How the GW myth is perpetuated


JLM
#661
Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato View Post

It would take many years for the permafrost to melt,the tundra drys up every summer but its such a good insulator that allmost everything under it stays frozen.Thats one of the reasons spring breakup only lasts a week northwest of hudsons bay,the water cant go into the ground and when it hits the lakes that ice also melts very quickly.

As long as they keep getting the 24 hours of darkness each winter I dont think we have to worry too much about the arctic becoming a tropical paradise.

It's nice to see a sane statement on this subject amongst all the hype and tripe.
 
Kakato
#662
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Come drill on a lake just past the tree line with me sometime. 20 years ago we rarely sniffed a hole for methane, these days you can toss a match in and make coffee. The summer time off gassing of Tundra is up from the longer hotter warm streches...waaaaaay up.

Thats pretty cool(the vid) and Ive never seen that before.
Where I was not much rotted so I dont think there would have been too much methane build up especially with the water near zero all the time.

Could that methane have come from a coal seam under the lake or is it all from rotting vegetation?
 
petros
#663
Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato View Post

Thats pretty cool(the vid) and Ive never seen that before.
Where I was not much rotted so I dont think there would have been too much methane build up especially with the water near zero all the time.

Could that methane have come from a coal seam under the lake or is it all from rotting vegetation?

Nope. Under the organic matter sits the worlds hardest granite.

I've looked into harvesting that resource to run my LF 70's.

It is complex but can be done. You need a gas dryer and a tank array.

Until the price of the tanks come down in price and weight (especially weight) will potential be reached.
 
Kakato
#664
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Nope. Under the organic matter sits the worlds hardest granite.

I've looked into harvesting that resource to run my LF 70's.

It is complex but can be done. You need a gas dryer and a tank array.

Until the price of the tanks come down in price and weight (especially weight) will potential be reached.

You mean the Canadian shield?
I use to curse that stuff,especially the rose granite which the crusher could barely scratch.

Not much rotted where I was,you could drink the water allmost anywhere and the only way the tundra got contaminated is if someone walked on it and crap came off their boots.There was a few places the Innuit wouldnt let you walk because the caribou would pick up some kind of hoove disease and it came off the hunters kamiks or so I was told.
 
petros
#665
Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato View Post

You mean the Canadian shield?
I use to curse that stuff,especially the rose granite which the crusher could barely scratch.

Not much rotted where I was,you could drink the water allmost anywhere and the only way the tundra got contaminated is if someone walked on it and crap came off their boots.There was a few places the Innuit wouldnt let you walk because the caribou would pick up some kind of hoove disease and it came off the hunters kamiks or so I was told.

The "sheild" indeed. When someone asks me if "working underground is scary", I say "you tell me, you live under a wooden roof".

I've spent the last 6 years mainly drilling from 58 degrees north to 300-400km past the treeline where the lignus overburden is 20m thick in spots. Year by year the thickness of the permafrost that traps in the gasses has been getting thinner and thinner.

I'm sorry if I'm not helping in deunking the myth but I see what I see and it is drastic.
 
petros
#666
Oh yeah...speaking enviro impact and the locals. There is another nasty gas sitting below that frost with the capability of wiping out large areas.

Radon.

The best is yet to come....
 
ironsides
#667
petros:
Beat me to it, there is so much that it "methane" could be a global killer. Radon is localized.
 
petros
#668
I'd hate to be a in a low area when the radon does come up. People tend to live in valleys.

The deniers can scoff all they want.

I know how my industry has changed in massive ways because of warming and I know the change is long from over.
 
Kakato
#669
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

The "sheild" indeed. When someone asks me if "working underground is scary", I say "you tell me, you live under a wooden roof".

I've spent the last 6 years mainly drilling from 58 degrees north to 300-400km past the treeline where the lignus overburden is 20m thick in spots. Year by year the thickness of the permafrost that traps in the gasses has been getting thinner and thinner.

I'm sorry if I'm not helping in deunking the myth but I see what I see and it is drastic.

I agree,the permafrost is very delicate,while it never melted under the grass where I was at if you scraped back the shrubs so that the brown dirt showed it was a matter of minutes before it would start melting.When the inspector told us our blasting shack had to be a mile from camp we dragged it there,on the way back there was 2 streams flowing where the skids dragged and the lake was allready silting.
Glad I wasnt running that show at the time. The head enviro engineer flew all the way from montreal to see that one.
I also spent 7 weeks trying to scrape the permafrost to bedrock for a million gallon fuel tank to sit on.Now that was painfull,I got about an inch scraped off every day and finally we just blasted it.I think our drillers said they had permafrost down to about 150 feet doing core samples.

Its a whole different environment thats for sure,nothing at all like the south here and any small change would be very noticeable.
I dont think its a matter of ice in the arctic melting,it does that every summer but more of it melting sooner or faster and that would lead to the top layer of permafrost getting more sunlight which might bring different plant species and change maybe the habitat and acidity levels in the waters and who knows what else?
I see a lot of the hysteria though from peeps trying to make a buck off it and that pisses me off.
 
