Climate Change(d)?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Here in central Georgia it's a catastrophic 62 degrees, just 4 degrees above normal, but the other day it was 70 and next week we will be in the mid 70s. The little pink flowers and daffodils are blooming, so it couldn't possibly be related to anything known as climate change. /s And, all that arctic ice that's melting is nothing to worry about. And what in the world do scientists know compared to someone who lives in Santa Monica?

The climate "scientists" have been predicting climate catastrophe for decades. No catastrophes, we are still here.

Of course, the predicted decades for problems are still in front of us in the later half of this century. The question of the current moment is the alleged precipice of a potential point of no return.

And what makes you think that climate does not change and remains static?

That is as daft as asking "Have you heard of Jesus?"

Are you not aware that climate has natural variability? I am sure that somewhere in this years long thread, climate variability has been discussed. Things like El Nino? Yes?

And some of the warmest summers are also occurring during La Nina cycles, which isn't normal.

 

[Elixir]

No catastrophes, we are still here.

"We?" You and the frog in your pocket are evidently still here, yeah.
Others among us have suffered record numbers and intensities of hurricanes, tornadoes and other weather phenomena.
But weather is variable, right Swiz? No shit.
When you figure out that your mantra does nothing to mitigate an alarming rate of increased insurance costs and losses due to climate-related catastrophes (not exclusively due to corrupt actuaries), you will be on your way to full cranio-rectal extraction.

somewhere in this years long thread, climate variability has been discussed

Yabut every time the RATE of climate variance and its correlates have been brought up, you near break your arm trying to handwave away or ignore the data.

 

[TSwizzle]

The climate "scientists" have been predicting climate catastrophe for decades. No catastrophes, we are still here.

Of course, the predicted decades for problems are still in front of us in the later half of this century. The question of the current moment is the alleged precipice of a potential point of no return.

Yes these disasters are always ten years away. Every COP conference has started with "We only have xx years to save the planet!!!!111!!!11!!"

Jog on.

 

[TSwizzle]

Flash back Friday

President Mohammed Nasheed and 13 other government officials submerged and took their seats at a table on the sea floor — 20 feet below the surface of a lagoon off Girifushi, an island usually used for military training. With a backdrop of coral, the meeting was a bid to draw attention to fears that rising sea levels caused by the melting of polar ice caps could swamp this Indian Ocean archipelago within a century. Its islands average 7 feet above sea level.

CNN



I think the Maldives may have gained land mass since then.

 

[steve_bank]

I think Trump is right..

We should get rid of all pollution controls on gas cars and industry. We should go back to when visibility on a clear sunny day in the La basin was a few miles.

In the 1960s, air pollution in the Los Angeles basin was notoriously severe, often creating a thick, brownish-orange, or yellowish haze that
drastically reduced visibility.


In the 1960s, air pollution in the Los Angeles basin was notoriously severe, often creating a thick, brownish-orange, or yellowish haze that
drastically reduced visibility.
Visibility in the 1960s:

Average Conditions: Visibility was poor, with haze often making it impossible to see the nearby mountains. During the 1960s (specifically 1960-68), the mean visibility at noon in downtown LA was roughly 8.3 miles, a significant decline from about 12.6 miles in the 1930s.
"Excellent" Visibility Days: Days with "excellent" visibility—defined as over 35 miles—dropped to just a handful per year in the 1960s (e.g., only 1 day in 1969).
Physical Effects: The air was so polluted that it caused eyes to burn, lungs to hurt, and forced schools to cancel recess on "smog alert" days.
The "Clear" Day Illusion: Even on relatively "clear" days, a layer of haze was often visible, only truly clearing after strong wind events or heavy rain.
Regional Differences: Visibility tended to be worse on the eastern side of the basin (Riverside/San Bernardino) as pollution was blown eastward, though the entire basin was affected.

While the 1960s was a particularly bad period, it marked the beginning of intensive, albeit slow, efforts to control emissions that have improved visibility in the region since.

Who needs to see those mountains in the distance anyway.

As RFKjr said, we are going to make American healthy again.

The La basin includes Santa Monica doesn't it?

