Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’


EagleSmack
+4
#2071
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Is fire weather or climate?


Heat is climate change... Cold is weather.
 
MHz
#2072
Any chance a hurricane is going to show up in the next few days??
 
Curious Cdn
#2073
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Any chance a hurricane is going to show up in the next few days??

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/top...Gta?li=AAggNb9

Yup.
 
Cliffy
#2074
 
Cliffy
+1 / -1
#2075
150 Congressional Republicans Represent Fossil Fuel Companies Instead of Their Communities

Last week, we mocked the fossil fuel industry’s use of an outlet it owns to brag about perverting democracy — but we didn’t actually call out the politicians in the industry’s pocket.
Lucky for us, the Center for American Progress Action Fund did just that this week. A new analysis from CAP tallies up the climate deniers in the 116th Congress. As it turns out, there are a lot: 150.
But that’s actually an improvement from last year, when there were 180. Of those 180, 47 are no longer serving: 22 were defeated in 2018, 16 retired, five resigned, and four went to other positions.
This may explain why the industry was so keen last week to assert the influence their money has. As it turns out, taking the cash may actually be a bad move for a candidate, since fossil-fuel funded candidates lost 30 seats in the 2018 elections (not factoring in the myriad of other factors at play, of course).
And make no mistake — it is the fossil fuel industry that demands denial, not average Americans. CAP Action Fund cites polling that shows a majority of Americans, including Republicans, know that climate change is real, that it is making weather more extreme, and that we should take action to reduce fossil fuel use.
Exact numbers obviously depend on the poll, but by and large it’s safe to say that a majority of all Americans, including some 55 percent to 66 percent of Republicans, support various types of climate action, including the policies in the Green New Deal.


More: https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/01/3...fuel-companies
 
Walter
#2076
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

150 Congressional Republicans Represent Fossil Fuel Companies Instead of Their Communities
Last week, we mocked the fossil fuel industry’s use of an outlet it owns to brag about perverting democracy — but we didn’t actually call out the politicians in the industry’s pocket.
Lucky for us, the Center for American Progress Action Fund did just that this week. A new analysis from CAP tallies up the climate deniers in the 116th Congress. As it turns out, there are a lot: 150.
But that’s actually an improvement from last year, when there were 180. Of those 180, 47 are no longer serving: 22 were defeated in 2018, 16 retired, five resigned, and four went to other positions.
This may explain why the industry was so keen last week to assert the influence their money has. As it turns out, taking the cash may actually be a bad move for a candidate, since fossil-fuel funded candidates lost 30 seats in the 2018 elections (not factoring in the myriad of other factors at play, of course).
And make no mistake — it is the fossil fuel industry that demands denial, not average Americans. CAP Action Fund cites polling that shows a majority of Americans, including Republicans, know that climate change is real, that it is making weather more extreme, and that we should take action to reduce fossil fuel use.
Exact numbers obviously depend on the poll, but by and large it’s safe to say that a majority of all Americans, including some 55 percent to 66 percent of Republicans, support various types of climate action, including the policies in the Green New Deal.
More: https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/01/3...fuel-companies

Ultra bullshit.
 
Cliffy
#2077
 
petros
#2078
Dear Asia...

Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Your's truly,
God
 
Danbones
+2
#2079
You really are a high cliffy all right.

(The same polar vortex which brought record cold in the 70s is now supposed to be caused by global warming.)

Tony Heller
Published on Jan 29, 2019
Tomorrow is likely to be the coldest day on record in parts of the Midwest. This is making climate alarmists exceptionally desperate with their propaganda.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpl4bFgVXPU


You can't make this totally delusional brain dead stuff up. It's born behind trailer walls in the dark places.
 
Curious Cdn
#2080
13°C outside and the little snow that we had is melting away. The southern Ontario winter was a whole week long, this year. I guess that the next ice advance is upon us.
 
