Europe’s Green Deal: Same Hysteria, Same Destruction

[notsonice + 1,062]

10 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

DO glaciers melt when it is warm or when it is cold.....???

Did the glaciers in Antarctica, Greenland, etc melt 2X -->3X more from 1880 to 1940 or between 1940 till today...???

It is your graph, you believe it, you posted it, hook line and gullible naive sucker sinker. 

[notsonice + 1,062]

[notsonice + 1,062]

The Northwest Passage (NWP) is the sea route to the Pacific Ocean through the Arctic Ocean, along the northern coast of North America via waterways through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.^[1][2][3][4] The eastern route along the Arctic coasts of Norway and Siberia is accordingly called the Northeast Passage (NEP).

The various islands of the archipelago are separated from one another and from the Canadian mainland by a series of Arctic waterways collectively known as the Northwest Passages or Northwestern Passages.^[5]

For centuries, European explorers sought a navigable passage as a possible trade route to Asia. An ice-bound northern route was discovered in 1850 by the Irish explorer Robert McClure; it was through a more southerly opening in an area explored by the Scotsman John Rae in 1854 that Norwegian Roald Amundsen made the first complete passage in 1903–1906. Until 2009, the Arctic pack ice prevented regular marine shipping throughout most of the year. Arctic sea ice decline has rendered the waterways more navigable for ice navigation

[NickW + 2,714]

7 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You know that graph you published is complete and utter BS when we know from HISTORY/Geology/Archeology, actual personal eyewitnesses that around ~1000AD-->1300AD,

1. grapes were being grown in Scotland/Iceland,
2. Greenland was actually... Green and so was Iceland,
3. certain types of warm weather trees grew throughout Europe which cannot grow today,
4. Upper Canada had trees half meter in diameter where today only scrub brush or tundra grows,
5. the Rivers Ran Dry in N. Europe,
6. the Great Plains in the USA had moving sand dunes, Australia did as welI(more than it does today)
7. And yet today NONE of the above are true because the earth is too danged cold, yet the "graph"(wholly made up BS) shows 0.5C... to the lowpoint of the little ice age which was NOT man made which happened in both Hemispheres and yet, no one can figure out why(in reality with an actual MODEL)

FFS

This is a new variation on 'Grapes in Yorkshire'. You can grow grapes in Yorkshire or indeed Scotland today. The reason they are no longer commercially grown is the fall in transport costs makes the importation of wines from Europe and elsewhere more commercial worthwhile. Wind back to 30AD and the cost of an imported bottle of wind was probably 3 months peasant labour so growing grapes in Yorkshire - Scotland and making local wines was far more viable. 

Greenland was Green around the edges in AD 1300 as it is today. The interior of Greenland has been one lump of ice Km's thick for over 100,000 years. The Carbon in the ice has been dated down to the bedrock😉

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-old-glacier-ice?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products

[NickW + 2,714]

8 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

You know that graph you published is complete and utter BS when we know from HISTORY/Geology/Archeology, actual personal eyewitnesses that around ~1000AD-->1300AD,

1. grapes were being grown in Scotland/Iceland,
2. Greenland was actually... Green and so was Iceland,
3. certain types of warm weather trees grew throughout Europe which cannot grow today,
4. Upper Canada had trees half meter in diameter where today only scrub brush or tundra grows,
5. the Rivers Ran Dry in N. Europe,
6. the Great Plains in the USA had moving sand dunes, Australia did as welI(more than it does today)
7. And yet today NONE of the above are true because the earth is too danged cold, yet the "graph"(wholly made up BS) shows 0.5C... to the lowpoint of the little ice age which was NOT man made which happened in both Hemispheres and yet, no one can figure out why(in reality with an actual MODEL)

What tree species would they be (3)? 

Any linky for the claim in 4? 

And occasionally rivers run dry in N Europe. Example here 2018

https://metro.co.uk/2018/08/09/river-rhine-dries-heatwave-europe-continues-7817196/

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

“As you can see the trend is on the up, particularly thelast 40-50 years.”

So a 1 degree Celsius increase in a half century is causing all of this?

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 hours ago, NickW said:

 

And occasionally rivers run dry in N Europe.

The Colorado river barely makes it to the ocean anymore - mostly due to consumption, but snow shortfalls are expected to make things worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River

"After a much lower-than-average snowpack in the 2018 water year, Bureau of Reclamation officials projected the odds of an official shortage declaration in 2020 at 52 percent, in 2021 at 64 percent, and in 2022 at 68 percent."

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

The Colorado River ‘running dry’ is much more to do with diversions and water rights upstream than the annual snowpack in the Rockies.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The Colorado River ‘running dry’ is much more to do with diversions and water rights upstream than the annual snowpack in the Rockies.

True - as mentioned.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

California takes huge amounts of water from the drainage basins in the Rocky Mountain states due to agreements made decades ago. In my opinion these agreements are no longer valid.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

7 hours ago, notsonice said:

Wow?  Oh wait no.  You do not know what

ANOMALY... means

Nor standard DEVIATION.

Combine the 2 and you get rate of CHANGE from 'x' value rate of change.

So, baseline is rate of CHANGE between 81(maximum sea ice extent ever recorded) and 2010

What this graph shows is wildly changing conditions into 50's into the 1970's and steady state after 1980 to 2000 and then a deep dive for next 10 years. 

This aligns with reality as sailboats were able to pass through the northwest passage and along Russian coast until they couldn't in the 1970's/80s.  Opened again to small boats in the 00's. 

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Instead of looking at only last 40 years: Here is a historical perspective using, ice, mud cores from Greenland/Antarctica  https://principia-scientific.org/arctic-antarctic-sea-ice-now-at-historic-high-levels/    

Notice the trends...

