By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
global warming kicking in on 18:37 - Dec 10 by E17hoop
My favourite Delingpole:
That is a gem, E17. I have read Michael Mann's book on Climategate ("The hockey stick and the climate wars") and it mentions the fact that even Isaac Newton can be made out to be a dubious character if you bolt together extracts from unrelated statements.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 12:35 - Dec 12 with 1526 views
global warming kicking in on 13:58 - Dec 11 by TheBlob
The albedo problem is relatively easy to remedy.Mirrors to reflect sunlight,or black surfaces to attract depending on your preference for cooling or warming.
I have read articles on this and, yes, the solution is a simple one but the cost and effort required to get 1000s of mirrors into the earth's atmosphere are eye-watering.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 12:40 - Dec 12 with 1523 views
global warming kicking in on 15:14 - Dec 11 by elnombre
But the problem I'm having is which set of peer-reviewing scientists to trust. The 15th century astrologers? 16th century alchemists maybe? Perhaps 17th century, when they just 'invented' phlogiston? The 18th century spontaneous generationists who thought life just developed from dust? No? The 19th century anti-Darwin creationists then. Surely the 20th century scientists who were proved right when we all perished from acid rain in a nuclear winter.
Science is quite often the art of massively backing the wrong horse until another horse turns up.
Well, science does move on and what is accepted in one age may turn out to be bollox in the next but in the case of, for example, the IPCC report, you are talking about over 1000 reviewers.
Would you apply your logic to modern medecine, by the way?
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 12:44 - Dec 12 with 1521 views
global warming kicking in on 16:38 - Dec 11 by TW_R
So what warming effect has increases in CO2 had?
The increases in CO2 have driven the 0.85 degree rise in average global temperature between 1880 and 2012. Bear in mind that is the global average, the average temperature rise has been higher at the poles.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 13:34 - Dec 12 with 1508 views
global warming kicking in on 12:44 - Dec 12 by R_from_afar
The increases in CO2 have driven the 0.85 degree rise in average global temperature between 1880 and 2012. Bear in mind that is the global average, the average temperature rise has been higher at the poles.
global warming kicking in on 13:34 - Dec 10 by TheBlob
"could be".....always a nice out. We'll come back here in 2016 yes?If we're all still alive that is.
Even if the whole Arctic isn't ice free by 2016, we've had the North West Passage becoming navigable in recent years. That's the one that has never been navigable, because of ice, since it was discovered.
Climate change threads here are the most depressing reads I've ever encountered. It's like being stuck in a room with a load of people who think Clarkson is a philosopher. And who think evidence-based science is neither scientific nor based on evidence.
0
global warming kicking in on 00:46 - Dec 13 with 1449 views
global warming kicking in on 18:48 - Dec 12 by NW5Hoop
Even if the whole Arctic isn't ice free by 2016, we've had the North West Passage becoming navigable in recent years. That's the one that has never been navigable, because of ice, since it was discovered.
Climate change threads here are the most depressing reads I've ever encountered. It's like being stuck in a room with a load of people who think Clarkson is a philosopher. And who think evidence-based science is neither scientific nor based on evidence.
I think you're missing the point. I think that most of us agree that the climate is changing, but spending trillions of dollars on scientific research, cutting emissions etc etc without any evidence it has any real effect on the climate in the short or long term.
The problem is there is no evidence-based science that can tell us what the climate will be in 10, 20 or 100 years. The only thing that can be said for certain is that the climate is changing. Whether there is anything we can do about it is pure conjecture.
0
global warming kicking in on 01:14 - Dec 13 with 1443 views
New insight has been gained into the recovery of the ozone layer.
Scientists have been puzzled why the hole, which forms each year over Antarctica, has been changing considerably in size from year to year.
Now Nasa researchers say it is the weather that is primarily driving this variability - not the ozone-destroying chemicals in the upper atmosphere.
The findings were presented at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting in San Francisco.