 

[bilby]

I think

This claim is not supported by the evidence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The climate "scientists" have been predicting climate catastrophe for decades. No catastrophes, we are still here.

Of course, the predicted decades for problems are still in front of us in the later half of this century. The question of the current moment is the alleged precipice of a potential point of no return.

Yes these disasters are always ten years away. Every COP conference has started with "We only have xx years to save the planet!!!!111!!!11!!"

Jog on.

COP was subverted long ago, it's actually on your side, just pretending to do something.

But on a personal level I see the flowers in the back yard and wonder if we are going the same way as the lower part of the valley--no fruit. For us, it's just a luxury, nothing horrible will happen if there is no fruit. But there are orchards north of here.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[TSwizzle]

Reality bites in Wales

Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth has dropped his party's pledge to achieve net zero carbon emissions in Wales by 2035. It had committed to the target at the last general election, and made it part of its co-operation deal with the Welsh government in 2021. But ap Iorwerth told BBC Radio Wales Breakfast on Thursday that achieving net zero in that timeframe "isn't realistic".

News

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

 

[Elixir]

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

Dream on with the y suckers!
Read and learn:

“Emissions from human activity have not yet peaked globally, though some regions like Europe and the US have seen declines. Natural factors, including fires and thawing permafrost, add to the rise, and concentrations remain far above pre-industrial levels (now over 150% higher). Without emission cuts, levels could exceed 800 ppm by 2100.”

Alarms have been disconnected, but the fires rage.

 

[scombrid]

I think Trump is right..

We should get rid of all pollution controls on gas cars and industry. We should go back to when visibility on a clear sunny day in the La basin was a few miles.

In the 1960s, air pollution in the Los Angeles basin was notoriously severe, often creating a thick, brownish-orange, or yellowish haze that
drastically reduced visibility.


In the 1960s, air pollution in the Los Angeles basin was notoriously severe, often creating a thick, brownish-orange, or yellowish haze that
drastically reduced visibility.
Visibility in the 1960s:

Average Conditions: Visibility was poor, with haze often making it impossible to see the nearby mountains. During the 1960s (specifically 1960-68), the mean visibility at noon in downtown LA was roughly 8.3 miles, a significant decline from about 12.6 miles in the 1930s.
"Excellent" Visibility Days: Days with "excellent" visibility—defined as over 35 miles—dropped to just a handful per year in the 1960s (e.g., only 1 day in 1969).
Physical Effects: The air was so polluted that it caused eyes to burn, lungs to hurt, and forced schools to cancel recess on "smog alert" days.
The "Clear" Day Illusion: Even on relatively "clear" days, a layer of haze was often visible, only truly clearing after strong wind events or heavy rain.
Regional Differences: Visibility tended to be worse on the eastern side of the basin (Riverside/San Bernardino) as pollution was blown eastward, though the entire basin was affected.

While the 1960s was a particularly bad period, it marked the beginning of intensive, albeit slow, efforts to control emissions that have improved visibility in the region since.

Who needs to see those mountains in the distance anyway.

As RFKjr said, we are going to make American healthy again.

The La basin includes Santa Monica doesn't it?

I remember the I81 corridor in the great valley of Virginia in the 1980s. It was nasty. Way better now.

 

[southernhybrid]

I remember the New York City skyline in the 60s when I was in high school in NJ. It was horrible.You couldn't even see the Empire State Building through the smog.

Make America Smoggy Again!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Reality bites in Wales

Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth has dropped his party's pledge to achieve net zero carbon emissions in Wales by 2035. It had committed to the target at the last general election, and made it part of its co-operation deal with the Welsh government in 2021. But ap Iorwerth told BBC Radio Wales Breakfast on Thursday that achieving net zero in that timeframe "isn't realistic".

News

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

Yeah, it will end when we take ourselves out.

 

[Elixir]

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

Yeah, it will end when we take ourselves out.

Don’t be such an alarmist! We can go on indefinitely increasing atmospheric carbon. It will level out, and decrease really fast if most people croak from it.

 

[bilby]

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

Yeah, it will end when we take ourselves out.

Don’t be such an alarmist! We can go on indefinitely increasing atmospheric carbon. It will level out, and decrease really fast if most people croak from it.

