Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

Just a word on “ice ages” large and small.

As mentioned in my previous post, the occurrences of ice ages are thought to be determined by the precession cycles of the Earth’s spin axis and orbital parameters. But of course fluctuations in ocean currents, tectonic shifts and concomitant volcanism have played roles in past glaciations of the Earth’s surface. There is much yet to be understood about what causes the coming and going of ice-ages.

The last ice-age began 110 000 years ago, reached maximal glaciation about 22 000 years ago. In spite of current anthropocentric warming (from which civilization risks extinction) the next ice age is inevitable, though it is millennia in the future. Rest assured, the invisible hand of the market is not thinking that far in advance.

Of course our Mr. Clifford wasn’t referring to this sort of ice-age in our near future, but a “little ice-age.” As explained no such petite ice-age is ever likely to result from fluctuations in solar activity; fluctuations in solar luminosity, yes, but not the fluctuations in Sunspot activity and solar flares. Luminosity is astronomically stable...fluctuations in luminosity sufficiently large to effect terrestrial climate occur on the order of giga-years.

There have been petite ice-ages. In recent geologic history they are caused by increased albedo due to increased particulate matter or water vapor in the atmosphere. The ejecta from meteorite strikes and violent volcanic eruptions have been known causes. A forest fire of significant scale might conceivably increase the albedo enough to create a petite ice-age. So too might multiple nuclear explosions. Unfortunately for the conspiracy theorists out there, not jet contrails. Warning: many reports of petite ice ages are just local rather than global changes in climate

Petite ice-ages often last for one, two or three years. If if they were caused by solar activity (which is not the case) their duration would be considerably less than the eleven period of Sunspot activity. The carbon-dioxide in our atmosphere will remain a problem on a time scale far larger than that.

http://nyti.ms/14pZxpw

We are all going to die that's a given......None of us here are going to be wiped out by climate change another given so to the future generations that may or may not be because no on really knows shit for certain, well who seriously gives an ass.........I say live for the moment not the if's and but's:whistle:

Quote:

---

well who seriously gives an ass...

---

about what? Your children? The children of your sisters, brothers and friends? Their children? Yeah. Screw them. 'cause we can really be certain about anything, it follows we should certainly screw our children's and their children's future. There are a lot of moments in a lifetime. Why does living once and a while for the moment preclude once and a while living for the future?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeninety

We are all going to die that's a given......None of us here are going to be wiped out by climate change another given so to the future generations that may or may not be because no on really knows shit for certain, well who seriously gives an ass.........I say live for the moment not the if's and but's:whistle:

---

You are free to dismiss it if you want, but that doesn't mean the issues around climate change are a fantasy even if they don't directly affect you. If you see climate change in the context of resource management, the interactive relationship we humans have with the planet is not just crucial to our survival -it does impact the planet.

Yes, like George Carlin in the satire on Earth Day we have seen many times, 4 billion years of planet earth doesn't give much prominence to humans, and campaigns to Save the Whale!, Save the Snail Darter! because otherwise we are all doomed can sound overwrought, even if the threat to species if very real, with or without us: but we are not on the planet earth a billion years ago, we are here now -you are here now, and probably for the next 50 years or so, and it is because of humans in the past protesting about the quality of life in their locality that chemicals firms are not allowed to dump effluent in the local river; lead has been removed from gasoline; food production is (to some extent) controlled so you are not buying diseased meat; there are large areas of the natural environment in North America and Europe that are protected from industrial development so you can enjoy Yosemite, or wander around the New Forest looking at wild horses.

There is a moment of bitter irony in Carlin's nihilist rant -he pauses to reach for a cup of water and drinks it -right there, in that moment, he insults millions of people who cannot do just that: think of a Palestinian on the West Bank living under occupation whose access to water is rationed while settlers are jumping in and out of swimming pools and washing their cars. The last time I was on the West Bank I had to drink bottled water and the kitchen in a hostel I once lived in was closed because there was no water.