Susan Strahan, from Nasa’s Goddard Space Center in Maryland, said: “We want to measure and see that the ozone hole is being reduced.
“But to understand if the ozone hole is shrinking, we need to understand all of the different factors that cause the ozone hole area and depth to vary.”
Twenty years ago, the international Montreal Protocol came into force to phase out ozone-depleting substances such as CFCs.
These chemicals break down in the high atmosphere and release chlorine, which, in a reaction driven by the Sun, goes on to destroy ozone gas. As a result, each year, the ozone layer over the southern polar region experiences a deep thinning.
After the ban, this hole stopped getting bigger.
However, there have not yet been signs of a full recovery — and damaging ultraviolet rays from the Sun are still streaming through.
And in some years, such as 2006 and 2011, the hole appeared to be very large, while in others, such as 2012, it looked small.
Now scientists from Nasa believe that the weather plays a much more significant role in the complex system than had previously been suggested.
Dr Strahan said: “We have identified another factor that wasn’t fully recognised before: and that is how much ozone gets brought to the polar regions in the first place, by the winds.”
Satellite images show that fluctuating air temperatures and winds change the amount of ozone gas that sits above Antarctica.
And scientists believe this is dictating the apparent size of the ozone hole changes year on year.
If more ozone is brought to the lower region in the stratosphere, there is more ozone to destroy and the hole can look bigger. This was the scenario in 2006.
But in 2011, the winds brought less ozone to this lower area, so the ozone there got destroyed more quickly — again the hole looked more sizeable.
If, however, as in 2012, the winds push more ozone into the upper stratosphere, this can mask the hole below and make it look smaller.
“At the moment, it is winds and temperatures that are really controlling how big it is,” Dr Strahan added.
The team thinks meteorological conditions will continue to be the dominant driver in the process until about 2030.
After that, as the long-lasting chemicals in the atmosphere finally start to clear, the layer should start to recover.
Dr Strahan said: “We can project how quickly we think chlorine will decline in the coming decades and use this, as well as our knowledge of temperatures in Antarctica, to predict that the ozone hole will probably go away in 2070, give or take 10 years.”
global warming kicking in on 12:44 - Dec 12 by R_from_afar
The increases in CO2 have driven the 0.85 degree rise in average global temperature between 1880 and 2012. Bear in mind that is the global average, the average temperature rise has been higher at the poles.
RFA
No - the average temperature has changed by 0.85 degrees over that period. That's all anyone can say. Whether it is related to increases in CO2 is purely speculation.
The interesting thing about the period you've chosen is that for the first 60 years or so, the average temperature went down, not up. And since around 2003 there has been a small decline.
But in the end, selecting such a small period really makes the numbers meaning less as it doesn't take into account any cyclical climate changes over a longer period of time.
Europe was much hotter 2000 years ago than it is now, but interestingly non these evidence-wielding scientists seem to want to talk about that. It might have an impact on the funding they are being given for there expeditions around the world.
0
global warming kicking in on 13:36 - Dec 16 with 1386 views
global warming kicking in on 00:46 - Dec 13 by TW_R
I think you're missing the point. I think that most of us agree that the climate is changing, but spending trillions of dollars on scientific research, cutting emissions etc etc without any evidence it has any real effect on the climate in the short or long term.
The problem is there is no evidence-based science that can tell us what the climate will be in 10, 20 or 100 years. The only thing that can be said for certain is that the climate is changing. Whether there is anything we can do about it is pure conjecture.
I doubt that "trillions of dollars" are being spent, but if they are, the bulk of that will be on the fossil fuel industry because that industry receives 6x the subsidies that renewables do. We have the evidence of how emissions affect climate based on past temperature records, from ice cores, tree rings etc. They tell us what the climate was like and the levels of C02, methane etc. This is established and accepted science.
Your "evidence" argument means that you think all climate science and meterology should be binned.
