We can't reverse manmade climate change.

[usexpat97]

That "big tether line" failed the first time out. The guy admitted that he hadn't actually tested it.

And...?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And...?

That's all you got out of that post?

 

[RealityCheck01]

What I meant by can't is that man doesn't have it within himself to reverse this problem. That's why it's getting worse, as we speak.

That is also wrong, OldWiseGuy. Man has recognized the problem and is trying to fix it. An issue is some politicians who are burying their heads in the sand or obeying for their prejudices rather than looking at the real world. But they are not mankind.

Regarding the developed world, Europe is going forward and producing 22% less CO2 than 1990.

Manmade greenhouse gas emissions will eventually decrease.
Renewables can reduce CO2 emissions by 70% by 2050 (about the energy sector)
Some countries have already decreased their CO2 emissions.
Analysis: Why the UK’s CO2 emissions have fallen 38% since 1990.

 

[RealityCheck01]

I am not a Climatologist, however, I am not ready to surrender my judgement to science. ...

You do not need to be a climatologist, Silverback.
Much of climate science can be understood by anyone willing to read some science. Most people know about the greenhouse effect (an increase in greenhouse gases give an increase in global temperatures). They know that the levels of CO2 (a greenhouse gas) has risen. and thus temperatures will rise if other drivers are constant. The details of climate science are easily found on the Internet. For example, Skeptical Sceince: Explaining climate change science & rebutting global warming misinformation.

People who are unwilling or unable to learn have to rely on the analysis of experts. It is the expertise of climate scientists that you are denying. The 97% consensus on global warming is that the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is strong enough that 97-98% of climate scientists believe that AGW is happening.

What does past climate change tell us about global warming?

Scientific analysis of past climates shows that greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. The evidence for that is spread throughout the geological record. This makes it clear that this time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.

Global warming on Mars, ice caps melting

Martian climate is primarily driven by dust and albedo and there is little empirical evidence that Mars is showing long term warming.

A fantasy about funding forcing the 97% consensus on global warming. Science funding is generally independent of results. Scientists are funded to do science, not to get specific results. Scientists publish their data and analysis so that anyone can test what they did.

A baseless accusation of fraud, Silverback. The data that shows that global warming is happening is publically available. The analysis that shows we are causing global warming is publically available. Anyone can use the data, repeat the analysis and do their own analysis to check whether we are causing global warming.

 

[Silverback]

You do not need to be a climatologist, Silverback.
Much of climate science can be understood by anyone willing to read some science. Most people know about the greenhouse effect (an increase in greenhouse gases give an increase in global temperatures). They know that the levels of CO2 (a greenhouse gas) has risen. and thus temperatures will rise if other drivers are constant. The details of climate science are easily found on the Internet. For example, Skeptical Sceince: Explaining climate change science & rebutting global warming misinformation.

People who are unwilling or unable to learn have to rely on the analysis of experts. It is the expertise of climate scientists that you are denying. The 97% consensus on global warming is that the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is strong enough that 97-98% of climate scientists believe that AGW is happening.

What does past climate change tell us about global warming?


Global warming on Mars, ice caps melting


A fantasy about funding forcing the 97% consensus on global warming. Science funding is generally independent of results. Scientists are funded to do science, not to get specific results. Scientists publish their data and analysis so that anyone can test what they did.

A baseless accusation of fraud, Silverback. The data that shows that global warming is happening is publically available. The analysis that shows we are causing global warming is publically available. Anyone can use the data, repeat the analysis and do their own analysis to check whether we are causing global warming.

I'm sorry, but I remain a sceptic on the issue. However, as I stated, I support most climate change initiatives, because they are anti polluting.

That is the best I can do...that should be reasonable enough, I would think.

 

[RealityCheck01]

I'm sorry, but I remain a sceptic on the issue.

Unfortunately that is not what is in your last post, Silverback.
A skeptic about science looks at the scientific evidence. They may conclude that there is not enough evidence and so no conclusion can be reached. That is not the case with anthropogenic global warming. They may conclude that the evidence is flawed and thus any conclusion is wrong. That is not the case with your post and anthropogenic global warming.
A climate change skeptic does not post well known climate myths, funding fantasies and fraud insults. That is the act of a climate change denier.

