There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

[billvon 2,396]

27 minutes ago, rushmc said:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/03/big-news-verified-by-noaa-poor-weather-station-siting-leads-to-artificial-long-term-warming/

Aaaaand - we're back to the type 1 "the climate isn't warming!" denial.  Especially funny in a thread that started out with the claim that it WAS warming but that warming ended in 1998.

What type will the denial be tomorrow?  I can hardly wait!

[DJL 232]

On 10/11/2019 at 6:31 PM, rushmc said:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/03/big-news-verified-by-noaa-poor-weather-station-siting-leads-to-artificial-long-term-warming/

 

 

[DJL 232]

This was interesting.  It reminds me of how at a quarry in Richmond the foundations of various structures were made out of concrete and not stone.  This was explained on the plaque to be an indicator of the glaring truth that concrete, even at a stone quarry was becoming a preferred building material.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-energy-renewables/the-permian-paradox-texas-shale-players-go-green-to-drill-more-idUSKBN1XI1HH

[lippy 771]

4 hours ago, DJL said:

This was interesting.  It reminds me of how at a quarry in Richmond the foundations of various structures were made out of concrete and not stone.  This was explained on the plaque to be an indicator of the glaring truth that concrete, even at a stone quarry was becoming a preferred building material.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-energy-renewables/the-permian-paradox-texas-shale-players-go-green-to-drill-more-idUSKBN1XI1HH

I spent the past couple of days on a frac pad in ND testing out some new equipment and it was a weird juxtaposition to see wind turbines in every direction around the site.

[yoink 321]

On 6/14/2019 at 3:15 PM, billvon said:

From Science:

================

Increasing mitigation ambition to meet the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal avoids substantial heat-related mortality in U.S. cities

I can’t help but think that one of the reasons science is so mistrusted is because of the language it uses.

I’ve got a science degree and even I’m tuning out halfway through that title.  I get that it’s written for other scientists but there needs to be a halfway house to engage more people - A language that describes methods for the specialist, but defines the problem and the conclusions in a way the lay person can understand EASILY.

 

Otherwise 3rd parties pass on the information with their own spin or it just gets ignored completely.

 

It’a marketing problem.

[DJL 232]

48 minutes ago, yoink said:

I can’t help but think that one of the reasons science is so mistrusted is because of the language it uses.

I’ve got a science degree and even I’m tuning out halfway through that title.  I get that it’s written for other scientists but there needs to be a halfway house to engage more people - A language that describes methods for the specialist, but defines the problem and the conclusions in a way the lay person can understand EASILY.

 

Otherwise 3rd parties pass on the information with their own spin or it just gets ignored completely.

 

It’a marketing problem.

I think it's more that when scientists speak they have to include disclaimers and people take the as an admission that they're wrong.  Then if you get Bill Nye to say it people say that he's not a scientist.

[DJL 232]

2 hours ago, lippy said:

I spent the past couple of days on a frac pad in ND testing out some new equipment and it was a weird juxtaposition to see wind turbines in every direction around the site.

And pretty soon the things propelled by that fuel will be driven by batteries.

[JoeWeber 2,298]

2 hours ago, yoink said:

I can’t help but think that one of the reasons science is so mistrusted is because of the language it uses.

I’ve got a science degree and even I’m tuning out halfway through that title.  I get that it’s written for other scientists but there needs to be a halfway house to engage more people - A language that describes methods for the specialist, but defines the problem and the conclusions in a way the lay person can understand EASILY.

 

Otherwise 3rd parties pass on the information with their own spin or it just gets ignored completely.

 

It’a marketing problem.

Yo's, we be banging away at that Paris thing so you ain't be falling down dead cause it's hot. Like I tell you, stay chilly. That's what I'm talkin' about. Oh, and don't forget to Maga Jama in Bama fo' sister Sessions! And wear your ears!

[lippy 771]

3 hours ago, DJL said:

And pretty soon the things propelled by that fuel will be driven by batteries.

Pretty soon is relative.  It's definitely coming but I have no idea of the time frame.  What I find interesting is how many people in the industry are in complete denial that anything will ever change.  

[DJL 232]

2019 Continues as the second hottest year on record with combined sea and surface temperatures and continues to get closer to 2016 for the hottest.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201910/supplemental/page-1

[billvon 2,396]

One step at a time . . . .

========================

Jeremy Clarkson finally recognises climate crisis during Asia trip

Grand Tour host says impact of global heating on lake bed in Cambodia was ‘genuinely alarming’

Aaron Walawalkar 24 Nov 2019 08.03 EST

Jeremy Clarkson has made what could be the biggest reversal of his 30-year career. The anti-environmental columnist has, for the first time, accepted the existence of global heating after seeing the impact for himself.

Clarkson’s epiphany came as he and his Grand Tour co-stars ran into difficulty while filming a 500-mile boat race from Siem Reap in Cambodia to Vung Tau in Vietnam.

The group’s jet boats slowed to a crawl and they were forced to wade through Tonlé Sap lake in the usually vast Mekong river system, which has been affected by water shortages.

 . . .

The former Top Gear host confessed he found the “graphic demonstration” of global warming “genuinely alarming”.