As for trying to do something about it, we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that it causes global warming. We can see that GW - and climate change - are making life harder, and costlier, in most parts of the planet. We only have one planet we can live on. So shouldn't we try to reduce CO2 emissions to make things easier for mankind? There is no Planet B.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 13:41 - Dec 16 with 1382 views
global warming kicking in on 13:36 - Dec 16 by R_from_afar
I doubt that "trillions of dollars" are being spent, but if they are, the bulk of that will be on the fossil fuel industry because that industry receives 6x the subsidies that renewables do. We have the evidence of how emissions affect climate based on past temperature records, from ice cores, tree rings etc. They tell us what the climate was like and the levels of C02, methane etc. This is established and accepted science.
Your "evidence" argument means that you think all climate science and meterology should be binned.
As for trying to do something about it, we know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that it causes global warming. We can see that GW - and climate change - are making life harder, and costlier, in most parts of the planet. We only have one planet we can live on. So shouldn't we try to reduce CO2 emissions to make things easier for mankind? There is no Planet B.
RFA
So what caused the planet to be warmer 2000 years ago when we didnt have man made co2 products?
favourite cheese mature Cheddar. FFS there is no such thing as the EPL
Esa's Cryosat sees Arctic sea-ice volume bounce back
The bounce back in the extent of sea ice in the Arctic this summer was reflected also in the volume of ice.
Data from Europe's Cryosat spacecraft suggests there were almost 9,000 cu km of ice at the end of this year's melt season.
This is close to 50% more than in the corresponding period in 2012.
It is a rare piece of good news for a region that has witnessed a rapid decline in both area cover and thickness in recent years.
But scientists caution against reading too much into one year's "recovery".
"Although the recovery of Arctic sea ice is certainly welcome news, it has to be considered against the backdrop of changes that have occurred over the last few decades," said Prof Andy Shepherd of University College London, UK.
"It's estimated that there were around 20,000 cu km of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," he told BBC News.
Cryosat is the European Space Agency's (Esa) dedicated polar monitoring platform.
It has a sophisticated radar system that allows scientists to work out the thickness of the ice floes covering the Arctic Ocean.
In the three years following its launch, the spacecraft saw a steady decline in autumn ice volume, with a record low of 6,000 cubic km being recorded in late October 2012.
But after a sharply colder summer this year, the autumn volume number has gone up.
Measurements taken in the same three weeks in October found the floes to contain just shy of 9,000 cu km.
Thicker ice has been retained in the Arctic Part of this stronger performance can be put down to the greater retention of older ice.
This is evident particularly around the Canadian archipelago and North Greenland, where there is much more two-year-old and three-year-old ice than in previous years.
"One of the things we'd noticed in our data was that the volume of ice year-to-year was not varying anything like as much as the ice extent - at least for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012," explained Rachel Tilling from the UK's Nerc Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling (CPOM).
"This is why we're really quite surprised by what we've seen in 2013.
"We didn't expect the greater ice extent left at the end of the summer melt to be reflected in the volume.
"But it has been. And the reason is related to the amount of multi-year ice in the Arctic."
Dr Don Perovich is a sea-ice expert at Dartmouth College, US.
He said Cryosat's data tallied with observations made by other spacecraft.
"In previous summers, some of the [multi-year ice] migrated over to the Alaska and Siberia areas where it melted. But this past summer, it stayed in place because of a change in wind patterns. And so there'll likely be more multi-year ice next year than there was this year," he told BBC News.
Cryosat's radar has the resolution to see the Arctic's floes and leads Some 7/8 of the ice tends to sit below the waterline - the draft The aim is to measure the freeboard - the ice part above the waterline Knowing this 1/8th figure allows Cryosat to work out sea-ice thickness The thickness multiplied by the area of ice cover produces a volume The minimum ice extent in the Arctic this summer was recorded as 5.10 million sq km. Again, this was a figure almost 50% larger than the all-time satellite-low mark achieved 12 months previously - when floes were reduced to just 3.41 million sq km by mid-September.