Kakato
#670
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

I'd hate to be a in a low area when the radon does come up. People tend to live in valleys.

The deniers can scoff all they want.

I know how my industry has changed in massive ways because of warming and I know the change is long from over.

Watch for radon daughters.
 
Kakato
#671
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsides View Post

petros:
Beat me to it, there is so much that it "methane" could be a global killer. Radon is localized.

Anywhere theres rotting vegetation or coal there is methane.My municipality has over 3000 miles of tunnels and shafts under it from the coal days and quite a few houses had to be destroyed because of the methane seeping into their house.
 
petros
#672
Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato View Post

I agree,the permafrost is very delicate,while it never melted under the grass where I was at if you scraped back the shrubs so that the brown dirt showed it was a matter of minutes before it would start melting.When the inspector told us our blasting shack had to be a mile from camp we dragged it there,on the way back there was 2 streams flowing where the skids dragged and the lake was allready silting.
Glad I wasnt running that show at the time. The head enviro engineer flew all the way from montreal to see that one.
I also spent 7 weeks trying to scrape the permafrost to bedrock for a million gallon fuel tank to sit on.Now that was painfull,I got about an inch scraped off every day and finally we just blasted it.I think our drillers said they had permafrost down to about 150 feet doing core samples.

Its a whole different environment thats for sure,nothing at all like the south here and any small change would be very noticeable.
I dont think its a matter of ice in the arctic melting,it does that every summer but more of it melting sooner or faster and that would lead to the top layer of permafrost getting more sunlight which might bring different plant species and change maybe the habitat and acidity levels in the waters and who knows what else?
I see a lot of the hysteria though from peeps trying to make a buck off it and that pisses me off.

The past 5 years has been hit and miss for ice roads. My air bills have gotten frightening.
Those 150m cores may still be frozen but I'll tell you this from experience, they aren't has hard as they once were and the crystal structure is changing. It's not as simple as saying "it's frozen to 150m".
 
Kakato
#673
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

The past 5 years has been hit and miss for ice roads. My air bills have gotten frightening.
Those 150m cores may still be frozen but I'll tell you this from experience, they aren't has hard as they once were and the crystal structure is changing. It's not as simple as saying "it's frozen to 150m".

I know the 4 years I was there the ice stayed the same and winter came the end of september like clockwork.I stayed as far away from the boart guys as I could,most were half crazy.
They were drilling gold samples and not ice so thats just one thing they allways had to tell you before flying out to the drill,how deep it was froze.

This was quite far north though and we were running 50 ton cat trucks loaded with sand from an esker on our ice road,it was 8 feet thick at the thinnest spot.
About 3 times thicker then the stuff they drive on in ice road truckers(love that show).
 
petros
#674
Why do you think it's called "over BURDEN"? Of course we'll bitch about the ugly **** beast that guards the treasure and metres per day that pays money.

I've worked from Axel on down. There has been obvious surface changes that far up but when it comes to the southern end of the arctic the changes are reaching far below surface.
 
Walter
#675
Unbe-phukking-lievable.

October 27, 2009

Climate chief Lord Stern: give up meat to save the planet

Robin Pagnamenta, Energy Editor

People will need to consider turning vegetarian if the world is to conquer climate change, according to a leading authority on global warming.
In an interview with The Times, Lord Stern of Brentford said: “Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better.”
Direct emissions of methane from cows and pigs is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Methane is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a global warming gas.
Lord Stern, the author of the influential 2006 Stern Review on the cost of tackling global warming, said that a successful deal at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December would lead to soaring costs for meat and other foods that generate large quantities of greenhouse gases.
 
big
#676
Are you implying that in order to fight obesity people have invented the myth of global warming?
 
Ron in Regina
#677
Isn't this chief Lord Stern the same guy that says we should eat our pets
to save the planet due to a pet's environmental footprint? That we should
all be keeping herbivores (& not carnivores like cats or dogs) that we can
communally share (further reducing a pet's carbon footprint) and then we
should periodically eat our herbivore pets (hamsters & rabbits & chickens)?
 
big
#678
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in Regina View Post

Isn't this chief Lord Stern the same guy that says we should eat our pets
to save the planet due to a pet's environmental footprint? That we should
all be keeping herbivores (& not carnivores like cats or dogs) that we can
communally share (further reducing a pet's carbon footprint) and then we
should periodically eat our herbivore pets (hamsters & rabbits & chickens)?

If you look so innocent, it is because Lord requires that animals as pets be loved by humans. It was the gods whom originally require from humans that they domesticate animals so that they can have readily familiar surrogates to perform sacrifices.
 
Ron in Regina
#679
My Bad. It was some other Folks and this Lord Stern Guy quoted them:
Save the planet: eat a dog? | Stuff.co.nz

The couple has assessed the carbon emissions created by popular pets, taking into
account the ingredients of pet food and the land needed to create them.

"If you have a German shepherd or similar-sized dog, for example, its impact every
year is exactly the same as driving a large car around," Brenda Vale said.