Twin_Moose
#2081
Trade you -36c and over 2' of snow on the ground
 
Twin_Moose
+1
#2082
Surprise, there’s a six-mile hole under Antarctica

Quote:

No one likes a surprise void. Especially not a void where ice is supposed to be. Especially not in the glacier that already plays the largest role of any single glacier’s in sea-level rise.
The void—or the “cavity,” as radar scientists put it—is in the Thwaites glacier, a troublesome mass of ice on the highly troublesome West Antarctic ice sheet. Melting from Thwaites is currently responsible for an estimated 4% of global sea-level rise. That’s before accounting for the surprise cavity.
Researchers found the cavity thanks to ice-penetrating radar attached to NASA’s Operation IceBridge aircraft, along with data from Italian and German Earth-observing satellites. They published their findings in Nature last week. The most disconcerting aspect of the discovery is the sheer size of the empty space where ice should be, and the fact that it only began growing sometime between 2011 and 2016, which suggests it is growing at an “explosive” rate, according to a NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory press release accompanying the paper.
The void is now roughly six miles (9.5 km) long and 1,000 feet (300 meters) deep. That empty space represents the loss of about 14 billion metric tons of ice.
The size of the cavity is alarming, because it contributes to a feedback loop of doom—a death spiral for the glacier, if you will: The bigger the cavity, the more water can touch the glacier from below, causing melt to speed up.
“This is the ocean eating away at the ice,” Eric Rignot, one of the authors of the study and a professor of Earth system science at the University of California-Irvine, told the New York Times. “It’s a direct impact of climate change on the glacier.”
The Thwaites glacier is a “threshold” system, which means that once it reaches a certain point in its crumbling, it will be destabilized. Once destabilized, there’s no going back; it will fall apart. If Thwaites melts down completely—which models predict is possible within 50-100 years, according to NBC— sea levels could rise by two feet on average across the globe.
And if Thwaites falls apart, it could trigger the destabilization the rest of the West Antarctic ice sheet.
As Jeff Goodell put it in Rolling Stone, a complete collapse of Thwaites would be a doomsday scenario:
When a chunk of ice the size of Pennsylvania falls apart, that’s a big problem. It won’t happen overnight, but if we don’t slow the warming of the planet, it could happen within decades. And its loss will destabilize the rest of the West Antarctic ice, and that will go too. Seas will rise about 10 feet in many parts of the world; in New York and Boston, because of the way gravity pushes water around the planet, the waters will rise even higher, as much as 13 feet.
The prospect of a Thwaites collapse is terrifying enough for some scientists to propose artificially propping it up. In 2018, a pair of researchers put forth the idea of building an artificial sill—a sort of crutch—to hold it back, but also acknowledged that humanity’s engineering ability is probably not be at that level yet. “An ice sheet intervention today would be at the edge of human capabilities,” they wrote. “The easiest design that we considered would be comparable to the largest civil engineering projects that humanity has ever attempted.”

How is this considered GW when it is heating from the bottom up? It should be Geothermal warming no?
 
Walter
+1
#2083
Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

Surprise, there’s a six-mile hole under Antarctica
How is this considered GW when it is heating from the bottom up? It should be Geothermal warming no?

Quit presenting facts.
 
coldstream
+2
#2084
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

13°C outside and the little snow that we had is melting away. The southern Ontario winter was a whole week long, this year. I guess that the next ice advance is upon us.


I think the last few days have been the coldest I've experienced in the Fraser Valley since I moved here 12 years ago. In that time the winters have become increasingly more severe. The summers have become wetter and cooler.

That seems typical of the northern half of the continent. It likely means that the Northern Hemisphere is heading into an extended cooling cycle that will likely last centuries. And it all has nothing to do with the trace elements of carbon in the atmosphere or the fractional amount of that contributed man.
Last edited by coldstream; Feb 6th, 2019 at 01:53 PM..
 
petros
+1
#2085
Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

Trade you -36c and over 2' of snow on the ground

Move 1400km South to Casper Wyoming so you can be at the same latitude as Curious kitty.
 
MHz
#2086
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

13°C outside and the little snow that we had is melting away. The southern Ontario winter was a whole week long, this year. I guess that the next ice advance is upon us.