Area/extent is easier to measure, but scientists regard thickness/volume to be the best metric with which to judge the health of the ice pack, which is why Cryosat's unique data-set is so important.
For a while, it was uncertain whether the European satellite would get any autumn measurements this year.
The spacecraft suffered a major fault in its onboard power system at the beginning of October, and all science activity was halted.
But engineers managed to switch the satellite over to a back-up system and normal operations were resumed on 11 October.
"We lost the side 'A' of the power subsystem we believe for good, although we still have hope to be able to use part of it in the future in case we experience another issue," said Esa Cryosat mission manager Dr Tommaso Parrinello.
"Since 2 October, we have been operating on the redundant chain, but all other subsystems are still being operated on their prime chain 'A'. Therefore, the science instruments and the quality of data have not been affected."
The new Cryosat study was presented here in San Francisco to the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting, where the annual Arctic Report Card was released.
The observations show clearly that more thick ice (red/yellow) has been retained this year
Esa's Cryosat sees Arctic sea-ice volume bounce back
The bounce back in the extent of sea ice in the Arctic this summer was reflected also in the volume of ice.
Data from Europe's Cryosat spacecraft suggests there were almost 9,000 cu km of ice at the end of this year's melt season.
This is close to 50% more than in the corresponding period in 2012.
It is a rare piece of good news for a region that has witnessed a rapid decline in both area cover and thickness in recent years.
But scientists caution against reading too much into one year's "recovery".
"Although the recovery of Arctic sea ice is certainly welcome news, it has to be considered against the backdrop of changes that have occurred over the last few decades," said Prof Andy Shepherd of University College London, UK.
"It's estimated that there were around 20,000 cu km of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," he told BBC News.
Cryosat is the European Space Agency's (Esa) dedicated polar monitoring platform.
It has a sophisticated radar system that allows scientists to work out the thickness of the ice floes covering the Arctic Ocean.
In the three years following its launch, the spacecraft saw a steady decline in autumn ice volume, with a record low of 6,000 cubic km being recorded in late October 2012.
But after a sharply colder summer this year, the autumn volume number has gone up.
Measurements taken in the same three weeks in October found the floes to contain just shy of 9,000 cu km.
Thicker ice has been retained in the Arctic Part of this stronger performance can be put down to the greater retention of older ice.
This is evident particularly around the Canadian archipelago and North Greenland, where there is much more two-year-old and three-year-old ice than in previous years.
"One of the things we'd noticed in our data was that the volume of ice year-to-year was not varying anything like as much as the ice extent - at least for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012," explained Rachel Tilling from the UK's Nerc Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling (CPOM).
"This is why we're really quite surprised by what we've seen in 2013.
"We didn't expect the greater ice extent left at the end of the summer melt to be reflected in the volume.
"But it has been. And the reason is related to the amount of multi-year ice in the Arctic."
Dr Don Perovich is a sea-ice expert at Dartmouth College, US.
He said Cryosat's data tallied with observations made by other spacecraft.
"In previous summers, some of the [multi-year ice] migrated over to the Alaska and Siberia areas where it melted. But this past summer, it stayed in place because of a change in wind patterns. And so there'll likely be more multi-year ice next year than there was this year," he told BBC News.
Cryosat's radar has the resolution to see the Arctic's floes and leads Some 7/8 of the ice tends to sit below the waterline - the draft The aim is to measure the freeboard - the ice part above the waterline Knowing this 1/8th figure allows Cryosat to work out sea-ice thickness The thickness multiplied by the area of ice cover produces a volume The minimum ice extent in the Arctic this summer was recorded as 5.10 million sq km. Again, this was a figure almost 50% larger than the all-time satellite-low mark achieved 12 months previously - when floes were reduced to just 3.41 million sq km by mid-September.
