Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 5:10:51 GMT
Awww..now you want to attack the Orange Bad Man...and we were having such fun. Why add to to the thermal readings ? Sure..he eats a lot Big Burgers..inducing methane ..but we all do..especially the Vegans..let us relish our role..revel in our majesty....like that of the yeast cells..they have a good run..then..suddenly die..poof..poisoned by the their own toxicity..whilst we drink and make merry and stumble drunkenly to our future.
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Dec 10, 2018 16:37:45 GMT
What will the sun do next?
Many have predicted a weak sunspot cycle in the years ahead, but new work from India suggests otherwise. The work dashes speculations of a sun-induced global cooling of Earth’s climate in the coming decade. Here's the story: What will the sun do next? By Deborah Byrd in SPACE | December 10, 2018
This was Sunday’s sun – December 9, 2018 – as seen on the The Sun Now page of NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO). Notice … no sunspots.
It is thought that the current sunspot cycle – cycle 24 – will approximately span the years 2008 to 2019. In other words, we haven’t reached the lowest ebb of the cycle yet, and no one knows exactly when it will come, but solar physicists think we’re probably close. This cycle has been an odd one, with fewer dark sunspots visible on the sun’s surface than expected. Now, with the next cycle due to start, we’re beginning to see projections for what will happen when the sun revs up again and begins producing more sunspots. Will the next sunspot cycle be more “normal” or will we again see a decreased number of spots?
On December 6, 2018, the Center of Excellence in Space Sciences India (CESSI) reported that two of its scientists have made a prediction for the upcoming sunspot cycle. Solar physicist Dibyendu Nandi and his Ph.D .student Prantika Bhowmik devised a new prediction technique, which simulates conditions both in the sun’s interior, where sunspots are created, and on the solar surface, where sunspots are destroyed.
Earlier predictions (like this one) have suggested the coming sunspot cycle 25 will be weaker than the current cycle 24. But, based on their model, Nandi and Bhowmik believe cycle 25 might be similar to or even stronger than 24. They expect the next cycle to start rising about a year from now and to peak in 2024. Their work was published December 6, 2018, in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications.
Why should we care?
Indeed, many people do care about solar activity, due to the sun-Earth connection. High activity on the sun can negatively affect some earthly technologies, for example, electric grids and orbiting satellites. So – as Nandi and Bhowmik point out – an accurate prediction of a coming solar cycle might help space scientists plan satellite launches and estimate satellite mission lifetimes.
Another sun-Earth issue has particularly grabbed the public’s imagination: a little-understood, possible link between activity on the sun and Earth’s climate. Keep reading, to learn more.
A statement from CESSI explained the climate question:
"The current sunspot cycle, dubbed as solar cycle 24, is just ending, and it has been one of the weakest cycles in a century. In fact, over the last several decades, successive sunspot cycles have significantly weakened in strength, and some earlier studies based on simplistic statistical approaches have claimed a significant weakening of the sun’s activity is imminent, resulting in a loss of sunspot cycles.
The last such episode, known as the Maunder minimum, occurred between 1645 and 1715 and coincided with the Little Ice Age, a period of long winters and global cooling."
Was there a causative link between reduced sunspot numbers and the Little Ice Age? In other words, did weakened activity on the sun cause the Little Ice Age? If so, could a series of weak solar cycles cause another global cooling in the years ahead? If that happened, the cooling would be laid on top of the ongoing trend of global warming, which virtually all climate scientists agree is caused by human activities.
For scientists, there are two big problems with the idea of a sun-caused cooling (or a sun-caused warming, for that matter). First, no known physical mechanism has yet been found, explaining exactly how a change in solar activity affects Earth’s climate.
Second, scientists are aware of only one episode of decreased sunspots during a time of global cooling. The coincidence of the Maunder Minimum and Little Ice Age is suggestive, yes. But, for scientists, it doesn’t prove anything.
