What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Satellite data show Earth's glaciers in massive decline

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,135
Reaction score
8,552
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
Now show a comparable graph for other interglacial cycles.

aha.gif
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
67,125
Reaction score
14,609
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,504
Reaction score
36,700
Points
2,290

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,135
Reaction score
8,552
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
FYI radiative forcing of CO2 alone calculates a 1.73C increase in associated temperature when atmospheric CO2 rises from 280 ppm to 400 ppm.

Why does your graph show slightly more than half of that? Doesn't that right there suggest the models that you think will create a blast furnace are wrong?
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
41,470
Reaction score
13,052
Points
2,250

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
476
Points
140
" Democracy By Tyranny Of Majority Addressing Symptoms Not The Cause "

* Somewhere Else And Doubtful Of Concern *

You will have to explain to me - at some other time and at some other place - what "regard for the utility of supply or demand for labor" it is that you believe warranted but ignored by the left. Do you believe the left ignore unemployment figures and labor statistics? Or do you simply hope to make a clever-sounding argument for restrictions on immigration?

* Without Enough Oxygen To Breath *
I will make mention of overpopulation when and where I see fit. Feel free to do the same, particularly if you do it in appropriate threads. The topic of THIS thread, of which I am the OP, is the global loss of glacial ice revealed by satellite data. If you have a comment on THAT topic, I would love to chat about it with you.
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas. Despite its short atmospheric half life of 12 years, methane has a global warming potential of 86 over 20 years and 34 over 100 years (IPCC, 2013). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits has been hypothesized as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Climate scientists like James E. Hansen predict that methane clathrates in permafrost regions will be released because of global warming, unleashing powerful feedback forces that may cause runaway climate change.[48]

Research carried out in 2008 in the Siberian Arctic found millions of tonnes of methane being released[49][50][51][52][53] with concentrations in some regions reaching up to 100 times above normal.[54]

There is evidence for one to three distinct pulses, or phases, of extinction.[11][12][13][14] The scientific concensus is that the cause of extinction were elevated temperatures and widespread oceanic anoxia due to the large amounts of carbon dioxide that was emitted by the eruption of the Siberian Traps.[15] It has also been proposed that the burning of hydrocarbon deposits, including oil and coal, by the Siberian Traps and emissions of methane by methanogenic microorganisms contributed to the extinction.[16]
[17]

Oceanic anoxic events or anoxic events (anoxia conditions) describe periods wherein large expanses of Earth's oceans were depleted of dissolved oxygen (O2), creating toxic, euxinic (anoxic and sulphidic) waters.[2] Although anoxic events have not happened for millions of years, the geological record shows that they happened many times in the past. Anoxic events coincided with several mass extinctions and may have contributed to them.[3]
 
Last edited:
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
1,774
Points
290
Location
N/A
That's all interesting stuff. But none of that has anything to do with current declines in glaciers around the world. Please try to stick to thread topics or simply start a new thread on the topic of your choice (within "Environment"
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
1,774
Points
290
Location
N/A
co2-emissions-per-capita.png


Please stop exhaling to save Mother Earth.
CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
6,537
Reaction score
1,504
Points
140
I often wonder how many kids hardcore AGW deniers (or "those who just love being stupid" as I just heard Rick Smith describing those obstinately refusing to get vaccinated) have raised compared to those with some actual respect for and understanding of scientific research. Speaking of methane contributing to AGW, there have been some recent reports about how capping old, abandoned oil wells could help much more than perhaps previously thought:
Previous studies have found the basin generates 2.7 billion kilograms of methane per year or nearly 4% of the total gas extracted. That’s 60% higher than the average methane emissions in oil and gas production regions nationally. This was attributed to high rates of venting and flaring due to a lack of natural gas pipelines and other gas production infrastructure.

Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas that scientists have linked to climate change. If the rate of methane leaks UC observed were consistent across all 102,000 idled wells in Texas, the 5.5 million kilograms of methane released would be equivalent to burning 150 million pounds of coal each year, according to an estimate by the magazine Grist and nonprofit news organization the Texas Observer.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
41,470
Reaction score
13,052
Points
2,250
co2-emissions-per-capita.png


Please stop exhaling to save Mother Earth.
CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Nope. That wasn’t me. Try again.
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,863
Reaction score
1,774
Points
290
Location
N/A
co2-emissions-per-capita.png


Please stop exhaling to save Mother Earth.
CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Nope. That wasn’t me. Try again.
My sincere apologies
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
41,470
Reaction score
13,052
Points
2,250
co2-emissions-per-capita.png


Please stop exhaling to save Mother Earth.
CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Nope. That wasn’t me. Try again.
My sincere apologies
No problem. I’ve done the same thing.
 

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
476
Points
140
" Climate Change Wizard Clueless About A Ratio "

* Analysis On Stupid And The Planet Is Full *

CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Do you have the slightest clue what a Ratio - Wikipedia is and how to calculate per capita emissions ?

Per Capita Emission = CO2 emissions of a country DIVIDED by population of a country .

China population 1.398 billion (2019)
US population 328.2 million (2019)

China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emissions of the us .

Is the entirety of the liberal arts majors of the left on board with such gawd awful ignorance that they believe shifting CO2 emissions to china based on per capita ratio makes any sense ?

The bid inn and the left are the long are of the ccp and the shifting of industry to china is all about dismantling us infrastructure and enabling chinese communist hegemony .

-- Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions --
RankCountryCO2 emissions (total)
1China10.06GT
2United States5.41GT
3India2.65GT
4Russian Federation1.71GT
5Japan1.16GT

co2-emissions-per-country-chart.jpg
 
Last edited:

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
6,537
Reaction score
1,504
Points
140
China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emmissions .


RankCountryCO2 emissions (total)
1China10.06GT
2United States5.41GT
3India2.65GT
4Russian Federation1.71GT
5Japan1.16GT
So with less than a quarter of the people, we in the U.S. manage to produce more than half as many emissions. We therefore produce more on an individual basis. We'll continue having no standing to criticize others until we can get our own house in order. India has nearly the same population as China yet produces less than half the emissions we do. Why does India make us both look like crap by either measure? Because India has never been as industrialized. Would you like them to be? Great Britain and Germany have been very industrial so why aren't they topping any lists? What's our excuse? Why have we let China lead the green tech revolution?
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top