Area/extent is easier to measure, but scientists regard thickness/volume to be the best metric with which to judge the health of the ice pack, which is why Cryosat's unique data-set is so important.
For a while, it was uncertain whether the European satellite would get any autumn measurements this year.
The spacecraft suffered a major fault in its onboard power system at the beginning of October, and all science activity was halted.
But engineers managed to switch the satellite over to a back-up system and normal operations were resumed on 11 October.
"We lost the side 'A' of the power subsystem we believe for good, although we still have hope to be able to use part of it in the future in case we experience another issue," said Esa Cryosat mission manager Dr Tommaso Parrinello.
"Since 2 October, we have been operating on the redundant chain, but all other subsystems are still being operated on their prime chain 'A'. Therefore, the science instruments and the quality of data have not been affected."
The new Cryosat study was presented here in San Francisco to the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting, where the annual Arctic Report Card was released.
The observations show clearly that more thick ice (red/yellow) has been retained this year
Thanks for posting that but the article does not mean we are out of the woods by any means. Look at this bit:
"Although the recovery of Arctic sea ice is certainly welcome news, it has to be considered against the backdrop of changes that have occurred over the last few decades," said Prof Andy Shepherd of University College London, UK.
"It's estimated that there were around 20,000 cu km of Arctic sea ice each October in the early 1980s, and so today's minimum still ranks among the lowest of the past 30 years," he told BBC News.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 18:53 - Dec 16 with 1345 views
global warming kicking in on 13:41 - Dec 16 by loftboy
So what caused the planet to be warmer 2000 years ago when we didnt have man made co2 products?
To answer both you and Jamie, there are a number of major influences on the earth's climate: volcanic activity, solar cycles, the earth's orbit, the strength of the earth's magnetic field and human influences. I don't know exactly which combination of the first four "caused the planet to be warmer 2000 years ago" as you say but it will one or some of those factors.
The same is true for the ice age Jamie mentioned.
The difference with the warming since the industrial revolution is that dozens of studies by climate scientists have been unable to explain the warming trend using the four natural factors. For example, we are just coming out of a solar minumum so the sun is not the culprit. In fact, Michael Mann (no, not the director of "Heat," the climate scientist from Penn State Uni), was researching the impact of natural influences on climate when he stumbled across the "fingerprint" of human activity. Only human influences could explain the recent warming he was studying.
His work and that of the other two scientists, Ray Bradley and Malcolm Hughes, who worked with him on the ground-breaking analysis has been reviewed to death, through all manner of enquiries, by Congress, even, and over two dozen other studies have corroborated his findings.
To bring home why global warming, with its attendant sea level rise, and climate change with its more frequent and heavier downpours, are such crucial issues, 5m properties in England are at risk of flooding. Well, that's one of the problems, anyway.
I'd be delighted if we weren't facing these issues but we are, and even the big oil companies have accepted that the recent GW and CC are manmade:
Conoco-Phillips CEO:
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded that global warming is unequivocal."... "Last year we became the only U.S. integrated energy company to call for a mandatory national framework to address greenhouse gas emissions."
EXXON:“The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) provides an update of scientific understanding regarding GHG emissions, global warming and the risks of climate change, and the way changes could unfold in the future. Emissions scenarios and results from climate models (see Figure 1) estimate that, without policy intervention, temperatures could increase 1 to 5 º C by 2100.”
CHEVRON:“we recognize and share the concerns of governments and the public about climate change.The use of fossil fuels to meet the world's energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases(GHGs)–mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane–in the Earth's atmosphere."
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 19:12 - Dec 16 with 1335 views
global warming kicking in on 18:53 - Dec 16 by R_from_afar
To answer both you and Jamie, there are a number of major influences on the earth's climate: volcanic activity, solar cycles, the earth's orbit, the strength of the earth's magnetic field and human influences. I don't know exactly which combination of the first four "caused the planet to be warmer 2000 years ago" as you say but it will one or some of those factors.