Still, the coincidence exists, and the idea is intriguing. And so it’s tempting to ask if a significantly weak sunspot cycle 25 – in the coming decade – would temporarily alleviate ongoing global warming. Scientists have, in fact, been asking this question.
According to Bhowmik and Nandi, all that sort of speculation may be moot. The sun might come roaring back into something like more “normal” activity in the decade ahead; it might begin producing many more sunspots. Please note that I’m putting “normal” in quotes because no one knows what “normal” really is, for the sun.
Bhowmik and Nandi sounded confident when they said:
"[We] find no evidence of an impending disappearance of sunspot cycles and thus conclude that speculations of an imminent sun-induced cooling of global climate is very unlikely."
Are they right? Will their model prove to be predictive for solar cycle 25? Time will tell.
Bhowmik and Nandi successfully reproduced a century of sunspot observations with their model. The red curve represents the simulated (starting from the beginning of solar cycle 17) and predicted (cycle 25) solar activity. Image via CESSI.
Bhowmik and Nandi prediction for sunspot cycle 25 compared with the current sunspot cycle 24. The work suggests the coming sunspot cycle will be similar to or slightly stronger than the activity levels that are just ending. Image via CESSI.
Bottom line: Solar cycle 24 was weak, with fewer sunspots at its peak than expected. Many have predicted an even-weaker solar cycle 25 for the coming decade. But two scientists from India have a new predictive model, based on computer simulations, suggesting otherwise.
earthsky.org/space/solar-cycle-24-25-sunspot-predictions
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Dec 10, 2018 23:49:45 GMT
Spaceweather.com publish a table of Sunspot counts.
HAL
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Dec 11, 2018 21:46:34 GMT
The Arctic Is Not Doing Well (at All) By Stephanie Pappas, Live Science Contributor | December 11, 2018
'Tis the season of snowy nights and reindeer pulling sleighs — except in the actual Arctic, where climate change is wreaking havoc on a real-world winter wonderland.
A new "report card" from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Arctic Program paints a dire picture for the frozen North. According to the program's 2018 Arctic Report Card, Arctic surface air temperatures are warming twice as fast as in the rest of the globe, while populations of wild reindeer and caribou have tumbled by 50 percent over the last 20 years.
And the Arctic is setting alarming new records all the time. Air temperatures from 2014 to 2018 in the Arctic were warmer than in any prior year dating back to 1900, according to the report. The past 12 years have shown the lowest extents on record of Arctic sea ice. And the Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than it has in at least 350 years.
"As a result of atmosphere and ocean warming, the Arctic is no longer returning to the extensively frozen region of past decades," the report's authors wrote.
Ailing sea ice
The annual report is the 13th issued by NOAA's Arctic Program. One of the most dramatic changes in today's Arctic, the report found, is the loss of the region's sea ice. The winter maximum sea ice of 2018, measured in March, was the second lowest in 39 years of record-keeping, behind only 2017. In 1985, the report authors wrote, ice that had survived multiple years of freezing and thawing made up 16 percent of the Arctic's sea ice. Today, that number is a mere 1 percent. The thinner, single-year ice that makes up 99 percent of the ice pack is more prone to melt and flow.
Sea ice attached to the coast is also shrinking in area, extending only about half as far offshore in the modern era as compared to the 1970s.
Sea ice is disappearing all over the Arctic, the report's authors found, and in every month of the year. Average sea-ice thickness is also declining. Changes in the Arctic extend outward, the report's authors added, as warming in the far north seems to be altering ocean and atmospheric circulation, stacking the deck for extreme snowstorms like the "Beast from the East" polar vortex that hit the United Kingdom in February 2018.
Impacts on animals
Warming temperatures, lost sea ice and long-term declines in snowpack on land have caused chaos for the Arctic's wildlife. While reindeer are mythologized in Christmas carols, real herds are suffering. Wild reindeer and their fellow foragers, tundra caribou, have been in decline since the 1990s, according to the report. Where there were once 4.7 million animals combined, there are now 2.1 million. Of 22 herds being monitored by researchers today, 20 are on the decline.
