coral death cost the Maldive Islands $63 million in 1998/99. Tourists expecting to see beautiful reefs, says The Economist, “turn away in dismay from piles of unsightly grey rubble.” Olof Linden, the coeditor of the report, stated that “a large part of the most diverse ecosystem on the planet has simply tipped over.” Because coral reefs are important marine nurseries, this disaster also bodes ill for coastal populations that depend on fishing."

Is this true? From a science journal [remember my interest in science]:


Excerpts:

"More than 60 per cent of coral in reefs in the Maldives has been hit by bleaching as the world is gripped by record temperatures in 2016.

Bleaching happens when algae that lives in the coral is expelled due to stress caused by extreme and sustained changes in temperatures, turning the coral white and putting it at risk of dying if conditions do not return to normal.

Unusually warm ocean temperatures due to climate change and a strong El Niño phenomenon that pushes up temperatures further have led to coral reefs worldwide being affected in a global bleaching event over the past two years.

Preliminary results of a survey in May this year found all the reefs looked at in the Maldives, in the Indian Ocean, were affected by high sea surface temperatures."

"
Around 60 per cent of all assessed coral colonies, and up to 90 per cent in some areas, were bleached.

The study was conducted by the Maldives Marine Research Centre and the Environmental Protection Agency, in partnership with the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

It took place on Alifu Alifu Atholhu – North Ari Atoll – chosen as a representative atoll of the Maldives.

“Bleaching events are becoming more frequent and more severe due to global climate change,” said Ameer Abdulla, research team leader and senior adviser to the IUCN on marine biodiversity and conservation science.

“Our survey was undertaken at the height of the 2016 event and preliminary findings of the extent of the bleaching are alarming, with initial coral mortality already observed.

“We are expecting this mortality to increase if bleached corals are unable to recover.”

"The Maldives contains around 3 per cent of the world’s coral reefs and the islands are considered particularly at risk of climate change because they are low-lying and threatened by sea level rises.

In Australia, more than a fifth of the Great Barrier Reef is estimated to have died as a result of the worst mass bleaching event in history. In Kiribati in the Pacific, as much as 80 per cent of the coral is dead."
Marine biologists recently made the alarming discovery that “50-95% of the ocean’s coral reefs have died in the past two years.”

I heard it was 150%.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
35,542
Reaction score
8,171
Points
1,330
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
The catastrophe you speak of some think was caused by a geomagnetic pole shift accompanied by a micro nova and crustal displacement. This then lead to centuries of global cooling and massive glaciers...an ice age.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
The catastrophe you speak of some think was caused by a geomagnetic pole shift accompanied by a micro nova and crustal displacement. This then lead to centuries of global cooling and massive glaciers...an ice age.
Indeed some think that. The problem with that model is that the animals in the Arctic permafrost were quick frozen, probably within 30 minutes - it certainly did not take as long as a week, let alone years.

But that is somewhat off topic (my fault). On topic is the fact that the permafrost is now, after thousands of years, melting in a matter of decades!
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
So, going offline soon - watching TV. On the weather channel broadcast about the 2017 hurricane season (c. 7PM CST, 6/1/20) global warmng's effect on hurricane strength was discussed, along with evidence of global warming and sea level rise.

I took notes - a few points from the broadcast (approximate quotes):

"No secret that oceans are warming and sea level is rising."

Dr. Marshall Shepherd
Professor, Atmospheric Sciences
University of Georgia

Concerning hurricanes & global warming:

"to deny there is some connection is irresponsible."

Moderator (Jim Cantore?):

"More long term data and better climate models are needed before definitive conclusions can be made - but there are signs."

2017 hurricane season [coincided] with some of the warmest ocean temperatures on record.

Shepherd: "2017 long lasting severe storms (e.g. Irma) directly related to sea surface temperatures."

90%+ of warming of our climate system is in the oceans.

Dr. Kim Cobb
Climate Scientist
Georgia Tech

We (society) need to connect the dots and realize there is a clear and present danger.

Larger windspeeds (projected) due to warmer oceans.... warmer air over oceans can hold more water:
Hurricane Harvey stalled and "basically supercharged itself."

Carrie Emanuel (renowned climate scientist):

"Likelihood of a Harvey like rain event has increased 6-fold since the late 20th century" - add to that rising sea level:

Moderator: "Near Galveston, Texas sea level is rising 2"+ each decade.

Shepherd: "We know sea level is rising and in recent years rising faster."

Carrie: "How many lives lost (+ billions of dollars) before we realize we need to be pro-active in planning for our climate future which is our climate now."

