Northern nations warming faster than global average

[skookerasbil]

is that abnormal? when did you first cut your lawn last year?

Actually, yes, that is a bit on the unusual side. I usually don't have to start thinking about mowing the lawn until the end of April or beginning of May around here. Having already mowed it at the end of March is pretty abnormal.

So is the fact that the weeping willow tree across the street started to bud and turn green at the end of Feb. It usually doesn't start to bud until the end of March, beginning of April.

All of my trees are in full bud and we’ve been so cold for the entire year. Trees bud

In MA I have to start mowing at the end of April too. So far zero 70 degree days in MA. So much for warming...

Dude, he’s in fking Texas. And saying his temps are the same as ours. He thinks we’re stupid

Bullshit. I told you that this year it got warmer much earlier than it usually does. Never said anything about being the same temp as you guys, you're in the north and still bitching about being cold.

Lmao......s0n....we wear nut sack warmers in New York from October through April every ******* year. It sucks dog balls....we are absolutely dying for global warming around here. Even summers at the beach suck in recent years.

So yeah.....I'm pissed Al Gore got it so wrong.

 

[Olde Europe]

Yet, latest research from Los Alamos shows that in the weeks after the Chicxulub impact, more greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere than man produces at his current rate in a THREE-THOUSAND YEAR (3,000 years or 300 centuries) PERIOD, and yet...

...here we are. Better off than ever. The Earth is an amazing thing.

SMH.

BFB. You should be more concerned about the POINT and PURPORT of these scientists conclusions than my simple math error. Climate hoax swallowed hook line and sinker by the EU. They invented it.

The BFD is you are too lazy and sloppy to check what you're spouting so as to get it right.

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

 

[westwall]

Yet, latest research from Los Alamos shows that in the weeks after the Chicxulub impact, more greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere than man produces at his current rate in a THREE-THOUSAND YEAR (3,000 years or 300 centuries) PERIOD, and yet...

...here we are. Better off than ever. The Earth is an amazing thing.

SMH.

BFB. You should be more concerned about the POINT and PURPORT of these scientists conclusions than my simple math error. Climate hoax swallowed hook line and sinker by the EU. They invented it.

The BFD is you are too lazy and sloppy to check what you're spouting so as to get it right.

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

The "research" that has these warmy types all worked up about is fictional. It is entirely based on computer models. That means it ain't real. A person who can critically think realizes this and simply doesn't care what the models produce. They are crap. Their predictive ability is less than zero.

 

[wamose]

Yesterday all the heavy hitters who are vying for the Democratic presidential nomination took the day off from wailing about climate change and the 12 years we have left on earth. And what was so important? Well, it turns out that Al Sharpton, one of the greatest racists ever, had some kind of reparations rally that they all felt compelled to attend and heap praise on their great friend and mentor. It truly was despicable when you think about all the evil Sharpton has done in this country. These monkey see monkey do Democrats seem to have everything wrong these days.

 

[justoffal]

Are due to human influence. No evidence. Nothing to discount natural variability. Just words.
Stop your damn fear mongering already

I hope it's true! Need relief from heating bills in North East

 

[toobfreak]

Yet, latest research from Los Alamos shows that in the weeks after the Chicxulub impact, more greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere than man produces at his current rate in a THREE-THOUSAND YEAR (3,000 years or 300 centuries) PERIOD, and yet...

...here we are. Better off than ever. The Earth is an amazing thing.

SMH.

BFB. You should be more concerned about the POINT and PURPORT of these scientists conclusions than my simple math error. Climate hoax swallowed hook line and sinker by the EU. They invented it.

The BFD is you are too lazy and sloppy to check what you're spouting so as to get it right.

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital. Does it make you feel better if I say Chicxulub produced as much GHG in a couple of weeks as man produces in THIRTY CENTURIES? That's roughly 18X all what man has produced since we were even able to affect the environment from the beginnings of the industrial age dumped on the planet in an instant.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

 

[skookerasbil]

Yesterday all the heavy hitters who are vying for the Democratic presidential nomination took the day off from wailing about climate change and the 12 years we have left on earth. And what was so important? Well, it turns out that Al Sharpton, one of the greatest racists ever, had some kind of reparations rally that they all felt compelled to attend and heap praise on their great friend and mentor. It truly was despicable when you think about all the evil Sharpton has done in this country. These monkey see monkey do Democrats seem to have everything wrong these days.

Oy....white voters will love that!!