Climate is to blame for much of the decline, according to the report. Longer, warmer summers mean more parasites and heat stress for the winter-adapted grazing animals, along with a greater risk of grass-killing drought.
Meanwhile, toxic algal blooms driven by warming waters represent a new threat to marine life in the Arctic, the researchers wrote. Algal toxins have been found in ill or dead animals ranging from seabirds to seals to whales.
"Continued warming of the Arctic atmosphere and ocean are driving broad change in the environmental system in predicted and also unexpected ways," the report's authors concluded. "New and rapidly emerging threats are taking form and highlighting the level of uncertainty in the breadth of environmental change that is to come."
www.livescience.com/64278-arctic-dire-report.html?utm_source=notification
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Dec 11, 2018 23:12:49 GMT
But the Great Orange Wonder says it is all false news.
And he should know. he is more intelligent than anyone else; he says so himself. And , hell, he's Le Grand Fromage.
He is probably also aware that he possibly has only ten years of life left anyway; so why should he care.
Pity he may be spending some of them in jail.
HAL.
|
|
|
Post by moksha on Dec 12, 2018 11:46:53 GMT
THEIR HEARTS WERE FILLED WITH PRIDE HUMILITY HAD LEFT THEIR HEADS THEY OVERLOOKED
WHAT PUTS THEM TO BED FOREVER AND EVER THIS WAS DUE
TO BEING SO CLEVER TRYING TO RULE THE WORLD WILL SET OFF THE ALARM WRONG IT IS TO DO THE CHILDREN HARM
TARTARY
THE EMPIRE
.
|
|
|
Post by purr on Dec 13, 2018 1:45:39 GMT
Awww..now you want to attack the Orange Bad Man...and we were having such fun. Why add to to the thermal readings ? Sure..he eats a lot Big Burgers..inducing methane ..but we all do..especially the Vegans..let us relish our role..revel in our majesty....like that of the yeast cells..they have a good run..then..suddenly die..poof..poisoned by the their own toxicity..whilst we drink and make merry and stumble drunkenly to our future. Ha! EmbassyKat, I invariably cheer when President Trump comes out and openly supports Climate Change critics, also whenever hearing of these 'overheated' Climate Change conventions where some delegates challenge the need for the crazier economic measures, calling out the INCOMPLETE science underpinning yet another deadline for human/planetary survival! That said, nobody mistakes today's POTUS for the Orange Nice Man. Trump isn't doing himself any favors, with stuff like letting Gen. Kelly go etc. kinda turning the White House Chief of Staff position into a (careerwise) suicide mission . You just can't make this up. Still I think he is right on climate, and you seem to agree as well (reading your posts) that climate future might well be scary and deadly for Earth species (ourselves included), notwithstanding human industry not bearing the blame. Simply, IF our planet's life support systems go over to the dark side we will suffer, and the dying begins. Without Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, such a disaster will be more of a cosmic event / Act of God. Forget about going Green: how may Man and life on Earth survive. Day of the Prepper.... Actually this thought imo REQUIRES, if not going as far as stumbling, a fairly decent spot of Poliakov Premium Vodka to go with it. Served subzero in a long glass. purr
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 3:24:08 GMT
Hi Purr.. I ran across this and it was hilarious.. CEOs Love Their Private Jet Perks Facebook and Google are just two of the thousands of companies that signed the “We Are Still In” pledge formed in the wake of President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris accord in 2020. The group is led by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and boasts big corporations and U.S. states as signatories. The pledge is meant to show that prominent individuals, companies and states will “not retreat from the global pact to reduce emissions and stem the causes of climate change,” according to its website. However, many of the big companies committed to the goals of the Paris accord in recent years have been criticized offering the use of their private jets to chief executives. (RELATED: Congress Debates Whether More Tax Dollars Will Go Towards Add-Ons For Luxury Electric Cars) Facebook, for example, signed the pledge, but did not respond to TheDCNF’s question if it would support banning private jets to help meet the Paris accord. A 2016 Financial Times (FT) investigation into corporate spending on private jets found