Tic-toc. Phase II . . . . .
https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ne...ic-air/123115/
Wednesday, February 6, 2019, 9:51 AM -Much of the Prairie region is grappling with the "coldest weather of the winter by far" as Arctic high pressure dominates the region through this week and next. Extreme cold warnings are in place across the northern parts of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and almost all of Alberta. Daytime highs will struggle to climb above -25ºC for many this week, with wind chills dipping to some dangerous levels. More on this prolonged deep freeze, and when to expect more snow, below.
 
petros
#2087
You have to remember where he lives is about 800 km South of the 49th parallel.

At least 1000 km south of you.

Damn near the Jewtah/Idaho border.
Last edited by petros; Feb 6th, 2019 at 04:59 PM..
 
Curious Cdn
#2088
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

You have to remember where he lives is about 800 km South of the 49th parallel.
At least 1000 km south of you.
Damn near the Jewtah/Idaho border.

I live on the same latitude as Florence Italy. Down around Leamington, they are on the same parallel as Rome.
 
Twin_Moose
+2
#2089
I don't know if I want to laugh or cry at this

Hope in Manitoba in face of climate change

Quote:

Climate scientists say 2018 was the fourth-hottest year on record, but there may be some hope in Manitoba.Eric Reder of the Wilderness Committee told 680 CJOB that the province is among the more environmentally-friendly areas in Canada.
"We often talk about the fear of how things really are going to change," said Reder. "I'm a bit leery of doing that all the time.
"There's a lot of hope in Manitoba, of the way that we can change things and really put our stamp as a leader around the world of acting on climate."
Reder – whose organization is involved in the Peg City Climate Jam, a series of workshops taking place Saturday at the University of Winnipeg's Richardson College for the Environment – said one of the greatest challenges is to move away from the fossil fuel industry.

READ MORE: Winnipeg junior high students demanding action on climate change

"If we stopped using fossil fuels today, the climate emergency would disappear. It's as simple as that, but the chances of us doing that are zero," he said.
"The movement forward is to figure out how to get off fossil fuel as an energy source, and in Manitoba, we know where our energy comes from – hydroelectricity – so we have a phenomenal opportunity to be a leader.
"That's one of the big pieces of hope that I try to offer to people from Manitoba."
Reder said that without taking action, Manitobans could see side-effects of climate change that aren't necessarily immediately apparent.
He said the movement of bugs and parasites could be the biggest negative effect, with infestations decimating some species of plants and animals in the province.
"The cycle, the balance, the web of nature and wilderness that exists is going to change, and it's going to change in ways that we might not see coming."
Saturday's event will be an opportunity for Manitobans to learn about and discuss the potential impacts of climate change, as well as transformative work already underway in some of our communities.
"People want to come together," said Reder. "This eco-anxiety, they're worried about the future. One way to deal with that is to talk it through."

 
Twin_Moose
+1
#2090
Surprisingly not blamed on GW

Yukon ice cave 'definitely changing,' geologist says
 
Danbones
+1
#2091
Hawaii recorded what may be the lowest elevation snow in state history
https://www.sfgate.com/weather/artic...n-13607099.php
 
Danbones
+1
#2092
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

13°C outside and the little snow that we had is melting away. The southern Ontario winter was a whole week long, this year. I guess that the next ice advance is upon us.

LOL, that is why My Toronto based family members have ALWAYS left their snowmobiles, scoots, and SKIS, here since the 50s - because they could NEVER ride them down there, because freaks of nature aside, there NEVER was enough snow there, and certainly, NEVER enough winter.

LOL, you propaganda freaks are too much!!!

Any wealthy folks in Toronto have their ski chalets in the COLLINGWOOD to Barrie area where the snow belt is, JUST 60 Km from the city, where they get MOUNTAINS OF SNOW, while YOU do not!!!
 
