We try to allow members to discuss any topic they would like. I expect this thread to quickly devolve even more and it will be closed.
I would be pleased to be proven wrong.
3 Likes
Calm down now Boys - my English is not good enough for a discussion at such a high level … If we can discuss in Danish I am always available.
More love Michael
Here is one of my old election posters lol 
1 Like
Just one more before Elk shuts it down 
For the record, I’m a rational environmentalist. The only thing I want in my water is scotch, and I don’t want to see the air I breathe. I look forward to my first EV once you can charge it at night with relying on a coal-fired generation baseline unit… Oh, and we have solar on our roof to feed the class A amps.
But I have a very, very, dim view of “experts.”
2 Likes
It also helps to look at CO2 emissions as a function of population. Per capita, I believe the US is number 8 below Luxembourg, Australia, and Canada. China doesn’t even make the top 20. More people, more carbon.
edit: I’m not saying 8 is great. There are other ways to view the data.
I have both solar cells and geothermal heat and I hate coal power plants and nuclear power … we are in the process of transferring our excess wind power to hydrogen … still good day
As long as there are no certain countries involved, right…?
2 Likes
Interesting tid bit. From roughly 20,000 to 8,000 years ago the average sea level rise was 3 ft per century.
How the Great Lakes were formed…
About 20,000 years ago, the climate warmed and the ice sheet retreated. Water from the melting glacier filled the basins , forming the Great Lakes. Approximately 3,000 years ago, the Great Lakes reached their present shapes and sizes.
WHAT??? We might not be in control?? Lol.
In the early 80’s I was on board this research ship in the Arctic Ocean. We also examined, among other things, the Gulf Stream, among other things, the incipient temperature increase. We also did experimental fishing.
(Arkivfoto) Lukas Piotrowski/Ritzau Scanpix
Magnificent polar mission returns home: We saw the dying Arctic Ocean
The North Pole is the ‘epicenter of climate change’.
In total, the team brings more than 150 terabytes of data with back and over 1000 ice samples. Thus, it is the first time that a large amount of real data is to be used in the climate models.
More love Michael
1 Like
Just got off the phone from travel agent - were meant to be going up to Disko Bay on this
this May, booked for next May, contingency is May 2022!
Hopefully Greenland has not melted away by then.
1 Like
Ya think??? The only thing “settled” about climate is that it’s changing and always will. Similarly, around 17,000 years ago in the Pacific Northwest there was a an ice cap over 5,000 feet thick on the Canadian border, and where Seattle is now over 3,000 feet thick. The Puget Sound was carved out by this ice.
Since 90% of greenhouse gas is water vapor once we have a handle on evaporation, sublimation, cloud formation, and precipitation we will really be onto something. Oh, and a thermostat on the sun would be helpful too.
That said, I’m all about being a good steward of our planet and a huge proponent of clean air and water.
It looks good … I hope for the best. My boy is going home from Greenland on the 18th of December. I hope he’s allowed. It looks black just like the past. We are experiencing the biggest infection since the virus came. We are not advised to travel abroad - all countries.
more love Michael
All forms of pollution brought about from the burning of fossil fuels are bad and need to be replaced over time with cleaner and more sustainable sources of energy. That being said, I believe the climate change issue has been hijacked and is being used as a political football to push a certain agenda forward, one that does not have the best interest of a majority of the planet’s population.
3 Likes
It certainly benefits those involved in trading carbon offsets. How many even know about the carbon trading market, which is a way particularly for those who are policy influencers to cash in on carbon emission policy. Underlying the climate change debate is opportunity to influence policy in ways that represent big money for those who are involved in formulating it.
1 Like
I know intelligent people who have said things like “if the climate changes enough to raise sea level 3ft this century then humanity is lost”
I’ve seen someone intellect claim that if we get a 5 degree Celsius increase in global temperatures the earth will no longer be able to sustain life.
Climate change can be real, and we can admit humans have altered the course of climate significantly. Do we have to act like humans haven’t lived through stretches of thousands of years with similar sea level rise? We keep calling this the hottest period in history. Humans have lived though climates this warm before. Life in general has survived MUCH hotter.
There are tons of existential threats to humanity on the horizon. We have created some of them. There are many others we haven’t…but are on the horizon just the same. Without the advances we have made in the past few centuries we would be much worse off overall.
That doesn’t mean we can’t/shouldn’t use our newfound technological prowess to do all we can to be better stewards for the environment. I just wonder why everything has to be framed the way we do.
1 Like
Folks you need to read this…
Indeed. And then people should read the other nasa article posted the same day and linked to directly in this article about why milankavitch cycles don’t completely explain current warming.
Here’s s’mores for you to read
There will always be arguments for and against climate change, but there’s one thing that remains either way, why would anyone be against doing their utmost to lessen humanities impact on nature and try to be better in our responsiblities to the environment where we could. Surely there can be no argument that that would be a positive?
4 Likes
Surely we can do better, but what does it mean to do our utmost to lesson humanities impact on nature? Even an idealistic “green new deal” leaves the earth dramatically changed from the way it would have been without us around. I’d wager we’d still have climate change(easy money).
We could all still be hunter gatherers. That would certainly be doing our utmost.
2 Likes