Controversial I know, but I think US weather due to climate change

kasjaws · Post by **kasjaws** » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:51 pm

I know that the issue of manmade global warming is considered controversial. At the same time every reputable scientific organization in the US and worldwide agrees that the earth’s surface temperature has been increasing in recent decades due to human induced infusions of CO2 into the atmosphere. The idea that the “greenhouse effect” is caused in large part by the burning of fossil fuels is readily accepted in every scientific community of national standing.

So I begin with that premise. The global warming is human induced and climates are changing dramatically as a result. Over 20 years ago it was predicted that climate change would cause an increase in droughts, wild fires, tornadoes, extreme heat, hurricanes, and extreme storms in both winter and summer. In the past two years this is exactly what we have been seeing in the United States.

Record breaking heat waves in Texas. Droughts in the midsection of the country. The hottest temperatures in the Midwest in 100’s of years. Hurricanes that while not category 4 or 5 but rather massive storms that dump so much rain that massive flooding is seen in places that have never seen that kind of flood. Tornadoes in record number and of record velocity. Winter storms that sock in the Northeast and bury our major cities in snow and ice. Yes winter storms are affected by climate change.

I for one would hope these changes are caused by human induced infusions of CO2 into the atmosphere. If they are caused by us then maybe there is hope of changing things before they get much worse.

Post by **spot** » Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:05 pm

kasjaws;1368935 wrote: I for one would hope these changes are caused by human induced infusions of CO2 into the atmosphere. If they are caused by us then maybe there is hope of changing things before they get much worse.And what would need to be done to achieve that? How does it compare with declared intentions around the world? By all means post the more optimistic declarations. How likely are they, in your view, to bring about "hope of changing things before they get much worse"?

Here, Global Greenhouse Gas Data might help perhaps. If you consider Figure 2: Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning, Cement Manufacture, and Gas Flaring: 1752-2006 and say optimistically that US emissions will flick to zero tomorrow, you're scarcely denting the problem at all. The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will continue to rise year by year without missing a beat even after an extreme step like that.

We tried getting an international agreement to all lower emissions together. It was called the Kyoto agreement. The Bush Administration refused to adopt it, if I remember right.

There are dips on Figure 2 corresponding to worldwide recessions. None of them gave even a one-year dip in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, merely a dip in annual emissions. They're two different things.

I'll change the question, on reflection. What would slowly start to reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere would be the permanent sequestration of at least as much man-made atmospheric carbon as is emitted over a given period. It would have a quicker effect if it were ten times that amount but we can't go overboard, let's try for the possible. But the rate of sequestration has to at least match the rate of production and even at that rate it would still take hundreds of years to approximate steady-state pre-industrial stability.

And the chance of sequestering at least as much man-made atmospheric carbon as is emitted is about what, do you suppose?

You're more likely to grow wings.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:08 pm

And? is there a change from the norm? ...yeah there is but it hasn't changed all that much ...look at the records of frequency . We've become more populated and with the advent of media reaching more and more people, we notice it more . We're in a cycle a huge indefinate cycle. Just look at all the records kept and tell me it's much worse than it " used to be ".

The records you'd be looking up are any indiginous myths, legends, written records. Mariners, city, farming. the list goes on .

I think what we are seeing is not so much climate change but we're noticing more what our hand is doing ...If you're going to remove the top soil off the ground it's not that difficult to work out what the results are going to be . if large companies are deliberately going to Dump large doses of crude into the sea it doesn't take a brain surgeon to work out the chain of events after that. the problem is countries have chosen to be insular and now it's coming back to bite them .

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:28 am

You have to admit there's a problem before you can deal with it... so far our Republican party is in major denial that there's any connection between our actions and the changes in the weather. Their sponsors are big business, obviously they're not going to condemn their money bags.

Post by **spot** » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:40 am

Buy Craven A, they don't affect your throat. That's what the ads said.

Much the same advice really.

Attached files

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:02 pm

SnoozeAgain;1368965 wrote: You have to admit there's a problem before you can deal with it... so far our Republican party is in major denial that there's any connection between our actions and the changes in the weather. Their sponsors are big business, obviously they're not going to condemn their money bags.

Talk about money bags!!! Was listening to a show on our ABC (that's our national braodcaster, like the BBC) and after a PETA woman went on about us not using the fur of feral animals like rabbits and foxes etc etc We then are told that PETA has a lovely little sponsor.....What are synthetic clothing made out of ...what's their base product ??? OIL!! they have a major oil based company supporting them . Up until two days ago I had no idea that anything synthetic is made from oil....I'm going back to fur. And helping my enviroment at he same time. I think PETA is a front so the oil companies can do what they want.

After this radio broadcast I was reminded of the official apology to australia from Pink (some rockstar ) telling us how we should stop mulsing and going on and on about how australians should live ...supporting PETA all the way.....she apologised saying she did not know much about my country ....PETA is a Brand that is here to take our minds off everything else. They hold complete countries to ransom . And then have the audacity to tell Africans not to cull their elephants that the oil companies push more and more into populated and farming areas, in turn destroing the eco systems that lead to starvation. ....but you just ask PETA, they're a caring sharing lot .

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:24 pm

I didn't know that about PETA, but it figures.

Yes a lot of Synthetic stuff is made from petroleum.

And plastics of all sorts.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 3:35 am

kasjaws: I agree that much of the changing weather we are seeing is due to human action. Unfortunately, as spot points out, most are not even prepared to admit there's a problem.

Prince Charles has just been appointed head of the WWF. He's convinced about climate change and I think he intends to make a noise. But it won't get noticed.

I think the famines we are seeing, the hurricanes, are just the start. It's going to get worse. Kyoto was the last possible chance to avoid major disaster and we didn't take it. So now we face inevitable consequences.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:31 pm

Isn't it Ironic that Climate change has allowed the Oil companies to move into the Artic Circle? just priceless.

Post by **spot** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:27 am

I've no objection to using all the oil anyone can get their hands on. I merely disapprove of wasting it as fuel, it should be treated as having far more value.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:16 am

I've long felt that top business people were psychopaths concerned with nothing but themselves. Apparently a Horizon programme has just proved it, in the case of businesses in London anyway.

Since these people quite literally have no feelings about, and care nothing for, other people, we should not be surprised that they can take decisions they know will kill billions without any concern whatever. They will be lavishly rewarded for decisions which had a positive effect on the value of the company.