Skeptical Sceince: Explaining climate change science & rebutting global warming misinformation has a list of the most used climate myths and what the science actually says.

 

[USincognito]

So let's just go ahead full throttle and do everything we can to destroy the planet God gave us? Is that what you're suggesting?

Careful though. So's Law.

 

[DennisTate]

Manmade greenhouse gases are going to increase, not decrease. These gases result from manufacturing and commerce, which sustains the economy. While some may reduce consumption most cannot or will not, thus man's contribution to climate change will not decline but likely increase.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

But....... in theory we could turn deserts green on a massive scale........... and by so doing could produce more food for more people and create jobs in nations with lots of desert.

"So how is our problem of continental drying causing global warming? It all has to do with vegetation and sunlight. When sun light hits a plant, it causes a process which we call photosynthesis where the energy from the sun light creates oxygen for us to breathe, water for us to drink, and is stored as sugar for plants and animals to use. When the same sun light hits the soil, all of its energy turns into heat and is radiated back into the atmosphere.. ."

"Therefore, the less vegetation you have on the planet, the more sunlight is being turned into heat and the warmer the planet becomes...."

"Just take a look at any satellite picture of the earth showing heat and you will see that our deserts are the warmest spots on the planet by far. More heat is being generated by just one of the top four or five deserts than by all of our cities combined.... "

"The truth is that you can do more to decrease global warming by just reducing the average temperature for the Sahara Desert by one or two degrees than if we humans completely quit using fossil fuels and returned to the cave…."

"So, how would you start working to resolve this problem? Easy, cool the deserts and get some vegetation growing on them as soon as possible. But the method is much more complex than that. You have to use the prevailing trade winds in relation to the deserts to get the best results as quickly as possible and it will be extremely expensive…."

"Then we build desalination plants along the coast near these water sheds and pipe water to the tops or ridges of the water sheds…"

"We need to start working on this as soon as possible because, if the planet reaches a point to where it is warming faster than our technology can possibly stop or reverse this warming trend, then our planet is lost and all life will cease to exist on this planet within a relatively short period of time. We will need to start with the largest and hottest deserts because cooling them will have the greatest benefit in the least time (Global Warming II by biologist Carl Cantrell)."

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But....... in theory we could turn deserts green on a massive scale........... and by so doing could produce more food for more people and create jobs in nations with lots of desert.

I'm skeptical of the desert thing. It seems to me that the desert reflects heat back into space, much like snow cover does. The daytime air over deserts is very dry and doesn't trap much of the reflected heat. So the desert may actually be mitigating global warming. The fact that the deserts cool down rapidly after sunset is further evidence of this.

 

[DennisTate]

I'm skeptical of the desert thing. It seems to me that the desert reflects heat back into space, much like snow cover does. The daytime air over deserts is very dry and doesn't trap much of the reflected heat. So the desert may actually be mitigating global warming. The fact that the deserts cool down rapidly after sunset is further evidence of this.

But..... where is the heat actually going?

Is it actually going back into outer space?

Or is it going into the atmosphere and being shifted around by the jet streams??????????

There are several ways of looking at the idea of sand being more than one hundred degrees during the daylight hours and then cool by the next morning.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But..... where is the heat actually going?

Is it actually going back into outer space?

Or is it going into the atmosphere and being shifted around by the jet streams??????????

I don't know how high it goes but it does go up and away.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But..... where is the heat actually going?

Is it actually going back into outer space?

Or is it going into the atmosphere and being shifted around by the jet streams??????????

There are several ways of looking at the idea of sand being more than one hundred degrees during the daylight hours and then cool by the next morning.

Just did some reading on the topic. It seems that desert areas create high pressure zones above them which act to drive moisture/clouds away, thus the lack of rainfall, thus the term desert. The heat reflected upwards by the earth/sand is what is being measured. It is heat radiating from the earth and back into space.

If large amounts of water were introduced into the deserts the resultant water vapor, a very efficient greenhouse gas, would trap heat in the atmosphere. The more water added the more the greenhouse effect. So the idea of afforestation or other cultivation through irrigation of the (Sahara) desert would be disastrous regarding global warming, at least in the short term.

