Climate Change(d)?

[Elixir]

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of livesin wars and natural disasters..

Oooh NOoooes!
That translates to “fifty thousands” per year! That could cost every American fractions of a penny EVERY YEAR!!
Run, Swiz! They’re coming for your money!

 

[TSwizzle]

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.. A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate. The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. Climate change ‘should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network. An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions. Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change. Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon’s dire warnings could no longer be ignored. Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. ‘It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.’ ‘This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,’ he added.

Teh Grauniad

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
Abrupt climate change
Next year widespread flooding
imminent catastrophic climate change
Ignoring the evidence
etc. etc. etc.

lol, this piece of nonsense was published in February 2004. Twenty two years ago, almost twenty three years ago.

It really is a rapture like cult.

You realize that The Guardian isn't peer reviewed scientific literature right?

ffs, this again?

Your arguments against climate change

You're a joke.

Why are you posting in this thread?

I am responding to your glib assertions because you quoted me.

Every once in a while I think... maybe, maybe this time TSwizzle will actually contribute positively to the conversation.

Why would you think that? This shit thread has been going through the same rinse and repeat cycle for years.

In a few days time, SouthernHybrid will post a doomsday climate catastrophe article and say something like "why should we believe what a scientist says when the climate denialist knows it all". I will respond "what a crock of shit this is", it's a catastrophic 73f in Santa Monica. There will be a bit of back and forth for a couple of days and it will go quiet again. It has been this way for years.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.. A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate. The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. Climate change ‘should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network. An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions. Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change. Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon’s dire warnings could no longer be ignored. Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. ‘It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.’ ‘This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,’ he added.

Teh Grauniad

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
Abrupt climate change
Next year widespread flooding
imminent catastrophic climate change
Ignoring the evidence
etc. etc. etc.

lol, this piece of nonsense was published in February 2004. Twenty two years ago, almost twenty three years ago.

It really is a rapture like cult.

You realize that The Guardian isn't peer reviewed scientific literature right?

ffs, this again?

Your arguments against climate change

You're a joke.

Why are you posting in this thread?

I am responding to your glib assertions because you quoted me.

You didn't respond to any assertion. You just retorted a spasm.

Every once in a while I think... maybe, maybe this time TSwizzle will actually contribute positively to the conversation.

Why would you think that? This shit thread has been going through the same rinse and repeat cycle for years.
In a few days time, SouthernHybrid will post a doomsday climate catastrophe article and say something like "why should we believe what a scientist says when the climate denialist knows it all". I will respond "what a crock of shit this is", it's a catastrophic 73f in Santa Monica. There will be a bit of back and forth for a couple of days and it will go quiet again. It has been this way for years.

Or you could try not being a dickhead.

 

[TSwizzle]

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.. A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate. The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. Climate change ‘should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network. An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions. Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change. Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon’s dire warnings could no longer be ignored. Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. ‘It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.’ ‘This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,’ he added.

Teh Grauniad

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
Abrupt climate change
Next year widespread flooding
imminent catastrophic climate change
Ignoring the evidence
etc. etc. etc.

lol, this piece of nonsense was published in February 2004. Twenty two years ago, almost twenty three years ago.

It really is a rapture like cult.

You realize that The Guardian isn't peer reviewed scientific literature right?

ffs, this again?

Your arguments against climate change

You're a joke.

Why are you posting in this thread?

I am responding to your glib assertions because you quoted me.

You didn't respond to any assertion. {snip}.

Yes I did and you quoted my response.

Every once in a while I think... maybe, maybe this time TSwizzle will actually contribute positively to the conversation.

Why would you think that? This shit thread has been going through the same rinse and repeat cycle for years.
In a few days time, SouthernHybrid will post a doomsday climate catastrophe article and say something like "why should we believe what a scientist says when the climate denialist knows it all". I will respond "what a crock of shit this is", it's a catastrophic 73f in Santa Monica. There will be a bit of back and forth for a couple of days and it will go quiet again. It has been this way for years.

Or you could try not being a dickhead.

Right back at ya.

 

[DBT]

Whatever anyone may be, deny it or not, the evidence shows that earth’s climate is changing and that we are contributing to it through our economic activity and emissions.

 

[steve_bank]

Amazing what you can learn just by listening to weather reporting. Heard this today in relation to El Nino and climate change.

In short it is part of what is cauing west coast flooding.

AI
Kelvin Waves and Their Role in Climate Change

Kelvin waves are long, low‑frequency waves in the ocean or atmosphere that can transport heat and alter sea levels, and they play a key role in El Niño — a major driver of global climate variability.

What Kelvin Waves Are

Kelvin waves are planetary‑scale gravity waves that travel along boundaries such as the equator or coastlines. n the ocean, they can be equatorial Kelvin waves (moving eastward along the equator) or coastal Kelvin waves (trapped along a shoreline). They are extremely long — thousands of miles — and can persist for weeks to months

AI
Kelvin waves linked to El Niño are raising West Coast sea levels by 6–12 inches, increasing the likelihood of coastal flooding when combined with high tides and storms.