Or consider the fate of Lima, in Peru, which is running out of water altogether and more than a million have no access to running water but must buy it from trucks at inflated rates:
http://www.350resources.org.uk/2011/...fall-declines/

That something as basic to life as a glass of water is a political issue suggests that you have a right not to care, until the day when you wake up and turn on your tap, and nothing comes out. It has already happened in Barnhart, Texas where farming communities that survived for decades have run out of water, in their case owing to fracking in the area. A case of gas for your cars being more important than water for your cattle -or for you?
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...e-oil-no-water

You should also be aware that your fellow Americans in Alaska are living on land that is disappearing into the sea, because of climate change: you may argue they choose to live in a precarious environment, but do you think the Inuit, the Inupiat and the other communities in that part of the world would really rather live in Chicago or Oklahaoma?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3678828.html

Very good post Stavros. Only one small correction. He's one of yours, not one of ours. His profile says he's from Doncaster.

oops! We are all family, anyway...sorry Joe!

White House Brings Back Solar Panels - YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeninety

We are all going to die that's a given......None of us here are going to be wiped out by climate change another given so to the future generations that may or may not be because no on really knows shit for certain, well who seriously gives an ass.........I say live for the moment not the if's and but's:whistle:

---

It's a personal choice.... I mean, if those are your values, well, those are your values.
A lot of people will point out that it's human nature to be greedy and selfish. True, very true. But it's also human nature to be caring, kind and empathetic. I mean, anything human beings do is by definition human nature. And, too, it all hinges on the reward system. I mean, if a society, a system, a culture, as it were, rewards greediness and selfishness then, yep!, people will be greedy and selfish. That's understood. So, yeah, it all hinges on the reward system. If the culture, the system, the structure, as it were, rewards kindness, compassion and caring, well, people will be that. Human nature, as it were, is very flexible.
I happen to think we should care about others.

Human nature is not absolutely flexible, once a person is born and the early upbringing does it's job , that person is fixed. Even when we act selflessly we are acting selfishly, nature made us this way. (Altruism) ,It's the latest modification nature has developed but don't kid yourself s it's just a fancier kind of selfishness.Most people at most of human history always have valued greed and selfishness. Tell me of a time and a place were it hasn't truly been so. Even at our most Altruistic we are expressing selfishness. But to speak honest about Nature, she's a murderous Bitch, unsentimental and vicious. To hell with Nature. My concern is for me first , you second and the trees and the dirt last unless, it preserves me first, you second. If the vast majority of the population of this world are unconcerned with what happens to there environment, I say for those who trully are conserned go live in a deep bunker ,pull your efforts and isolate your self's from the rest of the idiots. And wate for there demise,you will be right in the end. Don't wait for the Obama's of this world to get there act together. They won't and it will be to late for you.

Instability is the order of the day in the theory of non-linear partial differential equations;i.e. chaos theory. If one butterfly flapping her wings in Rio initiate a Texas twister a hemisphere away, then the firing of one neuron on the far side of one selfish brain can initiate a selfless deed. No one is set, fixed or deterministically program by biology. We are responsible agents who too often act irresponsibly.

I doubt a single neuron did fire though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Instability is the order of the day in the theory of non-linear partial differential equations;i.e. chaos theory. If one butterfly flapping her wings in Rio initiate a Texas twister a hemisphere away, then the firing of one neuron on the far side of one selfish brain can initiate a selfless deed. No one is set, fixed or deterministically program by biology. We are responsible agents who too often act irresponsibly.

---

Let me put it another way, selflessness is accidental but it does work . Yes, evolution allowed for it. But only because on a social level it was beneficial to more people individually and allowed altruistic traits to pass onto the next generation. Selfishness is also allowed because it also passed on to the next generation and benefited individuals. So to go further I'm pretty sure , statistically ,more folks are socially conservative. And this is a problem for all of us. That means there not as likely to change there behaviors as fast as liberals. At least by sloganeering, or advertising or shame tactics in the media. It's not entirely impossible, it's just as you try to influance more and more conservtvs, you will encounter greater and greater resistance . I feel the logical thing to do is for as many as possible band together and form a union with the view of long term survival, even if it's an underground, or space colony type of survival, because it will be easier than convincing . Perhaps I'm wrong on this point. I know that most of conservs, even the hard to convince types ,would change behavior but only when the really bad shit happens. So why just sit around and waite for them to change. Better to act.