 

[Olde Europe]

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

So, still no link, and I am not going to take your word for anything. Not that I need one anyway. No one knows with any certainty the size of the impactor, no one knows with any certainty the geological situation at the impact site, no one knows with any precision what kind of events ensued thereafter, and thus these formidable calculations could be off by orders of magnitude.

It doesn't matter anyway, since the earth is warming, and we are in all likelihood going to encounter climates that are detrimental to life as we know it. Whatever happened 65 million years ago does not change that in any way, shape or form. The funny thing about all that non-argument is that the impact generated a mass extinction that eliminated most of the species then living. We are currently generating another mass extinction event. That doesn't get any better because it happened, for other reasons, before.

"We" (humankind) may have to get control of global population. That is still falling way short of what we (in the West) have to do to avert the worst of climate change. For if we don't stop it before the carbon content in the permafrost regions of the northern hemisphere starts to evaporate in earnest, we (humankind) might just as well call it a day. That's why the speed of warming in this region is such devastating news.

No one this side of complete and utter insanity has ever claimed, "Man is producing 100X more than nature." That's the mother of red herrings.

Oh, and get better soon!

 

[toobfreak]

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

So, still no link,

So, too stupid to simply type in my string of words I gave you and get 10 pages of hits for yourself? Typical liberal used to not thinking for himself expecting everything done for him. Need me to wipe your ass for you too?

and I am not going to take your word for anything.

So then by your very admission, there is no point is there? You're not interested in the facts, you couldn't bother going to the thread where I originally talked about all of this in detail. You're going to believe what you WANT to believe.

 

[SSDD]

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

So, still no link,

So, too stupid to simply type in my string of words I gave you and get 10 pages of hits for yourself? Typical liberal used to not thinking for himself expecting everything done for him. Need me to wipe your ass for you too?

and I am not going to take your word for anything.

So then by your very admission, there is no point is there? You're not interested in the facts, you couldn't bother going to the thread where I originally talked about all of this in detail. You're going to believe what you WANT to believe.

\When they have nothing...they will complain about whatever they can think of to complain about rather than acknowledge that they have nothing....Lucky he wasn't correcting punctuation also...they can't actually debate the topic so they go about picking the fly shit out of pepper and feel like they have accomplished something.

 

[jc456]

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

So, still no link, and I am not going to take your word for anything. Not that I need one anyway. No one knows with any certainty the size of the impactor, no one knows with any certainty the geological situation at the impact site, no one knows with any precision what kind of events ensued thereafter, and thus these formidable calculations could be off by orders of magnitude.

It doesn't matter anyway, since the earth is warming, and we are in all likelihood going to encounter climates that are detrimental to life as we know it. Whatever happened 65 million years ago does not change that in any way, shape or form. The funny thing about all that non-argument is that the impact generated a mass extinction that eliminated most of the species then living. We are currently generating another mass extinction event. That doesn't get any better because it happened, for other reasons, before.

"We" (humankind) may have to get control of global population. That is still falling way short of what we (in the West) have to do to avert the worst of climate change. For if we don't stop it before the carbon content in the permafrost regions of the northern hemisphere starts to evaporate in earnest, we (humankind) might just as well call it a day. That's why the speed of warming in this region is such devastating news.

No one this side of complete and utter insanity has ever claimed, "Man is producing 100X more than nature." That's the mother of red herrings.

Oh, and get better soon!

If the earth didn’t warm, would we exist? Sun causes warm. Read about how that works

 

[Zorro!]

Canada is warming at twice the global rate, report says - CNN
and
Canada’s Changing Climate Report

• The observed warming of Canadian temperatures are due to "human influence."
• There has been more rain than snowfall in Canada since 1948, a trend that looks to continue over the 21st century.
• Temperature extremes have changed in Canada, meaning extreme warm temperatures are getting hotter and extreme cold is becoming less cold.
• Extreme hot temperatures will become more frequent and intense.
• Over the last 30 years, the amount of snow-covered land has decreased in Canada.
• Flooding is expected to increase in Canada because of sea-level rise.
• Freshwater shortages in the summer are expected because warmer summers will increase the evaporation of surface water.

We've known that the Arctic had been warmed more than the rest of the planet by a significant margin. It should come as no surprise, then, that countries on the Arctic margin should share in that elevated warming: Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Finland and Russia are all likely to experience accelerated warming particularly on their northern boundaries.

Yes, it seems many are warming at "twice the global average!"

A FREE SPEECH WIN DOWNUNDER: Critical academic’s sacking was ‘unlawful’, court finds.