Overall, the same message Greta Thunberg related in her speech - with different details of course.
 

Sunsettommy

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
2,692
Points
1,050
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
The catastrophe you speak of some think was caused by a geomagnetic pole shift accompanied by a micro nova and crustal displacement. This then lead to centuries of global cooling and massive glaciers...an ice age.
Indeed some think that. The problem with that model is that the animals in the Arctic permafrost were quick frozen, probably within 30 minutes - it certainly did not take as long as a week, let alone years.

But that is somewhat off topic (my fault). On topic is the fact that the permafrost is now, after thousands of years, melting in a matter of decades!
Over 90% of all Permafrost by area on the planet have already vanished, nearly all of it melted out by 3,000 years ago since deglaciation began, thus little left to melt today. It is another phony scare over something that was mostly gone over 3,000 years ago.

:rolleyes:

The L ast P ermafrost M aximum (LPM ) map of the N orthern H emisphere: permafrost extent and mean annual air temperatures, 25–17 ka BP
 
Last edited:

Sunsettommy

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
2,692
Points
1,050
So, going offline soon - watching TV. On the weather channel broadcast about the 2017 hurricane season (c. 7PM CST, 6/1/20) global warmng's effect on hurricane strength was discussed, along with evidence of global warming and sea level rise.

I took notes - a few points from the broadcast (approximate quotes):

"No secret that oceans are warming and sea level is rising."

Dr. Marshall Shepherd
Professor, Atmospheric Sciences
University of Georgia

Concerning hurricanes & global warming:

"to deny there is some connection is irresponsible."

Moderator (Jim Cantore?):

"More long term data and better climate models are needed before definitive conclusions can be made - but there are signs."

2017 hurricane season [coincided] with some of the warmest ocean temperatures on record.

Shepherd: "2017 long lasting severe storms (e.g. Irma) directly related to sea surface temperatures."

90%+ of warming of our climate system is in the oceans.

Dr. Kim Cobb
Climate Scientist
Georgia Tech

We (society) need to connect the dots and realize there is a clear and present danger.

Larger windspeeds (projected) due to warmer oceans.... warmer air over oceans can hold more water:
Hurricane Harvey stalled and "basically supercharged itself."

Carrie Emanuel (renowned climate scientist):

"Likelihood of a Harvey like rain event has increased 6-fold since the late 20th century" - add to that rising sea level:

Moderator: "Near Galveston, Texas sea level is rising 2"+ each decade.

Shepherd: "We know sea level is rising and in recent years rising faster."

Carrie: "How many lives lost (+ billions of dollars) before we realize we need to be pro-active in planning for our climate future which is our climate now."

Overall, the same message Greta Thunberg related in her speech - with different details of course.
Oh my you easily fell for obvious misleading crap and over a... ha ha ha.. single year and a even a single storm..... :laugh:

Harvey was stalled by TWO Pressure cells in the area, that is why It didn't move inland hardly at all.

I drop the Weather Channel a while ago as they constantly provide misleading claims, heck they are even ignored by warmists as they are not being used as a source.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
The catastrophe you speak of some think was caused by a geomagnetic pole shift accompanied by a micro nova and crustal displacement. This then lead to centuries of global cooling and massive glaciers...an ice age.
Indeed some think that. The problem with that model is that the animals in the Arctic permafrost were quick frozen, probably within 30 minutes - it certainly did not take as long as a week, let alone years.

But that is somewhat off topic (my fault). On topic is the fact that the permafrost is now, after thousands of years, melting in a matter of decades!
Over 90% of all Permafrost by area on the planet have already vanished, nearly all of it melted out by 3,000 years ago since deglaciation began, thus little left to melt today. It is another phony scare over something that was mostly gone over 3,000 years ago.

:rolleyes:
Good morning Tommy! You sure are up early - or what time zone are you in?

Can you provide documentation for your claims?


Excerpts:

"The frozen layer of soil that has underlain the Arctic tundra for millennia is now starting to thaw. This thawing, which could release vast amounts of greenhouse gases, is already changing the Arctic landscape by causing landslides, draining lakes, and altering vegetation.
BY ED STRUZIK • JANUARY 21, 2020"

A permafrost slump, the size of a football stadium, on the shore of an unnamed lake in the Canadian Arctic.
A permafrost slump, the size of a football stadium, on the shore of an unnamed lake in the Canadian Arctic. ED STRUZIK FOR YALE ENVIRONMENT 360

" These retrogressive thaw slumps, or landslides — formed as warming temperatures rapidly thaw permafrost — are increasing across the Arctic, including the kilometer-long, 100-meter-deep Batagaika Crater in the Yana River Basin of Siberia. ...