Science Under Attack (BBC Horizon Documentary) - YouTube

Stavros posted this in another thread, but it seemed especially appropriate for this thread. Thanks Stavros, for the link.

From 2007: Rupert Murdoch launches effort to green News Corp.’s operations and programming:

http://grist.org/article/murdoch/

Short-termism dooming humanity:

The Resident: Short-termism dooming humanity - YouTube

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...edictions.html

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro..._nonsense.html

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...-ice-delusions

Antarctica

NASA’s Earth Observatory does indeed show a new largest extent of ice across the southern polar region.....


http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/our...ntroversy.aspx

Nice link (entitled antarctic ice levels-no controversy!). Thanks yosi.
The brief article explains how the ice levels in Antarctica are not only consistent with IPCC climate models but predicted by them. (The cold southern circumpolar winds obstruct, lift and cool the flow of the warmer winds that would push into the area; an effect that effectively insulates Antartica). The following graphic is from the IPCC link given in your link.

Neil Young on the importance of passing a five-year, comprehensive farm bill this year; and how the Renewable Fuel Standard creates jobs, reduces greenhouse gasses, and reduces our dependence on foreign oil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50OD9k7r9nI

Climate Change and the Colorado Flooding - YouTube

Climate Change and Boulder Floods - YouTube

Global Warming? Do the Math

Global Warming? Do the Math - YouTube

Caller: I Disagree With Global Warming!

Caller: I Disagree With Global Warming! - YouTube

Rising Temperature, Rising Food Prices:
http://www.countercurrents.org/brown300813.htm

The new Australian Prime Minister has scrapped the Climate Commission and its Chief Commissioner, Tim Flannery, and is preparing to scrap the Climate Change Authority and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. Flannery's book on America, The Eternal Frontier is one of my favourite books.

To some Australians this is a victory of common sense over the bogus predictions and bogus science of 'Climate Change' and has been supported across the world by like-minded people. Australia has an extreme climate by any standards, and Australians have been monitoring and lamenting the drastic effects humans have had on their environment, which for the Aboriginal people amounts to a desecration. A large part of Australia is uninhabitable by people, how much more is likely to become an oven over the next 100 years?
In addition to the basics, there is a typically pugnacious opinion piece by Andrew Bolt ('Australia's Most Read Columnist') and an article from yesterday's Independent which explains why there appears to have been a 'pause' in the effects of Climate Change which, nevertheless, do not change long-term predictions.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-1...ission/4968816

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opi...-1226723061366

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8830301.html

David Suzuki at PowerShift BC 2013 - YouTube

Smog Chokes Entire City In China | The Rubin Report - YouTube

Finding Happiness Outside of Material Consumption | Brainwash Update - YouTube

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro...arguments.html

Invalid Arguments: Climate Change - YouTube

Another good reason

A personal appeal ->

From the latest Oil & Gas IQ Newsletter:

"When an argument flares up, the wise man quenches it with silence"

The Energy Information Agency (EIA) has projected that by the end calendar year 2013, the United States will have surpassed the Russian Federation in natural gas production by some 300 billion cubic feet (8.5 billion m³).

Yet as the US becomes the world's largest natural gas hub, the skies to the north-east of the Flickertail State tell a story of opportunity lost. Above the extent of the Bakken shale play today, some 1,500 gas flares are burning. In fiscal terms, $2.4 billion-worth of gas has literally gone up in smoke since 2011. In terms of greenhouse gasses emission, it equates to the sum of two medium-sized coal power stations of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere in the past 24 months.

