The Environment Thread

[pigseye]

Considering climate models are the be all and end all of climate science, this should shake even the most hardened believers,

Because the uncertainties are so pervasive, NASA concludes that “today’s models must be improved by about a hundredfold in accuracy” if we wish to make climate projections.

https://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/role.html#COMP_MODS

The IPCC has admitted there is a great deal of “continuing uncertainty” in the sign and magnitude of the cloud influence. Most models indicate a positive feedback (more warming), but this “is not well understood” and the IPCC scientists “are not confident that it is realistic.”

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf

NASA and the IPCC finally admitting what everyone suspected, the models don't work and shouldn't be trusted and used to base government policy on.

Won't get any air play so I decided to post it here, maybe some of you will have the courage to pass it along. 

[pigseye]

So much for the consensus,

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-21955-0_7

The contribution to this temperature change due to injections of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere due to combustion of fossil fuel, and it is 0.02 K.

 

[pigseye]

Definitely a crisis, lol  

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-18963-1_5

The West Coast of North America has 20 long-term (90+ years) tide gauges measuring relative sea level changes. The East Coast has 33. Of the 53 total tide gauges, 45% (24) are negatively accelerating, 14 document falling sea levels, and just 11 have sea levels rising more than 3 mm/yr.

[pigseye]

Crisis, what crisis

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2018EF001070

“trends in recent rates of shoreline change along the U.S. Atlantic Coast reflect an especially puzzling increase in accretion, not erosion.”

From 1830 to 1956, shorelines eroded at the rapid rate of -55 cm per year on average. Since 1960, the U.S. Atlantic coast has been expanding (accretion) at a rate of +5 cm per year.

[pigseye]

And one more for good measure,

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1470160X1830757X

12 of 15 Florida Bay islands have also been expanding in size since the 1950s

[pigseye]

What's that old saying, there's a sucker born everyday,

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-49566130

Thousands of people who bought solar panels have complained to a financial watchdog that they are not bringing them the returns they were promised.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

 

 

Thought this was funny- I don't think they recognize the irony here...

[Fatty Liver]

Trump revokes waiver for California to set higher auto emissions standards, because no one wants cleaner air.

 

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump announced Wednesday he was revoking California's authority to set its own vehicle emission standards, the latest move in the Trump administration's ongoing fight with the Golden State and attempts to chip away at former President Barack Obama's environmental legacy.

"The Trump Administration is revoking California's Federal Waiver on emissions in order to produce far less expensive cars for the consumer, while at the same time making the cars substantially SAFER," Trump tweeted.

The President made the announcement while visiting California for fundraisers. He was in his hotel in Los Angeles when he sent the tweets.

California's waiver under the Clean Air Act allowed it to set standards tighter than the federal standards, which have been adopted by more than a dozen states and became the de-facto nationwide standard, because automakers do not design different sets of vehicles to meet different standards in different states.

The Trump administration has long been at odds with California, especially on environmental issues. Talks between California environmental regulators and the administration broke down earlier this year. Yet this summer, the state negotiated an agreement with several automakers to design cars to meet standards higher than those set by the federal government.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/18/politics/epa-trump-california/index.html

[Mark F]

26 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

, because no one wants cleaner air.

or cars that get better mileage. Who needs that?

Given two choices Trump will invariably take the wrong one.

Amazing though, to watch the Democratic party sit there and twiddle their thumbs as this fool runs their country as an absolute dictator.

At this point, given what we know about climate, I have concluded that some of these people in power think that they and theirs have enough wealth, that they'll be ok, to hell with the rest of us. Pelosi for instance, is not stupid.

The old guard has to go. They have to get out of the way, now.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Mark F

[Fatty Liver]

10 minutes ago, Mark F said:

or cars that get better mileage. Who needs that?

Given two choices Trump will invariably take the wrong one.

Amazing though, to watch the Democratic party sit there and twiddle their thumbs as this fool runs their country as an absolute dictator.

At this point, given what we know about climate, I have concluded that some of these people in power think that they and theirs have enough wealth, that they'll be ok, to hell with the rest of us. Pelosi for instance, is not stupid.

The old guard has to go. They have to get out of the way, now.

They mostly live in fenced compounds or gated communities with private security forces for protection, so they're well prepared for any catastrophe that may befall the rest of society, it won't effect them much.  Lots of islands to flee to.