Kelvin wave - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A Kelvin wave is a low-frequency gravity wave whose motion is concentrated near a vertical boundary (e.g., a shore) or the equator.[1] It occurs in the ocean and the atmosphere,[2] as well as in large lakes.[3] Waves along a coast are called coastal Kelvin waves; those along the equator are equatorial Kelvin waves. In a coastal Kelvin wave, a pressure gradient across the flow balances the Earth's Coriolis force, while the fluid moves along the boundary.[1] Kelvin wave retains its shape as it moves (being, in the shallow water model, non-dispersive[4]), and therefore does not curl over.[5] The direction of the wave is fixed: the coastal wave moves towards the poles along the eastern coasts (like California[a]) and towards the equator along the western coasts (like Japan and Australia). Around a closed basin, coastal Kelvin waves travel counterclockwise in the Northern Hemisphere[1] and clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere.[2] Equatorial Kelvin waves always travel eastward.[2]

Kelvin waves are regular events. Both equatorial[6][7] and coastal[8] waves are observed multiple times per year. Observations of the equatorial Kelvin wave are important for predictions about El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), thus the phenomenon attracts attention of the mainstream media.[5] Coastal Kelvin waves are an important component of tide waves.[3]

The Kelvin waves have planetary scale, sometimes thousands of miles long.[5] The equatorial waves move large amounts of heat and are known to temporarily reverse some currents in the upper ocean. At the same time, the height of the equatorial wave (observed changes in the ocean level) is very small: in the Pacific, downwelling Kelvin waves raise sea level by just a few centimetres.[9]

During the meteorological or oceanographical analysis, it can be assumed that one velocity component of a Kelvin wave vanishes (for example, for an equatorial wave there is no flow in the north–south direction), thus making the momentum and continuity equations much simpler). This wave is named after its discoverer, Lord Kelvin (1879).[10][11]

 

[southernhybrid]

I read the other day that a lot of those waves are expected to hit the California coast, not that our denialist will accept the truth. I wish he'd just stay out of this thread since he had nothing intelligent to contribute to it. The link can be accessed for free, but it might ask for an email or something so I will post enough to give others an idea of what is expected to hit California. This info is primarily for those who live in the area and accept the science.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/19/...e_code=1.PlE.SPRT.i4YMrEKpSVse&smid=url-share

In just a few decades, summers in California will not only be much hotter, but will also stretch for months longer. Floods will become more widespread and extreme. Exposure to wildfire smoke will kill thousands more people every year.

Those are the dire projections of California’s Fifth Climate Change Assessment, a report produced by California every few years that analyzes the impacts of changing weather patterns on the nation’s most-populous state.

The future laid out in the report, which was published on Monday, touches on familiar warnings: more wildfires, bigger storms, longer droughts. But it illustrates in unsettling detail just how quickly the climate is being reshaped, and reveals what is likely to be major upheaval to long-established ways of life in California.

According to the report, average temperatures are likely to increase in California by about 4 degrees Fahrenheit by the middle of the century. Current warming in California is unprecedented compared with the past century and estimates for the past millennium, the report shows.

The report also found that without major intervention, as much as three-quarters of California’s beaches could disappear — either seasonally or permanently — by 2100 because of coastal erosion. In that same time frame, sea level rise is expected to threaten $78 billion worth of property because of coastal flooding.

The state’s agricultural industry is expected to take a major hit as well.

Many crops require a certain number of hours of cold temperature to develop properly, and warmer temperatures could decrease fruit yields in some parts of the state by as much as 40 percent, according to the report.

At the same time, water shortages could mean that the number of acres that farmers irrigate could decline dramatically, including by up to 40 percent in the San Joaquin Valley, a major agricultural hub.

Most of this will affect younger and future generations. Sadly, all of the warnings and evidence haven't resulted in much action.

 

[Elixir]

Sadly, all of the warnings and evidence haven't resulted in much action.

The Swizzles of the world won’t wake up until the are starving. And then they’ll blame the libs.

 

[TSwizzle]

I read the other day that a lot of those waves are expected to hit the California coast, not that our denialist will accept the truth.

You are so predictable.

I wish he'd just stay out of this thread {snip}

If that were true and you actually meant it, you would not tag me in. Let's try that next time you feel like posting another bs study.

It is true, we do have a particularly strong El Niño developing. But that's the way climate works, it is variable.

Onto the climate apocalypse porn;

The future laid out in the report, which was published on Monday, touches on familiar warnings: more wildfires, bigger storms, longer droughts. But it illustrates in unsettling detail just how quickly the climate is being reshaped, and reveals what is likely to be major upheaval to long-established ways of life in California.

According to the report, average temperatures are likely to increase in California by about 4 degrees Fahrenheit by the middle of the century. Current warming in California is unprecedented compared with the past century and estimates for the past millennium, the report shows.

The report also found that without major intervention, as much as three-quarters of California’s beaches could disappear — either seasonally or permanently — by 2100 because of coastal erosion. In that same time frame, sea level rise is expected to threaten $78 billion worth of property because of coastal flooding.

The state’s agricultural industry is expected to take a major hit as well.

Many crops require a certain number of hours of cold temperature to develop properly, and warmer temperatures could decrease fruit yields in some parts of the state by as much as 40 percent, according to the report.

At the same time, water shortages could mean that the number of acres that farmers irrigate could decline dramatically, including by up to 40 percent in the San Joaquin Valley, a major agricultural hub.

"Familiar warnings", yeah very familiar and bogus. "could be" "likely" "possibly", "maybe", "perhaps" blah, blah, blah!

Just another nonsense propaganda puff piece. This is not science.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.


It is a catastrophic 67f today.