- Joined
- 18 June 2004
- Posts
- 1,045
- Reactions
- 638
On the CC ... Climate change issue,
Just to chime in, as someone who, well .... is involved and has been for some time, I do know his beliefs and he follows and quotes someone as I said, LOMBARD I think his name was that is a political science major who now calls himself something else, Peterson and others I suspect follow similar conspiracy crap that deniers of moon landings do.
Since 1978, now over 40 years, the most comprehensive measure on temperature has come from satellites and THEY as I said measure 500,000 places each day and every 30 or so minutes, so disputing their findings is, well absurd. Sure you may try to, but your stupid to do so.
Today, funnily enough, one of the issues I talked about, that Peterson dismissed and its associated with ACIDIFICATION and more to the methane side of it, today a report just came out and massive increases post 2010 till 2017/18 and the findings, actually make any and all PARIS agreements and limiting 1.5 degrees which always was a joke by 2100, even 3 now is out the window and after reading this paper, just published, I sadly am with most other fruitcakes up near a 10 degree impact by 2100. I would post the link but this guy is fruity, brilliant, but fruity to say the least. The paper however is not. Its a chilling paper and because one specialist, say in atmosphere does not speak to another like my ice guy at Cambridge and the other one at Oxford, the reason for the CH4 rise off the charts and at ARCTIC regions is as yet a mystery.
They do however as the fruity guy explained, issue a massive warning on it, hoping its not man made, or a feedback loop. Basically the CH4 levels as one goes further North, go off the scale by 100% rises above the average. Sadly even my best case of 10% Arctic permafrost melt and release by 2100 and hoping its not 20% because that is bad, well .... its bad. Shocking in fact.
Meanwhile MR plonker will sell his wares, Mr Trump has a hunch and sadly by 2100, because to build an accurate predictive model, the MORE ACCURATE input you have and without BS or missing pieces, its easy for me to answer why CH4 levels at the South pole are 100 PPM less than those at the NORTH POLE and where the increase in CH4 or Methane is coming from is sadly easy. In fact the 8 measuring stations in the North are well North of the fracking stuff going on so, despite hoping its not the case, it would appear just by the numbers, ignoring all else, Houston we have a problem.
Paris agreement is a joke. I suppose planting a billion trees is good, but a BB gun at 37.3 billion tones of which Australia owns 500,000 of that. So a hectare of trees absorbs 4 tons per year, but after fully grown it eventually goes into a cycle, and the CO2 capture stops. But leaving that aside, 2000 trees per Hectare as our fearless leader PM willy wonker is planting a billion trees so ... hmm 500,000 hectares and since its likely to already have CO2 absorbing stuff on it I would be fair in halving the numbers, BUT I SHALL NOT .... thats 5000 sq KM of planting ... but the numbers !! Ohh 4 tons per 5oo k so 2 million OUT OF 500 million we emit each year .... about 1% and its STOPS after 40 years !! So we still leave 99% not captured for 40 years. Problem solved.
Bravo ... no problemo at all Mr Plonker. CO2 is good as you said !! Pity ...
There are of course things to HOPE about, but it would first be productive for people in different fields to be speaking to each other, then again, its not a problem ... according to some. Hope is not going to cost anything we will notice, less than 1% of GDP diverted from supporting crap, not so much in Australia but the USA more so and getting something that removes CO2 at 500 times the rate and then do 5,000 sq KM at 500 if not 1000 the rate and move past this issue. Yes before you ask, there are things more efficient than trees !! Sadly by the time they get there, likely post 2050 and the first mass fail of crops globally and 100 million or so starving, if not 500 million, even that may not change things.
Must go put on my lipstick to make myself available for Mr PEterson ... even though I am male, I do know having watched American Beauty his real feelings on gender and sexuality.
Just to chime in, as someone who, well .... is involved and has been for some time, I do know his beliefs and he follows and quotes someone as I said, LOMBARD I think his name was that is a political science major who now calls himself something else, Peterson and others I suspect follow similar conspiracy crap that deniers of moon landings do.
Since 1978, now over 40 years, the most comprehensive measure on temperature has come from satellites and THEY as I said measure 500,000 places each day and every 30 or so minutes, so disputing their findings is, well absurd. Sure you may try to, but your stupid to do so.
Today, funnily enough, one of the issues I talked about, that Peterson dismissed and its associated with ACIDIFICATION and more to the methane side of it, today a report just came out and massive increases post 2010 till 2017/18 and the findings, actually make any and all PARIS agreements and limiting 1.5 degrees which always was a joke by 2100, even 3 now is out the window and after reading this paper, just published, I sadly am with most other fruitcakes up near a 10 degree impact by 2100. I would post the link but this guy is fruity, brilliant, but fruity to say the least. The paper however is not. Its a chilling paper and because one specialist, say in atmosphere does not speak to another like my ice guy at Cambridge and the other one at Oxford, the reason for the CH4 rise off the charts and at ARCTIC regions is as yet a mystery.
They do however as the fruity guy explained, issue a massive warning on it, hoping its not man made, or a feedback loop. Basically the CH4 levels as one goes further North, go off the scale by 100% rises above the average. Sadly even my best case of 10% Arctic permafrost melt and release by 2100 and hoping its not 20% because that is bad, well .... its bad. Shocking in fact.
Meanwhile MR plonker will sell his wares, Mr Trump has a hunch and sadly by 2100, because to build an accurate predictive model, the MORE ACCURATE input you have and without BS or missing pieces, its easy for me to answer why CH4 levels at the South pole are 100 PPM less than those at the NORTH POLE and where the increase in CH4 or Methane is coming from is sadly easy. In fact the 8 measuring stations in the North are well North of the fracking stuff going on so, despite hoping its not the case, it would appear just by the numbers, ignoring all else, Houston we have a problem.
Paris agreement is a joke. I suppose planting a billion trees is good, but a BB gun at 37.3 billion tones of which Australia owns 500,000 of that. So a hectare of trees absorbs 4 tons per year, but after fully grown it eventually goes into a cycle, and the CO2 capture stops. But leaving that aside, 2000 trees per Hectare as our fearless leader PM willy wonker is planting a billion trees so ... hmm 500,000 hectares and since its likely to already have CO2 absorbing stuff on it I would be fair in halving the numbers, BUT I SHALL NOT .... thats 5000 sq KM of planting ... but the numbers !! Ohh 4 tons per 5oo k so 2 million OUT OF 500 million we emit each year .... about 1% and its STOPS after 40 years !! So we still leave 99% not captured for 40 years. Problem solved.
Bravo ... no problemo at all Mr Plonker. CO2 is good as you said !! Pity ...
There are of course things to HOPE about, but it would first be productive for people in different fields to be speaking to each other, then again, its not a problem ... according to some. Hope is not going to cost anything we will notice, less than 1% of GDP diverted from supporting crap, not so much in Australia but the USA more so and getting something that removes CO2 at 500 times the rate and then do 5,000 sq KM at 500 if not 1000 the rate and move past this issue. Yes before you ask, there are things more efficient than trees !! Sadly by the time they get there, likely post 2050 and the first mass fail of crops globally and 100 million or so starving, if not 500 million, even that may not change things.
Must go put on my lipstick to make myself available for Mr PEterson ... even though I am male, I do know having watched American Beauty his real feelings on gender and sexuality.