Nah, if it gets to that point it will take a long time to fall, if only because of the oceans acting as a buffer. There's likely to be positive feedback traps too, such as methane releases from clathrates on the ocean floor.

Of course, it depends what you mean by "fast". But my bet is that the decrease, even if humans go extinct, will be nowhere near as fast as the current rate of increase, which is blisteringly fast by geological standards (though unfortunately still slow enough by the standards of individual human lives, as to make some fools think that everything is peachy).

 

[Elixir]

There's likely to be positive feedback traps too, such as methane releases from clathrates on the ocean floor.

The existing clathrate deposits will have limited time to respond due to sea bottom temperature rise. They are very sensitive to pressure changes, and increasing sea levels will keep most of it trapped. So there may be some catastrophic tsunamis due to a few underwater ridges giving out, but Antarctic melting will soon put a stop to thst nonsense!

 

[bilby]

There's likely to be positive feedback traps too, such as methane releases from clathrates on the ocean floor.

The existing clathrate deposits will have limited time to respond due to sea bottom temperature rise. They are very sensitive to pressure changes, and increasing sea levels will keep most of it trapped. So there may be some catastrophic tsunamis due to a few underwater ridges giving out, but Antarctic melting will soon put a stop to thst nonsense!

That's true if we assume that sea bottom temperature rise is fairly uniform. Which is perhaps a fair bet, given the generally stable conditions in the deep oceans, until you consider that the stakes are rather high. Betting your life on it seems a touch risky; Betting the lives of all land vertebrates larger than rats on it seems very risky indeed.

It could make a few catastrophic tsunamis look like a nice day at the beach.

Wow, I don't think I have ever seen the tide so low; All this talk of sea level rise must be a load of... Hey, what's that black line on the horizon?

 

[Elixir]

I spent a good bit of time looking into that whole question back in the 80s, and there is (was?) no real fact-based assurance that unforetold disasters are not just imminent (geologically speaking) but inevitable, given the current rate of sea temperature rise.
Coastal clathrate deposits are millions of years old, and have seen sea levels rising over the most recent thousands of years. But evidence is clear that underwater landslides and their attendant mega-tsunamis were a fairly regular (at intervals of tens or hundreds of thousands of years) occurrence when sea levels have been a few hundred feet lower than they are today. Models of the loading on continental shelves indicate(d) that even with the added pressure of further sea level rise, the risks of major destabilization of clathrate deposits rises dramatically with any rise in sea surface temps.
The so-called clathrate stability zone is only about 1 km deep, plus or minus a hundred or few hundred meters. So deep sea temps are almost irrelevant.
I stopped worrying about it for the same reason I stopped worrying about gamma ray bursts and meteor impacts. Only, a methane hydrate catastrophe can take several equally disastrous forms, and is basically inevitable, as a natural manifestation of our biosphere. But the chance of a yuuuge collapse of a continental shelf or a truly massive methane explosion during a human lifetime, is pretty small because a human lifespan is basically a flash in the pan.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This obsession with "carbon" is coming to an end at last.

Yeah, it will end when we take ourselves out.

Don’t be such an alarmist! We can go on indefinitely increasing atmospheric carbon. It will level out, and decrease really fast if most people croak from it.

No. The carbon we add will stay there for a very long time even if we quit adding.

And at this point I think other factors will take us out before warming becomes a major killer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Winter was cancelled.
Sincerely,
The yams.

We have some yams, she likes to eat the leaves but it's something you might find in an Asian grocery, certainly won't elsewhere. Back when The Felon was first elected I posted a picture looking out from our front porch, someone noticed the "dead" yams. Since then they have persisted longer and longer, this year they got singed a bit in January. Then we had one colder night, we figured they had had it and she took what was left. I didn't get around to removing all the "dead" stems. Today I was out there planting--stuff that shouldn't be planted until after the last frost date which is officially March 17, but I think it's safe despite living in a colder part of the city. I normally plant peas in the yam pots during the winter but decided that this year's growing season was too short, there would be nothing. But I notice they have green in them, go to pull the weeds--a couple of weeds, but mostly yam. Probably 80% of the stems had died but 20% were still alive and now sprouting leaves everywhere.