PS: Your (volume) is blatant fraud as no one has a clue other than a couple bore holes taken by the US NAVY and then it depends entirely where you take said sample.  (how Close to Canada/Greenland, time of year) What we do know is the average today is ~2m and 60 years ago it was ~2m when Submarines first went under the ice and we have indications the thickness today is no different than in the 1920's, but a single data point here does not an argument make. 

PPS: People who are honest post links.  That way everyone can properly admire their comeuppance or fraud.

 

 

[Marcin2 + 724]

31 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

California takes huge amounts of water from the drainage basins in the Rocky Mountain states due to agreements made decades ago. In my opinion these agreements are no longer valid.

Very true. The very idea of agricilture in California is bizarre. I do not know how the local water mafia In agriculture in California is called, but they certainly are not paying market prices for water, otgerwise whole business would not make any sense.

[Marcin2 + 724]

The fact that we human beings have significant impact on CO2 circulation on this planet, is just the fact. In the last 150 years it occurres, it is the first such sudden impact in all history of fauna on this planet. 
Hydrocarbons were created in millions of years. We utilize them 100,000 times faster than they were created.

We add 40 gigatons of CO2 to the equation. The nature was more or less in equilibrium with total throghput of 400 gigatons of CO2.

Half of our CO2 is absorbed by oceans, half is significantly changing the composition of air on this planet.

We do not know yet how we precisely impact the climate, but we do impact it.

Remember that our activities are just another layer of the complicated interdependencies of many factors: like Sun activity or impact of ocean currents.

Any historical changes of CO2 were much slower, at least 1000 times slower.

We are changing equilibrium of the planet.
There could be sudden loss of equilibrium and our actions could cause some catastrophic changes. Probably our species will not extinct, but we cannot be sure.   As a species we never were subject of such high CO2 concentrations. We do not know how High CO2 concentration impacts for example fertility.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Marcin2
Typo

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

So our species becomes extinct...what’s the big deal?

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

For anyone with an open mind: How one aspect of abject temperature fraud is happening:  Why USA matters.  Has old data over a very large land mass with thermometers out of major cities. Essentially no one else does and where essentially all the graphs start... with USA data. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hElTSfQEdsk

Start around 1min for how/why the manipulation is happening and 10min mark for why it matters. 

Edited February 5, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[Wombat + 1,028]

Haha, u make me laugh Tom. On one hand, u remind me of my Dad coz u so wise, on the other, ur funny coz u such an ol fossil. Get with the times Grandpa!

[Wombat + 1,028]

On 2/4/2020 at 12:43 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Let's just tax CO2 and CH4 into oblivion.

Taxing naturally ocurring gases and giving more control to governments should fix the problem.

While we are at it, better make it illegal to question political leaders and illegal to question scientists that are funded by vested interests.  Because they know what is best.

Finally Tom, u admit that scientists that have a vested interest in staying alive actually know best?!?

[Wombat + 1,028]

I reckon that China is all Yin and no Yang, what do u think?

[Geoff Guenther + 317]

7 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

PPS: People who are honest post links.  That way everyone can properly admire their comeuppance or fraud.

People who are honest post non-conspiracy site links. Then people can recognise their trustworthiness.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/principia-scientific-international/ (low fact, high conspiracy rating including dissemintating anti-vax information)

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Wombat said:

Haha, u make me laugh Tom. On one hand, u remind me of my Dad coz u so wise, on the other, ur funny coz u such an ol fossil. Get with the times Grandpa!

You are obviously an idiot. Ignoring someone with decades of practical, real life experience never ends well.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Wombat said:

I reckon that China is all Yin and no Yang, what do u think?

Do you even know what yin and yang represent? From your comment, you don’t. Go back to your Xbox and let the adults debate.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

6 hours ago, Wombat said:

Haha, u make me laugh Tom. On one hand, u remind me of my Dad coz u so wise, on the other, ur funny coz u such an ol fossil. Get with the times Grandpa!

Hold on a minute there young whippersnapper.  Let me crank up my fax machine to send you a retort.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

5 hours ago, Geoff Guenther said:

People who are honest post non-conspiracy site links. Then people can recognise their trustworthiness.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/principia-scientific-international/ (low fact, high conspiracy rating including dissemintating anti-vax information)

According to you, Scientific American, Nature, (pick your journal) should all be ignored because they routinely(greater than 50% of the time) publish lying slandering Bull Shit they claim is peer reviewed when in fact it is just their buddies doing them a favor?!?!  Actual Peer review is redoing their studies/tests and obtaining the same data.  A committee of ignorants who have not done the testing/studies sitting listening to a presentation have no idea if what is being said is 100% Bull Shit. 

Or you could scroll right to the bottom and pull up the articles/papers from the peer reviewed journals(you seem to like) from which they got their data and turn on your brain and think....  You prefer slander instead of thinking.  I feel sorry for you.

Edited February 5, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[seagull104 + 3]

On 2/4/2020 at 2:17 PM, Geoff Guenther said:

Arctic ice melt won't add to the sea level, Greenland and Antarctic ice melt will.

The other factor is that the initial sea level rise will be water expansion due to the warming of the ocean.

Interesting. Just a thought - won't the land expand as well? And is there any where a mathematical explanation of the melt versus sea level change?

[Geoff Guenther + 317]

2 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Or you could scroll right to the bottom and pull up the articles/papers from the peer reviewed journals(you seem to like) from which they got their data and turn on your brain and think....  You prefer slander instead of thinking.  I feel sorry for you.

So you post a link to bullshit conspiracy theories and tell me that somewhere in that pile of bullshit is a link to a peer-reviewed journal.  Is that really all your argument amounts to?