that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg “billed Facebook for a combined $1.2m of personal flights in 2013 and 2014” making him “one of the top 10 spenders in both years.” Apple CEO Tim Cook is reportedly forced to fly private jets for security reasons, and while Microsoft executives didn’t receive corporate jet perks, co-founder Bill Gates owns a massive private jet, a Bombardier BD-700. A representative of Microsoft asked TheDCNF for more information about a proposed private jet ban, but never followed up. Not every company TheDCNF contacted signed the “We Are Still In” pledge, but all have publicly backed the Paris accord. Most did not respond to TheDCNF, but two did. “The issue at hand is not the use of private planes, but the fuel supply of planes,” said Michelle Mendiola, a spokeswoman for Virgin. Mendiola gave examples of what Virgin, through its airline Virgin Atlantic, had done to invest in green jet fuel. “The real impact on climate change will be brought about by making alternative jet fuel more commercially viable and the development of more efficient commercial fleets,” said Mendiola, whose boss Richard Branson is one of the most outspoken corporate CEOs when it comes to global warming. “Munich Re has no private jet, therefore that’s not a real topic for us. And as you already mentioned, it won’t have a big impact on emissions over all,” spokesman Stefan Straub told TheDCNF. However, Straub did not respond to a follow-up question about whether or not Munich Re leased private jets. What About Al Gore And Mike Bloomberg? TheDCNF also reached out to Bloomberg through his philanthropic group, Bloomberg Philanthropies, but never got a response to a proposal banning private jets. The billionaire philanthropist is considering a run for president in 2020, and has a history of making trips to Bermuda and elsewhere aboard his fleet of jets. Bloomberg also owned a $4.5 million, six-seat Agusta SPA A109S helicopter. He kept the machine at the Morristown Municipal Airport in New Jersey with his private planes, The New York Times reported in 2012. TheDCNF also asked Tom Steyer, through his political organization NextGen Climate Action, about banning private jets. TheDCNF got no response, despite Steyer making his name opposing the Keystone XL oil pipeline. Likewise, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did not respond to TheDCNF’s question about banning private jets. The Microsoft co-founder currently leads a coalition of billionaires who are investing in clean energy technologies. Climate activist and actor Leonardo DiCaprio, who joined the “People’s Climate March” in New York City in 2016, did not reply to TheDCNF’s question. TheDCNF attempted to contact DiCaprio though his private foundation, the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation. However, “The Revenant” actor burned more than 17,000 gallons of jet fuel in 2016 during a round trip from France to New York City to accept an environmental award at the Riverkeeper Fishermen’s Ball. DiCaprio flew back one day later to France to attend an AIDS benefit gala. Representatives for Gore also did not respond to TheDCNF. Gore told CNN in 2017 he didn’t own a private jet, but in 2013 admitted to “sometimes” chartering a private jet. The former vice president has also been criticized for his enormous home energy usage, which is estimated to be 34 times the average American household.
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Dec 14, 2018 17:34:29 GMT
Mountain of Evidence Confirms: Climate Change Is Really, Really Bad for Human Health and Well-Being By Laura Geggel, Senior Writer | December 14, 2018
It's now beyond official: Greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, pose a danger to public health and welfare, according to an exhaustive review that looked at 275 scientific studies published over the past nine years.
Researchers did the report to investigate whether the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 2009 Endangerment Finding, which found that greenhouse gases pose a risk to human health, still held up. The new study showed that there is now even more evidence that greenhouse gases are harming human health and welfare. The investigation also found an additional four areas, not listed in the original report, in which greenhouse gases threaten people.
"There's absolutely no scientific basis for questioning the Endangerment Finding," review lead researcher Philip Duffy, president and executive director of the Woods Hole Research Center in Falmouth, Massachusetts, told Live Science. "The case for endangerment is stronger than ever."