"A lot of people worry about having SUVs but they don't worry about having
Alsatians and what we are saying is, well, maybe you should be because the
environmental impact ... is comparable."

In a study published in New Scientist, they calculated a medium dog eats 164
kilograms of meat and 95 kg of cereals every year. It takes 43.3 square meters of
land to produce 1 kg of chicken a year. This means it takes 0.84 hectares to feed
Fido.

They compared this with the footprint of a Toyota Land Cruiser, driven 10,000 km
a year, which uses 55.1 gigajoules (the energy used to build and fuel it). One
hectare of land can produce 135 gigajoules a year, which means the vehicle's eco-
footprint is 0.41 ha – less than half of the dog's.

They found cats have an eco-footprint of 0.15 ha – slightly less than a Volkswagen
Golf. Hamsters have a footprint of 0.014 ha – keeping two of them is equivalent to
owning a plasma TV.

 
big
#680
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in Regina View Post

My Bad. It was some other Folks and this Lord Stern Guy quoted them:
Save the planet: eat a dog? | Stuff.co.nz

What so wrong and mystifying about quoting a science magazine?
 
Ron in Regina
#681
Quote: Originally Posted by big View Post

What so wrong and mystifying about quoting a science magazine?


I thought (and originally attributed) the words in that article to this Lord Stern Guy.
Two of the three Dogs above are mine. I might just be going to Environmental Hell.
 
big
#682
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in Regina View Post

I thought (and originally attributed) the words in that article to this Lord Stern Guy.
Two of the three Dogs above are mine. I might just be going to Environmental Hell.

We know now a bit more about how the deniers' myths are perpetuated.
 
Ron in Regina
#683
Oh?
 
big
#684
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in Regina View Post

Oh?

i.e. by not verifying facts soon enough.
 
Ron in Regina
#685
My "Oh?" was on the word " denier's " and I had to check and make sure I wasn't
posting in a Religion SubForum. Better a denier than a heretic, I guess. Extremists
to one side or the other (This Lord Stern Guy, not anyone here ) in most Threads
(on Religion or Politics or this....) sort'a give me the heeby-geebies. There's always
two sides to a story, and it's a necessary function, specifically in a scientific debate.
 
AnnaG
#686
Quote: Originally Posted by big View Post

If you look so innocent, it is because Lord requires that animals as pets be loved by humans. It was the gods whom originally require from humans that they domesticate animals so that they can have readily familiar surrogates to perform sacrifices.

If you believe gods exist or care, I suppose.
Personally I don't think if they exist that they give a hoot about what goes on with the 3rd rock. So, IMO, the religious reason for having pets is just goofy.
I eat my chickens. Eating them is a practical reason for having them. Same with the deer, elk, etc. that wander about this neighborhood. I love them all and I love eating some of them.
Anyway, I'll leave it up to the news media, deniers of fact, religions, etc. to perpetuate myths.
 
big
#687
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaG View Post

If you believe gods exist or care, I suppose.
Personally I don't think if they exist that they give a hoot about what goes on with the 3rd rock. So, IMO, the religious reason for having pets is just goofy.
I eat my chickens. Eating them is a practical reason for having them. Same with the deer, elk, etc. that wander about this neighborhood. I love them all and I love eating some of them.
Anyway, I'll leave it up to the news media, deniers of fact, religions, etc. to perpetuate myths.

Our ancestors were not so flat.
 
Walter
#688
October 30, 2009
Gore Gone Wild: Predicts 220 Foot Sea Level Rise in 10 years

Marc Sheppard

The scariest story told this Halloween week had nothing to do with ghosts, goblins, or zombies, though it was certainly dripping with huge gobs of Gore. In fact -- the most terrifying words screeched in the past seven days came from the master of environmental horror himself.

According to Arab Internet services company Maktoob.com , our favorite greenhouse gasbag spent Tuesday afternoon outlining the reasons why attendees of the Leaders in Dubai Business Forum must change their wicked gas-guzzling ways:
“The North Pole ice cap is 40 percent gone already and could be completely and totally gone in the winter months in the next 5 to 10 years.”

Such thaw, cautioned Gore, “could increase sea levels by 67 metres” and that “each one metre of sea level rise (SLR) is associated with 100 million climate refugees in the world.” That’s up a full 47 meters from the already horrifying predictions he’s made previously.
 
TrapperSnapper
#689
Maybe someone should tell AlGore the ice is floating, if it melted the sea level would fall. I wonder if he's talking about metres or meters.

Maybe he should give up this AGW thingy and run for president, he would do much better.
 
big
#690
Quote: Originally Posted by TrapperSnapper View Post

Maybe someone should tell AlGore the ice is floating, if it melted the sea level would fall.

Maybe you should know that temperature is a proxy physical concept for atoms not being able to stay close together.
 

Similar Threads

42
History or Myth
by darkbeaver | Aug 2nd, 2009
0
The Shortage Myth
by darkbeaver | Dec 5th, 2007
35
How the Myth of Jesus came about
by Dreadful Nonsense | Oct 27th, 2007
17
The Myth of Zarqawi
by vista | Oct 24th, 2004