I once demonstrated the powerful thermal effect of rising hot air to a friend that I invited along for an airplane ride. We were flying at about 3000 feet AGL (above ground level) over huge dark green fields of late summer corn, cut occasionally by narrow farm roads. Spotting the thin yellow line of a crushed gravel road I told my friend to prepare for a 'bump' as we flew over the road, barely visible below. As we crossed it the Cessna 150 indeed sustained a good bump from the rising narrow thermal, as if an unseen foot had kicked us in the bottom. The strength of the bump on that hot summer day surprised even me. I have no doubt that the thermal could have been felt several thousand feet higher as well.

 

[RealityCheck01]

But....... in theory we could turn deserts green on a massive scale. ...

The delusions in a quote from a Carl Cantrell are not solutions to global warming.
The greenhouse effect is not his photosynthesis fantasy. Deserts are hot primarily because of a lack of water. What plants do to cool the round is provide shade.
A "return to the cave" delusion - cars will be (and are being!) replaced, not abandoned.
A "all life will cease to exist on this planet" delusion.

 

[RealityCheck01]

There are several ways of looking at the idea of sand being more than one hundred degrees during the daylight hours and then cool by the next morning.

There is really only one way. A desert is hot in the day and cold at night. A hot day + a cold night = a not vey hot average temperature. It is the average temperature that contributes to the Earths' temperature. It may even be possible that greening a desert does not change its average temperature.

 

[DennisTate]

The delusions in a quote from a Carl Cantrell are not solutions to global warming.
The greenhouse effect is not his photosynthesis fantasy. Deserts are hot primarily because of a lack of water. What plants do to cool the round is provide shade.
A "return to the cave" delusion - cars will be (and are being!) replaced, not abandoned.
A "all life will cease to exist on this planet" delusion.

Actually Carl believes that these verses will come to pass in the future and link the fulfillment of Isaiah 35 with a significant step toward stabilization of the climate.

Trees hold in a lot of water........ perhaps it is the water that they hold in and circulate that cause cooling.

Isaiah 35
1 The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.

2 It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the Lord, andthe excellency of our God.

3 ¶ Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble knees.

4 Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you.

5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.

6 Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.

7 And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.

8 And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein.

9 No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, it shall not be found there; but the redeemed shall walk there:

10 And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zionwith songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away."

Verse ten makes this sound like the time of the reestablishment of the nation of Israel to my thinking.

 

[DennisTate]

Just did some reading on the topic. It seems that desert areas create high pressure zones above them which act to drive moisture/clouds away, thus the lack of rainfall, thus the term desert. The heat reflected upwards by the earth/sand is what is being measured. It is heat radiating from the earth and back into space.

If large amounts of water were introduced into the deserts the resultant water vapor, a very efficient greenhouse gas, would trap heat in the atmosphere. The more water added the more the greenhouse effect. So the idea of afforestation or other cultivation through irrigation of the (Sahara) desert would be disastrous regarding global warming, at least in the short term.

I once demonstrated the powerful thermal effect of rising hot air to a friend that I invited along for an airplane ride. We were flying at about 3000 feet AGL (above ground level) over huge dark green fields of late summer corn, cut occasionally by narrow farm roads. Spotting the thin yellow line of a crushed gravel road I told my friend to prepare for a 'bump' as we flew over the road, barely visible below. As we crossed it the Cessna 150 indeed sustained a good bump from the rising narrow thermal, as if an unseen foot had kicked us in the bottom. The strength of the bump on that hot summer day surprised even me. I have no doubt that the thermal could have been felt several thousand feet higher as well.

I wonder what happens if you flew over a rain forest on a hot day?

Would the bump be as intense?

If not..... could all the water in the roots, bark and leaves of the trees be holding the heat in and preventing it from going into the atmosphere?????

Trees Clean Water

TREES CLEAN WATER

In my last blog we talked about the importance of trees for air quality; the first pillar of tree planting. This blog we will be shifting from Co2 to H2O. While the planet is made up of two thirds water, and the human body contains about the same amount, trees hold a little less as they are made up of approximately50% water. Like I said earlier, life cannot exist without water.