What is the Endangerment Finding?
The original Endangerment Finding was a long time in the making. It began when Massachusetts and other states sued the EPA during President George W. Bush's administration, asking the agency to regulate greenhouse gases. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that not only does the EPA have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, but it also can't refuse to do so if these pollutants are found to endanger people.
"The Supreme Court said 'if you determine that greenhouse gases are dangerous, then you have to regulate them,'" Duffy said. "But, of course, the Supreme Court wasn't itself going to say whether greenhouse gases are dangerous. That's a scientific process not a legal one. So, the EPA undertook the scientific assessment of the dangerousness or not-dangerousness of greenhouse gases."
In December 2009, the EPA released that report, which found that greenhouse gases do endanger human health and welfare by causing climate change. The administration of President Barack Obama used this finding to implement new regulations, such as the Clean Power Plan and stronger vehicle mileage standards for cars and light trucks, Duffy said.
But now, people in and out of President Donald Trump's administration have discussed overturning or revisiting the endangerment finding, Duffy said. In response to these statements, Duffy and his colleagues decided to look at scientific studies published since the endangerment finding came out, to see whether the science strengthened or weakened the case for endangerment.
What the science shows
The new review grouped the findings into different categories: public health, air quality, agriculture, forests, water resources, sea level rise, infrastructure and wildlife. The four new categories include ocean acidification, national security, economic well-being and violence. Here are more in-depth looks at several of them.
Overview of public health
People in more than 200 U.S. cities have an increased risk of premature death because of future warming, the researchers found. Extreme heat is linked with sleep loss, kidney stones, low birth weight, violence and suicide. Exposure to ozone and other air pollutants, including smoke from forest fires, can be bad for human health. Extreme weather events intensified by climate change can lead to physical trauma, disease outbreaks, interruption of health care delivery and mental health problems. Rising temperatures and carbon dioxide levels are also increasing the length of pollen season, which affects people with allergies. Certain crops are expected to produce fewer nutrients. Population displacement and armed conflict can also amplify risks to human health.
Water resources
With less snowpack in the mountains, the West and Southwest may experience more droughts. Reduced snowpack can lead to reduced river flow, which can threaten rare and endangered species, such as salmon and wolverines. Climate change is also expected to erode water quality in the United States because of nutrient loading (such as from fertilizer or animal waste), especially in the Midwest and Northeast.
Sea level rise
High sea levels will increase the risk to coastal communities, economies and infrastructure, largely because of flooding, erosion and extreme events. These effects can lead to displacement through "climate gentrification," in which people living at higher elevations have higher-priced properties. The movement of goods among major port cities will likely be affected, too, causing economic disruptions. Sea level rise may also disrupt the U.S. military, as well as disaster and humanitarian relief efforts.
National security
The United States' existing security will likely need to change as the planet warms. For example, in the Arctic, reduced sea ice will clear the way for more Chinese trade routes and Russian oil and gas extraction, possibly causing tensions between these countries and the U.S., the researchers wrote.
Economic well-being
An increase of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) over 75 years is expected to permanently reduce U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) by about 3 percent. The U.S. GDP is expected to be about 4 percent greater if warming is limited to 2.7 degrees F (1.5 degrees C) than if it's 3.6 degrees F (2 degrees C) above pre-industrial levels. Economies in poorer countries are expected to have an economic burden from climate change that is about five times larger than that of wealthier counties, the researchers found.
Violence and instability
Rising temperatures and increased rainfall can amplify violence and instability. In the U.S., higher temperatures are associated with higher rates of domestic violence, rape, assault and murder. Warmer periods may also elevate the risk of self-harm, including suicide, emerging evidence suggests.
Takeaway message
These findings "highlight this contrast between the science and the policies," Duffy said. "The scientific evidence is going in one direction, and the policies are going in exactly the opposite direction."
But this report shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, said Jason Smerdon, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University in New York, who wasn't involved with the review.