" As the Arctic warms faster than any region on Earth, public attention has largely been focused on the rapid disappearance of Arctic sea ice. But major changes are also taking place on land, and one of the most striking is the thawing of vast swaths of permafrost that have underlain these polar regions for millennia. ....

" The most alarming is expected to be the release of huge stores of greenhouse gases, including methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide that have remained locked in the permafrost for ages. Pathogens will also be released. ....

" “We’re seeing slumping along shorelines that can drain most of the water in a lake in just days and even hours,” says Marsh, a former Canadian government scientist who is now a professor of hydrology at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario. “It’s not surprising when you consider that as much as 80 percent of the ground here consists of frozen water. ....

" He also expects to see more of what Antoni Lewkowicz, a geographer and permafrost expert at the University of Ottawa, is seeing father north on Banks Island in the High Arctic of Canada. Lewkowicz recently reported a 60-fold increase in slumping along 288 lakes that he has monitored with satellite imagery from 1984 to 2015. ....

" The permafrost thawing that is leading to the release of greenhouse gases is intensifying across the Arctic. Much of the permafrost degradation that has occurred on Canada’s Banks Island took place after some of the warmest years on record, according to Lewkowicz. In 1984, the island had 60 active slumps. By 2013, there were 4,000. Lewkowicz expects that the island may see as many as 30,000 new active slumps in the coming years.

" Scientists suspect that some of the slumping may be giving new life to pathogens capable of killing muskoxen, caribou, and nesting birds as warmer temperatures nudge the pathogens out of their dormant state. Massive die-offs of muskoxen on Banks and Victoria islands in Canada, as well as reindeer in Siberia, appear to be related to once-dormant pathogens that are coming back to life. ....

" That change was evident as we bushwhacked through 8-foot-high willows en route to retrieve a water gauge swept away during the spring flood. Thirty years ago, lichen and sedges dominated this landscape. Today, willows and shrubs are proliferating across the tundra. Abundant caribou once fed on the lichen, their numbers on the Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula hitting 3,000 in 2006. Now, only half that number remain."

So, Tommy, you are correct that prediction models are unreliable. However, note the above is CURRENT EVENTS not predictions. The article has predictions as well based on tenable models - I did not quote any of these predictions out of respect for your valid points about failed predictions.
 
OP
N

Newtonian

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
1,170
Reaction score
182
Points
73
So, going offline soon - watching TV. On the weather channel broadcast about the 2017 hurricane season (c. 7PM CST, 6/1/20) global warmng's effect on hurricane strength was discussed, along with evidence of global warming and sea level rise.

I took notes - a few points from the broadcast (approximate quotes):

"No secret that oceans are warming and sea level is rising."

Dr. Marshall Shepherd
Professor, Atmospheric Sciences
University of Georgia

Concerning hurricanes & global warming:

"to deny there is some connection is irresponsible."

Moderator (Jim Cantore?):

"More long term data and better climate models are needed before definitive conclusions can be made - but there are signs."

2017 hurricane season [coincided] with some of the warmest ocean temperatures on record.

Shepherd: "2017 long lasting severe storms (e.g. Irma) directly related to sea surface temperatures."

90%+ of warming of our climate system is in the oceans.

Dr. Kim Cobb
Climate Scientist
Georgia Tech

We (society) need to connect the dots and realize there is a clear and present danger.

Larger windspeeds (projected) due to warmer oceans.... warmer air over oceans can hold more water:
Hurricane Harvey stalled and "basically supercharged itself."

Carrie Emanuel (renowned climate scientist):

"Likelihood of a Harvey like rain event has increased 6-fold since the late 20th century" - add to that rising sea level:

Moderator: "Near Galveston, Texas sea level is rising 2"+ each decade.

Shepherd: "We know sea level is rising and in recent years rising faster."

Carrie: "How many lives lost (+ billions of dollars) before we realize we need to be pro-active in planning for our climate future which is our climate now."

Overall, the same message Greta Thunberg related in her speech - with different details of course.
Oh my you easily fell for obvious misleading crap and over a... ha ha ha.. single year and a even a single storm..... :laugh:

Harvey was stalled by TWO Pressure cells in the area, that is why It didn't move inland hardly at all.

I drop the Weather Channel a while ago as they constantly provide misleading claims, heck they are even ignored by warmists as they are not being used as a source.
Bait and switch. I did not post about why Harvey stalled. The point was the amount of rainfall Harvey produced.

