Our cooling world
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
So what is the point of putting it up? What's the purpose? Ponds and ****houses should have flare stacks or the world will die?
That particular lake has one of the highest concentrations of methane because it's been frozen for over 10,000 years and has built up over 1.5 trillion tons of concentrated carbon. If it leaked, that would definitely have a significant impact on the atmosphere.
I'm not so sure if we would all die instantaneously like you might believe, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be a good thing.
I'm not so sure if we would all die instantaneously like you might believe, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be a good thing.
Last edited:
Ya know..... We could drill a small hole, drop in a flare and have a huge fish-fry.
You game?
Poached is good.
Are those frozen 10,000 year old spruce trees that line the lake?
It dosn't matter about the methane or the CO2 the greenhouse gas theory has been falsified. There is no damn greenhouse gas effect on earth unless you are actually in a glassed in greenhouse. I wanted to see the trees but I can't stand little docudramas like that, the music and the narrators voice carry practically all of the message, It's cheap theatrics to win votes for heavy taxation to address a problem that dosn't exist.
Defiantly would make us feel uncomfortable. The methane is locked in pockets under the tundra as well as under the oceans. If it for some reason it were to break lose all at once the world as we know it would end. would we all die, who knows.
As for carbon dioxide, those who died at Lake NCOs could be a example of what could happen. Dissolved carbon dioxide in Lake Nyos had become trapped in deep water because the lake bottom extended so far beneath the surface. Given the weight of water, the lake had to blow; its high hydrostatic pressure had capped this relentless buildup of carbonated water. But over time, bubbles started to appear until eventually the soda lake erupted, literally turning itself upside down in a few days of devastation. Niether of these gases are harmless.
As for carbon dioxide, those who died at Lake NCOs could be a example of what could happen. Dissolved carbon dioxide in Lake Nyos had become trapped in deep water because the lake bottom extended so far beneath the surface. Given the weight of water, the lake had to blow; its high hydrostatic pressure had capped this relentless buildup of carbonated water. But over time, bubbles started to appear until eventually the soda lake erupted, literally turning itself upside down in a few days of devastation. Niether of these gases are harmless.
No it hasn't.
Perhaps by the flat earth society or creationists but not by real science.
Several times a day it's in your pants pockets too.
Good answer. You sure put him in place.
File under, no $hit Sherlock.
Results are in from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project. For those who may not be aware, this project started under the guise that the surface temperature results could be biased by poor station placement, and the physicist leading the project cited Anthony Watts' work at Surfacestation.org. Indeed, the project even received funding from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.
The results are unsurprising...the world is getting warmer, and the methodology of the already existing surface temperature products from NASA, NOAA, and HadCRU in Britain suffer no bias from poorly positioned temperature stations.
Here's a graphic from Saturday's print edition of The Economist:
Anthony Watts had originally said that he would accept the result of this project, even if they contradicted his:
Results are in from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project. For those who may not be aware, this project started under the guise that the surface temperature results could be biased by poor station placement, and the physicist leading the project cited Anthony Watts' work at Surfacestation.org. Indeed, the project even received funding from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.
The results are unsurprising...the world is getting warmer, and the methodology of the already existing surface temperature products from NASA, NOAA, and HadCRU in Britain suffer no bias from poorly positioned temperature stations.
Here's a graphic from Saturday's print edition of The Economist:
Anthony Watts had originally said that he would accept the result of this project, even if they contradicted his:
What does he do when the results are in? Back peddle. He complains that the results are in no peer reviewed journal, and that the results were published before peer review (hypocrisy, exactly what Watts has done). The BEST papers are actually in the review process right now, and you can access them in my link to the BEST project above. More to the point, Watts' own results, are not peer reviewed...Also, he strangely objects to the BEST algorithm using 60 years of data, when Watts only used 30...yes, Watts is complaining that the results are more robust than his own, with more degrees of freedom in the data, so we should not compare results...strange from a supposedly sciencey blogger.
If this is climate change i'll take it! Been +5 to +8 the last few days and forecast for +16 today.
All winters been like one big chinook so far.
All winters been like one big chinook so far.
La Nina...This is something normal a couple times a century. I hope you'll willingly take the drought this summer that goes along with this warmer winter.
Are you confusing climate with weather?
I dread to think what will happen to the world once people have the ability to f**k with the weather. :lol:
(I guess they are actually doing it now, the upside being they don't realize what they are doing, God help us when they do know what they are doing) LOL
Yup,I'm next to the continental divide so most everyone west and south in the usa will be affected.
No snowpack at all in the mountains yet compared to most years but every day it isnt -40 here is a bonus day as far as i'm concerned even though it comes with wind gusts of up to 150 kph.