===========================

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/24/jeremy-clarkson-climate-crisis-cambodia-trip-grand-tour?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR2nkwYPT8471Qi3Jjdc_WjkRUVLa_qqUQgM389YZVpbTVb9UzwV4gy2U2w

[turtlespeed 212]

On 9/3/2019 at 12:55 PM, billvon said:

Yes.  We need to work as a republic, not a democracy.  It's how we solved the ozone layer problem, and it's how we will solve this.

"This" is not solvable - unless you get the entire planet to agree with you and stop taking short cuts.

320 million in one country vs 2.7 BILLION in China and India - 

I will have hope when we can get the regulations we had in place 15 years ago in place in just those two countries

[DJL 232]

44 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

"This" is not solvable - unless you get the entire planet to agree with you and stop taking short cuts.

320 million in one country vs 2.7 BILLION in China and India - 

I will have hope when we can get the regulations we had in place 15 years ago in place in just those two countries

There's no reason to wait for the other countries but our exit from the Paris Accord lost the diplomatic involvement needed to make this happen.  China was on board until we left.

[turtlespeed 212]

Just now, DJL said:

There's no reason to wait for the other countries but our exit from the Paris Accord lost the diplomatic involvement needed to make this happen.  China was on board until we left.

I disagree - China and her tactics had an influence into what made the administration leave.

One has to realise when you are fighting a losing battle.

[DJL 232]

1 minute ago, turtlespeed said:

I disagree - China and her tactics had an influence into what made the administration leave.

One has to realise when you are fighting a losing battle.

What were their tactics?  What made the administration leave is that it made people cheer at Trump campaign rallies.  It's seen as the anti-libtard thing to do.

[turtlespeed 212]

7 hours ago, DJL said:

What were their tactics?  What made the administration leave is that it made people cheer at Trump campaign rallies.  It's seen as the anti-libtard thing to do.

Again - lost cause - 

Until something drastic is changed, and not JUST by china . . . it will be worsening.

I'm not saying to do nothing - but to purposely spin your wheels and waste time - is not very efficient.

[billvon 2,396]

12 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

"This" is not solvable - unless you get the entire planet to agree with you and stop taking short cuts.

You don't need the entire planet.  Just most of it.

Quote

320 million in one country vs 2.7 BILLION in China and India - 

And yet we are #2 in CO2 emissions.  And India, with far more people, is #3.  Per capita we can do more than anyone else on the planet.

[DJL 232]

16 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Again - lost cause - 

Until something drastic is changed, and not JUST by china . . . it will be worsening.

I'm not saying to do nothing - but to purposely spin your wheels and waste time - is not very efficient.

Ok.  We were on track to have their involvement under Obama and that took a lot of diplomacy.  China's concern was spending capital on this just to get undercut by third world countries who would not get on board.  Part of the US and EU agreement was that we would help them and developing countries to switch to low emission power production so that everyone was on an even playing field.  Those agreements are now gone and China is even more short-sighted than we are so they're using whatever is cheapest but doesn't lead to the smog issues they had for so long in their cities.  That means natural gas and Russia has just cut an agreement to provide it.  So, because of our America First diplomacy we've lost the most important partner in combating global warming and are putting money it Russia's pocket.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

As always, everything with Trump leads back to Putin.

[DJL 232]

2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

As always, everything with Trump leads back to Putin.

Putin got his money's worth.  The weaker our relationships are, the better are his.

[Rick 67]

49 minutes ago, DJL said:

That means natural gas and Russia has just cut an agreement to provide it.

I just saw this today

Yesterday, China and Russia opened a monumental gas pipeline that further cements their economic and political relationship. 

• The pipeline, known as the Power of Siberia, cost $55 billion and runs 1,800 miles from Siberian gas fields to China's northern border. 

[yoink 321]

1 hour ago, Rick said:

I just saw this today

Yesterday, China and Russia opened a monumental gas pipeline that further cements their economic and political relationship. 

• The pipeline, known as the Power of Siberia, cost $55 billion and runs 1,800 miles from Siberian gas fields to China's northern border. 

How much do want to bet Trump's got money invested in it?

[gowlerk 1,910]

29 minutes ago, yoink said:

How much do want to bet Trump's got money invested in it?

I would doubt that either of the principals in that endeavor would seek outside money from the west. People talk about this as though development in these countries is a bad thing. Like somehow if America is not involved it is wrong. This is actually a good news story about an advancement in the world economy.

[brenthutch 383]

That pipeline was built during the Obama administration, so it supports Trump's assessment of China's motives and blows a hole in the "China is a bad actor because Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement" narrative.

Edited December 4, 2019 by brenthutch

[turtlespeed 212]

21 hours ago, billvon said:

You don't need the entire planet.  Just most of it.

And yet we are #2 in CO2 emissions.  And India, with far more people, is #3.  Per capita we can do more than anyone else on the planet.

Per capita - we are doing more than either China (#1 by a VERY large margin), or India (also by a VERY large margin).

Spending has to be balanced with efficiency.  The ROI just isn't worth the massive outgassing of funds until there are other major players on board as much as we are.