A Federal Court judge has ruled James Cook University acted unlawfully when it sacked physics professor Peter Ridd after he publicly criticised the institution and one of its star scientists over claims about the global warming impact on the Great Barrier Reef.

Professor Ridd last night welcomed the decision and called on the university’s council, its governing body, to make vice-chancellor Sandra Harding accountable for the legal defeat.

“The university has broken the law. What is the university council going to do about this? The vice-chancellor has brought the university into disrepute,” he said.

In his verdict, judge Salvatore Vasta said the university’s grounds for dismissing Professor Ridd — that he breached the university’s code of conduct — were improper. He found that all 17 findings used by the university to justify the sacking were unlawful. . . .

Judge Vasta also said the university had misunderstood “the whole concept of intellectual freedom”.

“In the search for truth, it is an unfortunate consequence that some people may feel denigrated, offended, hurt or upset,” he said.

A penalty hearing will be set for a later date.

The left always tries to silence its critics, because it can’t answer them. “Code of conduct,” my ass.

 

[Pilot1]

Those weren't my words, they were the words of the authors of the published study at my second link.

I guarantee you that natural variability has been taken in to account by the climate science community. In the resource I often recommend: "The Physical Science Basis", by my scan, the phrase "natural variability" occurs 310 times.

How can "Natural Variability" be accurately measured and taken into account when it has and does swing WILDLY over time to such extremes over such a long amount of time?

You are an obsessed KOOK. Stop.

 

[Wuwei]

Yet, latest research from Los Alamos shows that in the weeks after the Chicxulub impact, more greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere than man produces at his current rate in a THREE-THOUSAND YEAR (3,000 years or 300 centuries) PERIOD, and yet...

...here we are. Better off than ever. The Earth is an amazing thing.

SMH.

BFB. You should be more concerned about the POINT and PURPORT of these scientists conclusions than my simple math error. Climate hoax swallowed hook line and sinker by the EU. They invented it.

The BFD is you are too lazy and sloppy to check what you're spouting so as to get it right.

So, no one knows whether the unlinked "research" is any better than your math, or whether it exists at all. Your understanding of the impact and its consequences is most assuredly non-existent. That much we do know.

Sorry, OE, my "sloppy" research comes from the Los Alamos National Laboratory with their using the Q Machine super computer to generate the numbers by taking the KNOWN facts and working backwards to what it would take to create them. Sorry if my math was a bit off, I was half asleep when I wrote it not sleeping too well having just recently gotten out of the hospital. Does it make you feel better if I say Chicxulub produced as much GHG in a couple of weeks as man produces in THIRTY CENTURIES? That's roughly 18X all what man has produced since we were even able to affect the environment from the beginnings of the industrial age dumped on the planet in an instant.

Fact remains:

• CLAIM 1: Man is producing 100X more than nature: FALSE.

The Earth has endured far more than man can imagine producing, been rocked to the precipice of total devastation and STILL came back and righted itself to what we have today!

So whatever man does, whatever disturbance we add to, is meager, and once our technology outgrows our need for greenhouse fossil fuels, the Earth will carry on.

ITMT, the BEST thing we can do, is get control of global population.

I don't understand your point. Yes, Chicxulb was an 12 Km asteroid impact 66 million years ago that left a crater 200 Km across. It is presumed that it killed off the dinosaurs, but yes, man survived.

I have no doubt that man will survive if the climate scientist's worst predictions of current global warming runs their worst-case course. After perhaps a catastrophic hiatus man will continue an upward climb of civilization.

Is that supposed to give solace, that our species will survive. I am not a CAGW person, but I am sure they are more concerned with a much shorter term catastrophe that involves their young kids and future grand kids, and not the eventual survival of mankind a few hundred years from now.


.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

All you have to do it hit reply. You want to shove fear mongering down our throats and dont even know how to forum?

Are they related? Should we assume that because you are good at "forum"-ing you are also good at shoving fear mongering down your reader's throats?

You passed it on. You took responsibility for it.

What is "it"?

Your guarantees mean absolutely nothing.

My guarantee that natural variability has been taken into account? If you don't trust me, look for yourself.

Stop your fear mongering. You are scaring the children.

They need to be scared. We all need to be scared..

Did you have any comment about the high rate of warming at northern latitudes? You suggested that they were within natural variability. I am quite willing to debate that topic if you'd care to do so.

What are you going to do about it?

Get off your computer made from plastics derived from fossil fuels.

Stop using electricity that was likely produced by fossil fuels.

Stop driving or taking the bus anywhere.