[pigseye]

Okay I'm big enough to admit when I was wrong. I've been saying not to worry because we are in an interglacial period and can expect the temperatures to rise 2C above the pre-industrial levels.

Well I was wrong, new studies show that we can probably expect temperatures to rise up to 6C above pre-industrial levels. In a nutshell, we're ****** folks.

Tree remains dated to this period have been discovered 600-1000 meters atop the modern treeline in the Russian Altai mountains.  With lapse rate and tectonic changes considered, this suggests surface air temperatures were between 3°C and possibly up to 5.9°C warmer than today (Ganyushkin et al., 2018) at this time.

Modern sea surface temperatures of 15.5°C and 10°C have been recorded in the subpolar North Atlantic (Tobago Basin and Bonair Basin, respectively). Between and about 10 and 15 thousand years ago, temperatures reached 23°C and 17°C, respectively, which is ~7°C warmer than today). Temperatures were 2-4°C warmer than today between 20 and 30 thousand years ago (Reißig et al., 2019).

Today’s North Atlantic’s bottom-water temperatures are about 4°C. They averaged ~5°C during the last glacial, with anomalies reaching 10°C both 13 and 16 thousand years ago and about 7°C both 15 and 19 thousand years ago (Yasuhara et al., 2019).

Modern annual temperatures at a California lake average 18°C. Between 31 and 24 thousand years ago, temperatures averaged 22°C to 23°C, which is about 4-5°C warmer than today (Feakins et al., 2019).

The modern temperature in the subarctic North Pacific ranges beween 3 to 4°C.  About 14,500 years ago, the region had warm peaks of 5 to 9°C, as well as 4 to 7°C between 18 and 20 thousand years ago (Lohmann et al., 2019).

Sea surface temperatures near the Peruvian coast have plummeted in the last 50 years, with catfish remains in northern Peru suggesting this region was 4°C warmer than today during the Early Holocene. One reconstruction shows the region was ~2°C warmer than today about 15 to 16 thousand years ago (Salvatteci et al., 2019).

The “present observed temperatures” appear to be less than 24°C in the South Atlantic. This region was about 2°C warmer than today from about 10 thousand years ago to the Roman Warm Period, but it also reached similar or slightly (~1°C) warmer temperatures around 52 to 60 thousand years ago (Dauner et al., 2019).

 

[Wideleft]

32 minutes ago, Mark F said:

or cars that get better mileage. Who needs that?

Given two choices Trump will invariably take the wrong one.

Amazing though, to watch the Democratic party sit there and twiddle their thumbs as this fool runs their country as an absolute dictator.

At this point, given what we know about climate, I have concluded that some of these people in power think that they and theirs have enough wealth, that they'll be ok, to hell with the rest of us. Pelosi for instance, is not stupid.

The old guard has to go. They have to get out of the way, now.

The seeming Democratic "inaction" on this may be because they know this measure will be defeated in court.  The EPA set out minimum regulations for states to adhere to while explicitly stating that States could implement standards higher than the national guidelines.  This was because California already had an "automobile plan" when the EPA was created in 1973.  There was a good segment on NPR about this the other day.

If there is any silver lining to Trump, almost all his attempts to destroy things are either tied up in courts or have already been defeated in court - despite his unprecedented stacking of the courts with unqualified Republican yes men.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

https://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/even-the-sparrows-extensive-new-study-finds-three-billion-bird-decline-1.4601033

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

Okay I'm big enough to admit when I was wrong. I've been saying not to worry because we are in an interglacial period and can expect the temperatures to rise 2C above the pre-industrial levels.

Well I was wrong, new studies show that we can probably expect temperatures to rise up to 6C above pre-industrial levels. In a nutshell, we're ****** folks.

So, still no go on anthropogenic climate change though.

Edited September 20, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[pigseye]

48 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

So, still no go on anthropogenic climate change though.

No go that it's affects on temperature will be anything more than a spit in the bucket. Meaning, that if we go up 6C just from natural variation, it's contribution is meaningless. 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

51 minutes ago, pigseye said:

No go that it's affects on temperature will be anything more than a spit in the bucket. Meaning, that if we go up 6C just from natural variation, it's contribution is meaningless. 

Figured. Carry on.