The same is true for the ice age Jamie mentioned.
The difference with the warming since the industrial revolution is that dozens of studies by climate scientists have been unable to explain the warming trend using the four natural factors. For example, we are just coming out of a solar minumum so the sun is not the culprit. In fact, Michael Mann (no, not the director of "Heat," the climate scientist from Penn State Uni), was researching the impact of natural influences on climate when he stumbled across the "fingerprint" of human activity. Only human influences could explain the recent warming he was studying.
His work and that of the other two scientists, Ray Bradley and Malcolm Hughes, who worked with him on the ground-breaking analysis has been reviewed to death, through all manner of enquiries, by Congress, even, and over two dozen other studies have corroborated his findings.
To bring home why global warming, with its attendant sea level rise, and climate change with its more frequent and heavier downpours, are such crucial issues, 5m properties in England are at risk of flooding. Well, that's one of the problems, anyway.
I'd be delighted if we weren't facing these issues but we are, and even the big oil companies have accepted that the recent GW and CC are manmade:
Conoco-Phillips CEO:
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded that global warming is unequivocal."... "Last year we became the only U.S. integrated energy company to call for a mandatory national framework to address greenhouse gas emissions."
EXXON:“The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) provides an update of scientific understanding regarding GHG emissions, global warming and the risks of climate change, and the way changes could unfold in the future. Emissions scenarios and results from climate models (see Figure 1) estimate that, without policy intervention, temperatures could increase 1 to 5 º C by 2100.”
CHEVRON:“we recognize and share the concerns of governments and the public about climate change.The use of fossil fuels to meet the world's energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases(GHGs)–mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane–in the Earth's atmosphere."
global warming kicking in on 19:12 - Dec 16 by stevec
This is all tremendous stuff, R from Afar, but can you and these genius climate scientists explain me this....
How the fcuk did this planet survive four and a half billion years without you?
Ha ha nice one!
I care deeply about the impact on nature but most of all, I care about the impact on us. The planet itself will be just fine.
Changing rainfall patterns, floods, desertification, extremes of weather, changing seasons: That all makes life hard for mankind. It already is. The cost of our food has already gone up 20% in a decade due to climate change.
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
global warming kicking in on 13:33 - Dec 17 with 1285 views
global warming kicking in on 13:15 - Dec 17 by R_from_afar
Ha ha nice one!
I care deeply about the impact on nature but most of all, I care about the impact on us. The planet itself will be just fine.
Changing rainfall patterns, floods, desertification, extremes of weather, changing seasons: That all makes life hard for mankind. It already is. The cost of our food has already gone up 20% in a decade due to climate change.
RFA
now I'm no expert on climate change so I won't offer an opinion on that but hasn't food prices gone up because we're all riding too much and there's too many sprogs out there.
There's just not enough food to go around.
Will be interesting to see if food prices drop in the coming year now that the big supermarkets have said that due to food shortages they will be accepting non perfect fruit and veg for the first time in years. The wonky carrot is back!
0
global warming kicking in on 13:34 - Dec 17 with 1284 views
global warming kicking in on 13:15 - Dec 17 by R_from_afar
Ha ha nice one!
I care deeply about the impact on nature but most of all, I care about the impact on us. The planet itself will be just fine.
Changing rainfall patterns, floods, desertification, extremes of weather, changing seasons: That all makes life hard for mankind. It already is. The cost of our food has already gone up 20% in a decade due to climate change.
RFA
I'm afraid you'll find the price of food has gone up because the demand is outstripping supply.They try to hide the shortages in many cases by downsizing products to give the illusion of plenty.I've always said the Climate debate was a devised smokescreen(no pun intended)to divert the attention away from the population question and the quasi-religious - no dammit,overtly religious - status of childbirth.
global warming kicking in on 13:15 - Dec 17 by R_from_afar
Ha ha nice one!