Yes, the weather channel last night gave credence to ghost reports in areas where many were killed by tornadoes - your point is well taken. However, what I posted was information from climate scientists, not paranormal researchers. Can you document any specific point these scientists were wrong about?

Btw - Irma was in 2017; Dorian was in 2019 - you might want to check your math!

Hopefully, 2020 will be a less active hurricane season though above normal sea surface temperatures are alarming alarmists and warmists - aka climate scientists.

Time will tell. But living in below sea level areas like New Orleans is worse than crazy - more like suicidal. We live well above sea level in SE Louisiana on high ground. Only a very large meteorite impact in the Gulf of Mexico would threaten us with a catastrophic tsunami.

People in New Orleans had their warning with Katrina. They are choosing to trust man-made efforts to eliminate the danger - a very unwise thing to do! The area wasn't even in the more dangerous Northeast quadrant of Katrina which caused a 30' storm surge NE of there in Pass Christian, Gulfport, etc. And Katrina's top winds decreased before landfall!

Edit: A buoy recorded 55 foot waves - highest ever recorded waves by a buoy.
 
Last edited:

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
35,542
Reaction score
8,171
Points
1,330
The warming we have experienced is inconsequential relative to prior warming periods. I suspect warming is a minor issue.

Now, pollution is not. Something must be done about humans polluting the land, sea, and air.

Secondly, the world’s population has grown enormously these past few decades. Unless we utilize technology to properly handle population growth, pollution and species extinctions will continue.
Thank you for your respectful post!

The arctic permafrost testifies to a catastrophic sudden (Likely within 30 minutes) climate change where many animals, including many mammoths, were quick frozen until the current global warming. Now this old permafrost (over 4,000 years ago) testifies to a warmer climate before that catastrophe - clearly life did fine in a warmer climate so I get your point.

The current global warming is much slower - though it is already causing some extinctions because it is too fast for many species to adapt.

Nonetheless, there are many other causes of extinctions besides global warming. Deforestation and over fishing are 2 are related to over-population - though there are ways of increasing food production without destroying habitat and environment.

And, yes, pollution is a very important way man is ruining the earth.

My main point is the warning in the prophecy in Revelation 11:18 that our Creator will destroy the destroyers of the earth.
The catastrophe you speak of some think was caused by a geomagnetic pole shift accompanied by a micro nova and crustal displacement. This then lead to centuries of global cooling and massive glaciers...an ice age.
Indeed some think that. The problem with that model is that the animals in the Arctic permafrost were quick frozen, probably within 30 minutes - it certainly did not take as long as a week, let alone years.

But that is somewhat off topic (my fault). On topic is the fact that the permafrost is now, after thousands of years, melting in a matter of decades!
Yes they were quickly frozen, because of a crystal displacement that moved them to the polar region very quickly, as the theory posits.

Evidence of forests even rain forests, have been found at both poles. The only way this is possible that I know of, is the crustal displacement moved the land to the poles.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
112,864
Reaction score
24,145
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
So, going offline soon - watching TV. On the weather channel broadcast about the 2017 hurricane season (c. 7PM CST, 6/1/20) global warmng's effect on hurricane strength was discussed, along with evidence of global warming and sea level rise.

I took notes - a few points from the broadcast (approximate quotes):

"No secret that oceans are warming and sea level is rising."

Dr. Marshall Shepherd
Professor, Atmospheric Sciences
University of Georgia

Concerning hurricanes & global warming:

"to deny there is some connection is irresponsible."

Moderator (Jim Cantore?):

"More long term data and better climate models are needed before definitive conclusions can be made - but there are signs."

2017 hurricane season [coincided] with some of the warmest ocean temperatures on record.

Shepherd: "2017 long lasting severe storms (e.g. Irma) directly related to sea surface temperatures."

90%+ of warming of our climate system is in the oceans.

Dr. Kim Cobb
Climate Scientist
Georgia Tech

We (society) need to connect the dots and realize there is a clear and present danger.

Larger windspeeds (projected) due to warmer oceans.... warmer air over oceans can hold more water:
Hurricane Harvey stalled and "basically supercharged itself."

Carrie Emanuel (renowned climate scientist):

"Likelihood of a Harvey like rain event has increased 6-fold since the late 20th century" - add to that rising sea level:

Moderator: "Near Galveston, Texas sea level is rising 2"+ each decade.

Shepherd: "We know sea level is rising and in recent years rising faster."

Carrie: "How many lives lost (+ billions of dollars) before we realize we need to be pro-active in planning for our climate future which is our climate now."

Overall, the same message Greta Thunberg related in her speech - with different details of course.
How does atmospheric CO2 warm the deep ocean?
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top