Curious Cdn
#2093
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

LOL, that is why My Toronto based family members have ALWAYS left their snowmobiles, scoots, and SKIS, here since the 50s - because they could NEVER ride them down there, because freaks of nature aside, there NEVER was enough snow there, and certainly, NEVER enough winter.
LOL, you propaganda freaks are too much!!!
Any wealthy folks in Toronto have their ski chalets in the COLLINGWOOD to Barrie area where the snow belt is, JUST 60 Km from the city, where they get MOUNTAINS OF SNOW, while YOU do not!!!

It's called "Lake Effect" whereby moist, saturated air blows eastward from a Great Lake or other large body of water and dumps it's load when the cools, a bit. It doesn't happen when it's really cold. In fact, it doesn't snow much at all when it's really cold. Lake effect is in no way a symptom of "cold".

But what am I saying? You're a Metis and therefore you know all of this and you can "read the signs".

What do the wooly bear caterpillars tell you, this year?
 
Danbones
+2
#2094
You fakenews nazis are so stupid:

Canada's forests actually emit more carbon than they absorb

Tuesday, February 12, 2019, 1:33 PM -You might have heard that Canada's forests are an immense carbon sink, sucking up all sorts of CO2 — more than we produce — so we don't have to worry about our greenhouse gas emissions.

This claim has been circulated on social media and repeated by pundits and politicians.

This would be convenient for our country, if it were real. Hitting our emissions-reduction targets would be a breeze. But, like most things that sound too good to be true, this one is false.

That's because trees don't just absorb carbon when they grow, they emit it when they die and decompose, or burn.

When you add up both the absorption and emission, Canada's forests haven't been a net carbon sink since 2001. Due largely to forest fires and insect infestations, the trees have actually added to our country's greenhouse gas emissions for each of the past 15 years on record.

Not surprisingly, then, Canada has historically excluded its forests when accounting for its total greenhouse emissions to the rest of the world. We had that option, under international agreements, and it was in our interest to leave the trees out of the total tabulation, since they would have boosted our overall emissions.

But, just in the past couple of years, we have taken a different approach. We are now making the case to the United Nations that things like forest fires and pine beetle infestations shouldn't count against us, and that only human-related changes to our forests should be included when doing the calculations that matter to our emission-reduction targets.

By that accounting method, Canada's forestry activities would indeed count as a net carbon sink each year. But even then, they wouldn't cancel out our emissions from other sources. Not even close.

To understand why, we have to do a wee bit of math
https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ne...absorb/124262/

Oh no math..look out! Here come the climate nazis who can't do science, or math, but they can do children in various ways. Especially in the brains in the little socialist indoctrination camps ( sex education at 6 years old!!!) called schools.

It's all man's fault!!! We have found a new "original sin" to tax him on, and take away all his toys. Here lets throw some deranged illegal refugees in on top of that to make it all even better.
Last edited by Danbones; Feb 13th, 2019 at 08:08 AM..
 
Danbones
#2095
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

It's called "Lake Effect" whereby moist, saturated air blows eastward from a Great Lake or other large body of water and dumps it's load when the cools, a bit. It doesn't happen when it's really cold. In fact, it doesn't snow much at all when it's really cold. Lake effect is in no way a symptom of "cold".
But what am I saying? You're a Metis and therefore you know all of this and you can "read the signs".
What do the wooly bear caterpillars tell you, this year?

SO...lake effect snow is the problem,( which stops completely when the lakes are frozen over ), not climate change eh, you racist wiener defender? Did you see the ice records I posted earlier?

Funny...things like temp records continent (even world) wide, or the "ARCTIC VORTEX", or weather west, south, east, and even NORTH of the great lakes, have nothing to do with "lake effect snow".

DID YOU SEE WHERE THE SNOW YOU JUST GOT CAME FROM MAN????????
It was snowing UPWIND long before the storm ever even got near the great lakes.

GEE, SORRY EAST COAST!!! ALL THE SNOW YOU GET THAT NEVER SAW THE GREAT LAKES IS ALL "LAKE EFFECT SNOW" and it's man made, SORRY!!! No more gas engines for you!!!