Trees are designed by nature to hold and clean water, making them a vital part of any infrastructure whether it be in an urban or rural area. In a previous blog“How Planting Trees Can Help Reduce Your Carbon Footprint”, it's explained that mature trees help reduce runoff in urban settings. This prevents water from ending up in storm drains, and that reduces the dependency on water treatment facilities. The benefits add up over time since gallons of rainfall are diverted from treatment, saving time and energy.

 

[Ronald]

The climate has changed, the winters are not as severe back home in Michigan as they were in the 60's and 70's when I was growing up.

I don't believe it's man-made though, I have several reasons for my belief, I will spare you most of that.

I happen to like clean air, water, and soil, so I support most climate change proposals, because they are non polluting, and energy is a national security issue and that's important to me.

The man-made part of it has become to sensational, and when things become to sensational, it usually turns out to be Bologna.

To hot, global warming
To cold, global warming

No snow, global warming
Blizzards, global warming

Too much rain, global warming
Drought, global warming

Cat 5 storms, global warming
No cat 5 storms global warming

Everything is global warming, and it's to the point of ridiculousness.

So, I am skeptical, but lean against the theory.

Additionally, look at the people who support man-made global warming in DC, AOC, Omar, Sanders, Warren, and most of all Hillary Clinton. With these names in support, it drives me even farther away.I

You can believe what you like though.

It's all a political hoax perpetrated to disguise Global Governance. They have been pushing this since the Kyoto Agreement. It is this movement toward Globalism, that requires the U.S. and rich countries of the world to redistribute their wealth and relinquish their sovereignty.
No one wants pollution but please, Global Warming is just part of this movement toward Socialism. Listen to Walter Cronkite's speech to the United Nations. He plainly summarizes the agenda. Now they may be well meaning in that this "Utopia" can be created when everyone is playing on a equal field, having the same, then we can have peace and prosperity. We know that Socialism in USSR didn't work, Communism doesn't work and we can see countries like Venezuela who had the richest oil reserves in an extreme depression now with millions leaving because of the poverty and corrupt government.
Anyone who lived in Chicago this winter with the Artic Vortex that brought temperatures to -60 degrees, must be doubting this global warming BS.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I wonder what happens if you flew over a rain forest on a hot day?

Would the bump be as intense?

If not..... could all the water in the roots, bark and leaves of the trees be holding the heat in and preventing it from going into the atmosphere?????

Trees Clean Water

TREES CLEAN WATER

Tree are interesting, they even breathe out methane.

Trees release flammable methane—here's what that means for climate

 

[TLK Valentine]

Manmade greenhouse gases are going to increase, not decrease. These gases result from manufacturing and commerce, which sustains the economy. While some may reduce consumption most cannot or will not, thus man's contribution to climate change will not decline but likely increase.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

If we can't reverse it, we can at least slow it down.

Something is generally better than nothing.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It's all a political hoax perpetrated to disguise Global Governance. They have been pushing this since the Kyoto Agreement. It is this movement toward Globalism, that requires the U.S. and rich countries of the world to redistribute their wealth and relinquish their sovereignty.
No one wants pollution but please, Global Warming is just part of this movement toward Socialism. Listen to Walter Cronkite's speech to the United Nations. He plainly summarizes the agenda. Now they may be well meaning in that this "Utopia" can be created when everyone is playing on a equal field, having the same, then we can have peace and prosperity. We know that Socialism in USSR didn't work, Communism doesn't work and we can see countries like Venezuela who had the richest oil reserves in an extreme depression now with millions leaving because of the poverty and corrupt government.
Anyone who lived in Chicago this winter with the Artic Vortex that brought temperatures to -60 degrees, must be doubting this global warming BS.

The globe is actually warming, with some pretty disastrous results, thus global warming is real. How mankind deals with it remains to be seen. Desperate times might call for desperate measures. Perhaps a global effort under a single authority is needed to address this existential threat. At present too few are taking it seriously and perhaps are laying the groundwork for such an authority. Time will tell.