Don't eat any food that was produced by using fossil fuels in any way.

Turn off the heat in your home and use only cold water for everything! In fact, stop using water filtered and processed by electricity derived from fossil fuels.

Now, since you are going to die anyway, why not shut up and let the rest of us die slowly from global warming?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You know, part of the reason that the north is warming faster is because of the melting permafrost. 60 Minutes did a story on it this weekend. Seems that there is a Russian scientist and his son who have been monitoring an area in Siberia. Just a few years ago, the permafrost was frozen to the point where you couldn't get a shovel into the ground during winter, because the ground was frozen solid.

Now? He's digging around 6 feet down and is finding that the permafrost has a lot more carbon dioxide and methane in it than previously thought, and it is those greenhouse gases that are contributing significantly to global warming.

Google Pleistocene Park sometime and see what his research has found.

Well let's hope the scientists are right about this coming little ice age.

But either way, cant get hysterical about this stuff because there isnt dick we can do about it anyway!

Reading comprehension ain't your strong suit, is it? I stated that this Russian scientist has noticed Siberia (you know, that really cold place), is having it's permafrost melting. That is the exact opposite of a coming ice age.

Nah I get it....but I just posted the other day of Russian scientists ( not affiliated with Trump btw) predicting a coming ice ice for the next 100 years.

Either way....no way to reverse global warming anyway so who cares?

Actually, in his research, the area he is in used to be grasslands because the mammoths kept stomping down the trees. When they went extinct because of being hunted by man, trees started to grow in the area, and it's because of the trees that it's getting warmer up there, as trees hold heat better than open grassland. He thinks that if he can get the place returned to grassland, the winters will start freezing the permafrost again, and will stop greenhouse gases from being released into the atmosphere.

Trees absorb more CO2 than grass, so the trees are better.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Boston is freezing! You people are nuts.

Amarillo was in the mid 70's today, and is gonna be 89 on Tuesday. Sucks that you have to freeze.

Already had to mow my lawn once, and I'm gonna have to do it again in the next couple of days.

Speaking of lawns, it has been so cool ths Spring that I actually had to wait until last Saturday to cut my grass for the first time in 2019. I can remember cutting it in late February before! Also, thanks to my Facebook memories, last year on April 16th, it snowed! BTW, the high this weekend will be in the 50s after it has already been up to 80!

Bring on gullible warming!

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, part of the reason that the north is warming faster is because of the melting permafrost. 60 Minutes did a story on it this weekend. Seems that there is a Russian scientist and his son who have been monitoring an area in Siberia. Just a few years ago, the permafrost was frozen to the point where you couldn't get a shovel into the ground during winter, because the ground was frozen solid.

Now? He's digging around 6 feet down and is finding that the permafrost has a lot more carbon dioxide and methane in it than previously thought, and it is those greenhouse gases that are contributing significantly to global warming.

Google Pleistocene Park sometime and see what his research has found.

Well let's hope the scientists are right about this coming little ice age.

But either way, cant get hysterical about this stuff because there isnt dick we can do about it anyway!

Reading comprehension ain't your strong suit, is it? I stated that this Russian scientist has noticed Siberia (you know, that really cold place), is having it's permafrost melting. That is the exact opposite of a coming ice age.

Nah I get it....but I just posted the other day of Russian scientists ( not affiliated with Trump btw) predicting a coming ice ice for the next 100 years.

Either way....no way to reverse global warming anyway so who cares?

Actually, in his research, the area he is in used to be grasslands because the mammoths kept stomping down the trees. When they went extinct because of being hunted by man, trees started to grow in the area, and it's because of the trees that it's getting warmer up there, as trees hold heat better than open grassland. He thinks that if he can get the place returned to grassland, the winters will start freezing the permafrost again, and will stop greenhouse gases from being released into the atmosphere.

Trees absorb more CO2 than grass, so the trees are better.

You didn't see his research. He said that the reason the permafrost was melting was because of the trees. While you might think that trees would be beneficial up there, they aren't. Why? Because bare ground freezes better than tree covered ground. Trees hold in the heat, causing the permafrost to melt,

 

[mamooth]

The "research" that has these warmy types all worked up about is fictional.

So, these crazy people actually think the temperature record is a model.

And the dishonest people are actually claiming the models haven't been excellent.

They're really off in their own magical world.

 

[mamooth]

What are you going to do about it?

If you want to live in a cave and hug trees, have a ball. Just don't try to drag us with you. We like modern technology.

Have I ever mentioned how much denier hippies disgust me?