You just made a total fool of yourself, and have shown everyone just how desperate you are, and you don't even have the freakin' brains to know it.

Congratulations Yorgie...here, let me help you with that.


Ooooops, I forgot, you don't actually do provable facts, just fakenews ones.
Last edited by Danbones; Feb 13th, 2019 at 08:18 AM..
 
Danbones
+1
#2096
Averaged among the 10 events, complete ice coverage causes major reductions in lake-effect snowfall (>80%) and turbulent heat fluxes over the lakes (>90%), less low cloudiness, lower temperatures, and higher air pressure. Another important consequence is a consistent weakening (30%–40%) of lower-tropospheric winds over the lakes when completely frozen. This momentum reduction further decreases over-lake evaporation and weakens downstream wind convergence, thus mitigating lake-effect snowfall. This finding suggests a secondary, dynamical mechanism by which ice cover affects downstream snowfall during HLES events, in addition to the more widely recognized thermodynamic influence.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/ful...R-D-12-00107.1



Well, look - there is no open water south west of you where the latest snow storm came from.



Toronto under extreme cold warning, day after record-breaking snowfall

Environment Canada has issued an extreme cold warning for Toronto, the day after a record-breaking snowfall blanketed the city.

The warning also extends to the rest of the GTA.
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2019/01/...king-snowfall/

“A frigid Arctic air mass and strong winds will result in wind chill values of -30 to -35 tonight through to Friday morning,” the national weather agency said in its warning.

...and just this week:

Toronto and most of southern Ontario remain under a winter storm warning from Environment Canada as the Colorado low moves across the province.

This is just the third time in 20 years that the TDSB has closed all of its schools for a snow day, the last being in 2011.
https://www.cp24.com/weather/snow-da...-gta-1.4293095
Last edited by Danbones; Feb 13th, 2019 at 08:37 AM..
 
Danbones
#2097
Hawaii battered by 191mph gusts, 40ft waves in rare winter snow storm (VIDEOS)

The island state of Hawaii has been battered by an “unprecedented” weather event which has brought 191-mph gusts, snow storms, waves as high as 40 feet (12.19 meters), widespread power outages, and at least one fatality.

The low pressure system began hammering the islands on Friday, with damaging winds combining with already choppy seas to create massive waves and, in turn, coastal flooding. A 66-year-old man died in the rough surf off Maui on Friday.
https://www.rt.com/usa/451306-hawaii...re-storm-maui/

“Unprecedented” lake effect wind, wave, and temperature.


"Lake effect snow" doesn't make the temperature drop to where the snow stays for those of you desperate enough to think so.

For example; what Toronto normally gets is lake effect rain.
 
DaSleeper
+1
#2098
I found that the jet stream affect Canadian temperature but not precipitation so much......


 
petros
+1
#2099
On the Prairie we say "it's a dry cold and not that bad". Snow is from warm moist air clashing with cold air.

When the jetstream drops like that it stalls that mix from happening.

Late Feb-April is when we get our heavy snows when warm moist air finally breaks over the Sierras or slams straight up from the Gulf.
 
Danbones
#2100
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper View Post

I found that the jet stream affect Canadian temperature but not precipitation so much...

In our case, the temperature is low enough that we keep the snow we get (dependent on the jet stream location ), but Toronto gets a MODERATED temp effect year round because of it's location re the great lakes, which means rain more than snow, and it doesn't make for a real winter there.

Just look at their snow removal plan - things like expenses/ per area, and their basic snow removal equipment/ per area. They need the military to come in for a real storm.

Not to mention the ice we have, which is necessary to get to the non drive in shoreline cottage areas from here.

WE do get some "lake effect" snow, but most of it is also triggered by land fall, and falls SOUTH of my part of the bay. Most of our snow this year is from south western storms that were dumping lots of snow well to that side of the lakes,long before they even get here.
Last edited by Danbones; Feb 14th, 2019 at 09:07 AM..
 

Similar Threads

1749
60
Global Capitalism; Greatest Scam in History
by darkbeaver | Oct 19th, 2018
2910