I care deeply about the impact on nature but most of all, I care about the impact on us. The planet itself will be just fine.
Changing rainfall patterns, floods, desertification, extremes of weather, changing seasons: That all makes life hard for mankind. It already is. The cost of our food has already gone up 20% in a decade due to climate change.
RFA
[doffs cap to Rfa for his patience and good humour on this thread]
0
global warming kicking in on 14:45 - Dec 17 with 1256 views
global warming kicking in on 13:34 - Dec 17 by TheBlob
I'm afraid you'll find the price of food has gone up because the demand is outstripping supply.They try to hide the shortages in many cases by downsizing products to give the illusion of plenty.I've always said the Climate debate was a devised smokescreen(no pun intended)to divert the attention away from the population question and the quasi-religious - no dammit,overtly religious - status of childbirth.
I'm with you on the population point. If we're going to achieve anything with anti-warming policy we've got to cut back on the sprogs now.
And you know it's urgent when even the major commercial consumers of fossil fuels start moving their pet football clubs to higher ground.
A magnificent football club, the love of our lives, finding a way to finally have its day in the sun.
global warming kicking in on 13:18 - Dec 10 by bosh67
Global warming is bolloc*s.
We are on the edge of an ice age, like we have been many times before.
We're still in an ice age.
Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. Stefan Moore, Stefan Moore running down the wing. He runs like a cheetah, his crosses couldn't be sweeter. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore. Stefan Moore.
0
global warming kicking in on 17:18 - Dec 17 with 960 views
global warming kicking in on 13:15 - Dec 17 by R_from_afar
Ha ha nice one!
I care deeply about the impact on nature but most of all, I care about the impact on us. The planet itself will be just fine.
Changing rainfall patterns, floods, desertification, extremes of weather, changing seasons: That all makes life hard for mankind. It already is. The cost of our food has already gone up 20% in a decade due to climate change.
RFA
The rising cost of food: Grocery prices have risen 2-3% each year between 1990-2011. There are four global policy shifts that are causing this inflation in world food prices. First, the U.S. government subsidizes corn production that is used for bio-fuels. This takes corn out of the food supply, raising prices.
Second, the World Trade Organization (WTO) limits the amount of corn and wheat that the U.S. and European Union (EU) can subsidize and store in stockpiles. This reduces the cushion available to add to the food supply when there are shortages, thus adding to food price volatility.
Third, as more people around the world are growing more affluent, they eat more meat. Grains are going to feed the animals that provide meat, further reducing the supply and increasing price volatility.
Fourth, higher oil prices lead to higher food prices. Food is transported great distances, especially if imported. Higher oil and gas prices increase shipping costs, which translates into higher food prices.
Point missed on this list relates the oil input to crops in producing fertilisers and culture of the crops (machinery) etc
Very little of it is to do with climate change
0
global warming kicking in on 19:21 - Dec 17 with 938 views
global warming kicking in on 12:40 - Dec 12 by R_from_afar
Well, science does move on and what is accepted in one age may turn out to be bollox in the next but in the case of, for example, the IPCC report, you are talking about over 1000 reviewers.
Would you apply your logic to modern medecine, by the way?
RFA
I bet there were more than 1000 alchemists convinced they were right too.
I certainly would apply that logic to medicine - shall we talk about the deniers of a link between HIV and AIDS, or the salmonella scaremongers, the MMR vaccine and autism, the CJD timebomb (that never went off)...?
I'll concede that when it sticks to say, designing better mobile phones or the giant screen at HQ, science does a pretty reasonable job.
0
global warming kicking in on 20:04 - Dec 17 with 926 views
global warming kicking in on 12:06 - Dec 10 by GloryHunter
Man-made climate change is a religion, a faith. If you question their faith they will insult you and call you stupid, because they know logic is not on their side.
wow you actually believe what you're saying don't you? maybe we deserve annihilation
“The thing about football - the important thing about football - is that it is not just about football.â€
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