[Fatty Liver]

Thank god we can shirk our responsibilities, I will no longer pay to have my sewage tank pumped out, I live on the side of a mountain that naturally drains down to a lake.  Economically I will come out  further ahead if I just pipe my **** down the creek bed into the lake,  I don't give a **** if my neighbours like it or not, it's all good.

[pigseye]

8 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Thank god we can shirk our responsibilities, I will no longer pay to have my sewage tank pumped out, I live on the side of a mountain that naturally drains down to a lake.  Economically I will come out  further ahead if I just pipe my **** down the creek bed into the lake,  I don't give a **** if my neighbours like it or not, it's all good.

And do we tell people they have to quit taking a dump? No, we use technology to handle the waste properly so that it doesn't pollute the environment. We should be doing the same thing with emissions, using technology to dispose of them in a responsible fashion.

[Mark F]

4 hours ago, Wideleft said:

4 hours ago, Mark F said:

 

The seeming Democratic "inaction" on this may be because they know this measure will be defeated in court.

why inaction in quotes?

Show me a single thing the Democrats have done, to stop Trump. Court action is counting on somebody else to do their job. Just as they did with Mueller.

And I wasn't referring just to inaction on this subject, they've done nothing meaningful about anything Trump has pulled off. They haven't even attempted to do anything. They don't even say much about him publicly. Pelosi is still looking for meetings of the mind and photo ops at the Whitehouse with this imbecile.

Excuse: Wouldn't want to be divisive now.

I expect Pelosi has personally done pretty well under Trump, with his trillion dollar gift to her class.

She's worse than useless.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Mark F

[Mark F]

Example. Washington Post:

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON’T PUSH BACK AGAINST TRUMP … WAPO: “Trump officials considering plan to divert billions of dollars in additional funds for border barrier,” by Nick Miroff and Josh Dawsey: “Senior Trump administration officials are considering a plan to again divert billions of dollars in military funding to pay for border barrier construction next year, a way to circumvent congressional opposition to putting more taxpayer money toward the president’s signature project, according to three administration officials.

 

[Wideleft]

21 minutes ago, Mark F said:

why inaction in quotes?

Show me a single thing the Democrats have done, to stop Trump. Court action is counting on somebody else to do their job. Just as they did with Mueller.

And I wasn't referring just to inaction on this subject, they've done nothing meaningful about anything Trump has pulled off. They haven't even attempted to do anything. They don't even say much about him publicly. Pelosi is still looking for meetings of the mind and photo ops at the Whitehouse with this imbecile.

Excuse: Wouldn't want to be divisive now.

I expect Pelosi has personally done pretty well under Trump, with his trillion dollar gift to her class.

She's worse than useless.

I was speaking specifically to the California Emissions Laws ruling.  Don't disagree with you on the overall.

[Mark F]

1 hour ago, Wideleft said:

I was speaking specifically to the California Emissions Laws ruling.  Don't disagree with you on the overall.

The Democrats say they want to play by the rules, sit around mumbling to themselves about reaching out across the aisle, while the Republicans stretch, bend, and break every rule, and coincidentally, get exactly what they want. Have to think after a while, that the Democrats are  privately ok with a lot of it. Any of them that are outspoken against Trumpism are quickly shut down and brought to heel by Pelosi. She thinks America can't afford universal healthcare.

Anyway, sorry if I seem riled, my reaction shows that I need ignore the Americans these days. Which I am trying to do.

[blue_gold_84]

On ‎2019‎-‎09‎-‎20 at 3:08 PM, pigseye said:

And do we tell people they have to quit taking a dump? No, we use technology to handle the waste properly so that it doesn't pollute the environment. We should be doing the same thing with emissions, using technology to dispose of them in a responsible fashion.

What a garbage false equivalency. We have to defecate; it's a biological necessity.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/global-temperatures-wmo-1.5293624

You're right: we're ******.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

38 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

What a garbage false equivalency. We have to defecate; it's a biological necessity.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/global-temperatures-wmo-1.5293624

You're right: we're ******.

Some posters need to defecate more frequently, due to being full up on ****. 

[pigseye]

5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

What a garbage false equivalency. We have to defecate; it's a biological necessity.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/global-temperatures-wmo-1.5293624

You're right: we're ******.

6000 reasons for you, try going without and then get back to me.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/partial-list-over-6000-products-made-from-one-barrel-oil-steve-pryor