Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
Sorry, the sarcastic symbol was to represent my post.How so? Do a google on 'penguin chicks dying+antarctica'
I got 9440 sites!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...-penguins-frozen-death-freak-rain-storms.html
I fully understand natural change and have limited but more knowledge of earth history than most people. I agree the warming/change/cooling is natural but I can't help think that this age of petro chemical crap is contributing in some way.Hence the earth has lost control of its CO2 balance all on its own , 4 times in the last 400,000 years.
As to a sense of loss, after spending many years living remotely (in a swag) amidst our wonderful outback my sense of loss, although at first magnified (Alpine forests are now the the goldfields) was tempered by scales of time and the magnitude of the landscape......
Wayne I agree 100% that we aren’t doing enough to live with Mother Nature.jtb
Fantastic post. Thanks for your erudite and balanced view.
Pat,
I don't think it does.
E.g the British gu'mint. Shoves AGW down our throats at every opportunity and spends mot of its time dreaming up new environmental taxes.
Yet, it is building a new runway at Heathrow and adding a few lanes to the M25, both to facilitate additional carbon reliant travel. Eh???
Meanwhile, it is up to non-AGW focused folk to campaign against general pollution, litter and the preposterous level of supermarket packaging that clogs up our bins and landfill.
I think the AGW agenda detracts from real sustainability issues. It is anecdotal I realize, but it's what I observe
TemjinSo much emotion here!
Let's be realistic here fellows. I may be a skeptic of the whole GW b---****, but LET'S assume once that it is true and indeed CO2 is the SOLE REASON for destroying the human civilisation if we don't reduce it in the future.
What can we do? etc .
spooly , you say that "It should be the goal of the IPCC to find flaws in their model".
Sure they should constantly check and improve their model.
But hey, if their model is telling them something pretty alarming - then are you suggesting that , just because it's alarming, they should ignore it?
which incidentally flies in the face of Nicholas Stern and Ross Garnaut, who both claim that it's more expensive to wait that to actThe economic pain of change will be massive, so we’d better be very sure it is necessary.
exactly - but the deniers will twist that to say that the penguins are freezing to death, so let's warm things up a bit
A strange and sad event to be sure. But this shows the delusional leaps of logic that people are making.
* One weather event does not prove or disprove anything.
* There may have been incidences of precisely the same thing in the last 10,000 years that humans haven't been on the continent to observe.
* It may never happen again, or at least infrequently enough to have no long term effect
Yet "they", in a most unscientific leap of faith, will have the penguins extinct in ten years in order to sensationalize the story.
That's intellectual dishonesty of the most disgraceful variety and I thought you as a teacher would have seen right through it. Very bad show.
In the past five years, torrential rains have become increasingly common there. We saw Adelie penguin chicks shivering during nearly six days of continuous storms.
If it had been snow, like in the old days, their down would be perfectly equipped to cope. But they can’t take rain. It’s like wearing a down jacket that gets soaking wet.
At night, the temperature would dip and the next morning we’d find them dead from hypothermia.
Other marine creatures like seals in the Antarctic are born with fur, but penguin chicks have nothing to protect them.
"Penguins are going about 60 kilometers [37 miles] farther to find food than they did a decade ago,"
In 2006 she visited the seasonal sea-ice home of the penguin colony featured in the 2005 movie March of the Penguins. The region was uncharacteristically ice free.
The Maya Civilization existed in some form from 2000 B.C. to A.D. 1500 on and near the Yucatán Peninsula of southern Mexico and northern Central America.
Thanks for this Wys ....
Not sure about Anna Bligh's long term green credentials -
I mean, Bob Carr (ex NSW Premier) was seriously green deep down. Anna Bligh ...mmmm maybe - guess I'll owe her an apology if she turns out to be genuine, but the Qld treatment of the Traveston Dam question (average depth about 2metres or less even when full) when other options half the plan area and a quarter the disruption to farmland were available is a bit of a worry
Smart State is the Queensland Government’s vision of a state where knowledge, creativity and innovation drive economic growth to improve prosperity and quality of life for all Queenslanders.The vision is for Queensland to develop into a knowledge-based economy and diversify its traditional economic base of mining and agriculture.
and we're re-marking the Pacific Highway between Sydney and Bris - three lanes north, one lane southIt`s all go for infrastructure in Brisbane with a duplication of the gateway bridge (the big one) and a tunnel underneath the river presently under construction.Gearing up for the southerners drift north.lol
It`s all go for infrastructure in Brisbane with a duplication of the gateway bridge (the big one) and a tunnel underneath the river presently under construction.Gearing up for the southerners drift north.lol
The survey shows that there was a net loss of ice from the combined polar ice sheets between 1992 and 2002 and a corresponding rise in sea level. The survey documents for the first time extensive thinning of the West Antarctic ice shelves and an increase in snowfall in the interior of Greenland, as well as thinning at the edges. All are signs of a warming climate predicted by computer models.
I think(who knows for sure) that the sceptics are starting to admit that the Arctic is losing ice bigtime....
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/ice_sheets.html
Here is NASA's opinion of the loss of ice in Antartica as well ...
spool; said:The IPCC`s 4th report gives a range of 2 to 4.5 degrees per doubling of CO2. Observed warming is at most 1.5C per doubling of CO2 if you assume that all warming was solely from CO2 forcing, which it simply couldn't be.
let's take it step at a time spoolyMeasuring observations is easy.
Whats causing it?
Not in schoolSpooly, I’m guessing you studied applied maths –
I would say it`s almost impossible to produce an accurate climate model.Earth’s climate ? – bloody difficult to know all the properties of the model (I concede) – but still , it’s not impossible. (and certainly not impossible to get it roughly right)
Of course predicting future sunspot activity etc gets into the crystal ball stuff- but the probability that it's about to build up again from a recent 2006-7 low to a peak at about 2012, - according to an 11 year cycle that Galileo discovered (for chyssake) seems a reasonable assumption (surely)
Who is behind climate change deniers?
When the tobacco industry was feeling the heat from scientists who showed that smoking caused cancer, it took decisive action.
It engaged in a decades-long public relations campaign to undermine the medical research and discredit the scientists. The aim was not to prove tobacco harmless but to cast doubt on the science.
In May this year, the multibillion-dollar oil giant Exxon-Mobil acknowledged that it had been doing something similar. It announced that it would cease funding nine groups that had fuelled a global campaign to deny climate change.
Those that don't believe in GW seem to have some great backing similar to what the tobacco industry had.
With friends like Exxon-Mobil you ............
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?