Bazz

Dr McLeay, wrote about climate change; the main theme being about the impact of climate change.

A short course which links health and climate change:

http://eliademy.com/catalog/catalog/product/view/sku/d0dd478153

Lancet and the British Journal of Medicine have had major articles about the health impacts of climate change.

Countries generally have not been doing well in pushing promises made at Paris.

Currently, we have the odd situation where Alaska is warmer than the Southern States.

The sea ice waxes and wanes in the Arctic Ocean; but multi-year ice which provides the backbone for ice structure is disappearing. Volume of sea ice has dramatically declined since 1980. Once that ice has been lost during Summer and Autumn period it creates a dystopian world.

The original Inuit inhabitants of the Arctic have a word for what is going on:

"'The Inuit have a word for changes they are seeing to their environment: uggianaqtuq, meaning “to behave strangely”': strong, sad NYT article on lost ice, lost hope & solastalgia in northern communities. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/25/climate/arctic-climate-change.html … "

From:

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/12/this-should-freak-everyone-out-the-arctic-will-never-be-frozen-again/

The Inuit with no ideology to push say ... 'to behave strangely".

Meanwhile, the US has its own climate refugees who are leaving Puerto Rico in droves. A large part of Puerto Rico still does not have power:

http://www.vox.com/2017/12/23/16795342/puerto-rico-maria-christmas

A graph in the article shows how out of 10 worst hurricanes experienced by the US, 9 have happened in the 21st Century, the other was in 1998.

To take no action in relation to climate change equates to stealing from our children; we are already experiencing a climate which is out of kilter.

Why are we still arguing about CO2 & any minute effect it may have on climate?

Anyone with even half a brain knows that the whole scam is an effort by the elites to get us ordinary peasants off our rich comfortable lifestyles, & back into a feudal existence. They see everything we consume as a waste of something they may one day want. Peasants with air conditioning & cars offends their sensibilities.

Not only do they want to reduce our lifestyle, they want to reduce our numbers. They don't need more than a billion or so surfs to provide everything to maintain their parasitic rich & comfortable lifestyle. They know the quickest way of getting rid of a few billion of us is to take away our energy supply.

All this is so obvious I can't understand why some of us can see it immediately. Even more, I can't understand how they can recruit useful idiots like Ant to do their fraud promotion for them.

The thing I can't figure out is, are the Ants of this world actually members of the elites, detailed to do their time pretending to be a true believer peasant, doing this promotion? Or are there actually stupid enough to believe what Ant pushes as science?

I wonder if the Ants will finally realise they have been conned, when the ice sheet reaches Chicago, or will they still claim this is yet another manifestation of "Global Warming"

Well ant, I've tried to leave you alone to spout your ignorance on the basis that its be-kind-to-dumb-animals week. But this piece of lunacy ("A graph in the article shows how out of 10 worst hurricanes experienced by the US, 9 have happened in the 21st Century") is just too imbecilic, even by your lofty standards,to let through.

The graph doesn't go even close to showing what you think it shows.First, it doesn't show the "worst" hurricanes, it shows the hurricanes that caused the biggest blackouts. Now, this might be hard for you to follow, but as electricity usage expands more places will suffer blackouts during storms. The Georgia/South Carolina Hurricane of 1881, yes 1881, probably didnt cause too many blackouts, not because it wasn't big but because electricity wasn't prevalent...let me know if I'm going too fast for you.

Second, its based on population not storm severity. More people means more "customer-hours lost" which is what is being measured. You're probably not aware of it but the US population is higher now than in the past. Higher population means more customer hours lost even if the storm is less severe than one in the past.

Finally the data is based on news reports for the older hurricanes. From the article.. the data is based on "rough estimates based on available news reports". I'm guessing available means online. They admit they probably got the 1938 hurricane wrong. There aren't too many articles from 1881 newspaper online, and I doubt they went searching through local libraries looking for reports about 19th century storms.

Let's face it, you saw a pretty picture which you thought supported your prejudices and didn't bother to look into it any further. SOP for our Antony.

Puerto Rico is a mess because its government is a corrupt mess. Well its Democrat so that goes without saying really.

___________

By the way, ant, how's that Exxon prosecution going? Anyone gaoled yet? Have you gotten around to reading the actual documents yet? or is ignorance bliss?

Hasbeen

Yep, we have those community orientated fossil fuel billionaires who are providing a public service through paying some denier groups to spread doubt about science. Nothing to do with profits, naturally.

The view that CO2 has an impact on climate was known in the 19th Century through Foote and Tyndall. A short newspaper article in a New Zealand paper acknowledges the impact of fossil fuels on climate.
Experimentation shows how CO2 takes up warmth from radiated heat.
Back modelling using known data shows that increasing CO2 is instrumental in warming the atmosphere.

To survive we need greenhouse gases, fossil fuels when used to create energy produce more CO2.

Scientists working for ExxonMobil in the '70s acknowledged that CO2 created from fossil fuels create a warming climate. Extra water vapour, a secondary greenhouse impacting agent is created through a warming climate.

Where is the evidence that extra CO2 has no impact on climate?

Without greenhouse gases we would not be alive; Earth would be too cold.

So what evidence is there that Earth is cooling (ice sheet at Chicago)? A quite peculiar comment when Alaska is warmer than Southern US States at present. What causes permafrost to thaw, or a greening of tundra areas, something observed for a number of years in Alaska, Northern Canada and Siberia?

mhaze

The case is still progressing:

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30032017/exxonmobil-climate-change-research-ny-attorney-general-investigation

An interesting quote from Texas Judge Kinkeade:

""What the Court does know is that Exxon has publicly acknowledged since 2006 the possible significant risks to society and ecosystems from rising greenhouse gas emissions, yet the attorneys general have only recently felt compelled to look further into Exxon's documents from the last 40 years to see if Exxon knew more than it shared with the public and investors about climate change.""

Which means that the Judge acknowledges the science produced by ExxonMobil scientists in the 70s. That is, CO2 is a greenhouse gas with an impact on climate

ant,

There is no progress in the case. It only survives because the few Democrat politicians who based their advancement on the claims, can't bring themselves to admit that there is no case.

After two years of 'investigation' not one single charge has been laid. Not one. But that is what I told you two years ago would happen. Anyone who has read the actual papers knows that there is no case. That's why Exxon have been happy to hand over some much data during the discovery phase. Some much in fact that the Democrats complained it was too much for them to process.

You'd know all this if you'd read the papers as I suggested two years ago. But, it seems, you prefer to be led down the garden path by ICN et al.