Around 4.9 trillion cubic feet (140 billion m³) of natural gas per annum are flared worldwide, that's roughly one third of the entire consumption of all 28 states of the European Union combined. As shale gains prominence in the national energy mix of many of the world's developing nations, the lack of infrastructure for processing flare gas should be a serious concern, both environmentally, monetarily and in the utilitarian sense in an age where giant discoveries are infrequent.

We would do well as an industry and a species to treat this issue as vociferously as possible...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro...ause_nope.html

Disposable Culture = Disposable Species - YouTube

With these "super-storms" that have been occurring lately, it's really proving that global warming is capable of producing increasingly dangerous weather. My partner's home province of eastern Samar, Philippines just experienced a scary example of this when it got slammed by a catagory 5+ storm, 200 mph winds and storm surges that resembled tsunami-like conditions. We're still waiting for news on the fate of her family & friends still living there and in neighboring tacloban(10,000 dead so far and complete destruction).

luckily there is a simple solution
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...global-warming

Two prevailing theories. Both curiously anthropogenic.

1) Anthropogenic greenhouse gasses prevent heat energy from escaping into the vacuum of space at the same rate it is produced by the conversion of incident solar radiation. The overflow of heat energy in the climate system produces weather extremes. E.g. A warmer atmosphere has a higher saturation point for water vapor, thus increasing the average time between downpours and conditions for drought. Because there are on average larger volumes of watervapor in the atmosphere than before, each downpour on average is more voluminous than before, increasing the risks of flood. Heat induced fluctuations in wind patterns and ocean currents warm some regions while cooling others.
Suggested modification: Try to cut our overall production of greenhouse gasses, perhaps sequester some of what we do produce.

2) God is fucking pissed off at us for condoning abortion. Televangelist David Barton says, “Abortion was a seed to it,” said Copeland, “that has grown into a murderous, bloody crop of child death.”
Once “you open the door to killing,” Barton added, “” it’s got a lot of different manifestations” because the nation immediately falls under the judgment of God as He removes his protection and “whap, here comes storms like we’ve never seen before and here comes floods and here comes climate stuff that we can’t explain; all of the hot times and all the cold times and not enough rain and too much rain and we’re flooding over here and we’ve got droughts over here … And today we’re saying ‘oh no, it’s global warming.No, we opened a door that lost God’s protection over our environment and that’s our choice.”
Suggested modification: Make abortion illegal, ban birth control and force women who seek abortions to painful vaginal probes.

It seems almost all scientists favor the first theory, particularly those scientists who have taken a professional interest in understanding the balance of energy within the climate system.
The second theory is favored by those who claim to have a direct and personal relationship with the one and true God of the universe. Also those who have a lot of stock in or take kick backs from oil and gas companies tend to favor the second theory.

Wait, there's actually a third theory.

There’s another televangelist, Pat Robertson, who is also a personal friend of the Creator who has on more than one tragic occasion put forward his theory that
3) Homosexuality and the teaching of eeevoloooshun are offensive to God’s apparently finite sensibilities and cause His wet-than-dry-than-wet-again mood swings.
Suggested moderation: send Pat more money.

I think a term that confuses people is global earing. They point and say "hey the winters re worse and longer than eer" etc... so climate change expresses more accurately the greater and more complex impacts of human action on the global environment.

Though maybe pat and his ilk are right. Stop all the fornication and bad behaviour which this site reflects and maybe we'll all have a much better world. (It may mean a few mass executions of the transgendered, gay people and other troublesome groups such as Jews and Muslims) The next day after it all stops the sun sill shine on bright green fields fringed with flowers, lambs will frolic, vicars will bicycle by and the churches will be full of nice ladies in nice hats and men in their Sunday best. There'll be cricket on the green again and al them uppitty foreigners with dark skins will learn their place. Filling their churches with joyous gospel singing for instance or scuttling back to the mosques in safety from skies no longer necessarily full of drones. Ahh the blessed peace of a well ordered world. And that nice white God will stop being in such a strop and restore order to the universe.