"If you've been paying attention, the Endangerment Finding in 2009 was very well-reasoned, and it's only gotten stronger since that time," Smerdon told Live Science. "It's basically a tsunami of evidence in support of the fact. People have very clearly connected the changing climate, which we're causing, to the downstream impacts."
The review also drives home that climate change will affect everybody, not just people in distant lands.
"Reports like this all point out that every one of us will be impacted by climate change in different ways, and it's going to be in all of our backyards," Smerdon said. "It's not something that's going to be far away."
The review was published online yesterday (Dec. 13) in the journal Science.
www.livescience.com/64300-climate-change-endangers-human-health.html
|
|
|
Post by nyx on Dec 15, 2018 2:25:10 GMT
The earth does what it wants.
When a volcano goes off, a lot junk gets into the air.
There 1,500 active earth volcanos, and 500 under the sea.
The earth has gone through hot and cold cycles, and man has nothing to do with climate change.
|
|
|
Post by swamprat on Dec 17, 2018 20:34:26 GMT
Dave Reay disagrees with the skeptics.....How I stave off despair as a climate scientist So much warming, so many dire effects, so little action — Dave Reay reveals how dreams of soggy soil and seaweed keep him going.
By Dave Reay
17 December, 2018
There’s a curve that is quietly plotting our performance as a species. This curve is not a commodity price or a technology index. It has no agenda or steering committee. It is the Keeling curve. It is painfully consistent in its trajectory and brutally honest in its graphical indictment of our society as one that stands ready to stand by as islands submerge, cities burn and coasts flood.
Established by Charles David Keeling in 1958, the curve records how much carbon dioxide is in our atmosphere — fewer than 330 parts per million then, more than 400 today. Each month for the past decade, my geeky addiction has been to scan the latest data. To search for some hint that ‘Stabilization Day’ will come: when global emissions and global uptake are once more in balance. As yet another ‘last-chance’ United Nations climate-change meeting draws to a close, emissions are still rising.
In climate science, you can check out of the lab anytime you like, but you can never leave. The overheating Earth that our super-computers model is the one we all share and which our children will inherit. Dynamic, high-resolution representations of warming trends and weather patterns that delight me as a researcher chill my spine as a human being: I stare at the lines curving up and see the people who endure them.
There are days when refining another obscure step on the road towards climate catastrophe gets you down. Some colleagues reach for gallows humour to keep them going — the quip “we’re going to need a bigger boat” is common in the face of the latest damning assessment of global inaction. Others seek solace in uncertainty, grasping at the coolest strands of future projections: the green pathways of a rapid and sustained global response. Many of us — my younger self included, as I expounded in my book Climate Change Begins at Home — try to wrestle back an iota of control by cutting our personal carbon footprints and spending our salaries on solar panels, super-insulated homes and electric cars. A few of us have foregone air travel and openly questioned how those who work on climate change can justify a high-emissions lifestyle.
Every tonne of carbon emissions avoided does matter, but unless individual actions are replicated globally, we are pissing in a hurricane. By the middle of this century, the world must reach net zero emissions. So, what more is an academic to do? Write more Nature papers? Blockade the university car park? Knit our elbow patches from hemp?
For me, the most powerful response is to teach. By educating new waves of practitioners, policymakers and researchers, I can vicariously boost mitigation and adaptation capacity at scales and across time horizons I could never reach alone. On restless nights, when futures of famine and storm-surge devastation play out behind my eyelids, that’s what helps me sleep.
That, and a personal plot to pull a lifetime’s worth of carbon out of the atmosphere.
The dream with which I’ve bored my family to distraction for the past 20 years is going truly ‘net zero’: paring down emissions to the bare minimum, and then managing a chunk of land to try to sequester the remainder.
Last month, that dream came true. Years of saving, a large dollop of luck and an even larger loan made me and my wife the nervous owners of 28 hectares of rough grassland and wild rocky shores in the west of Scotland. The coming years will see us map every baseline carbon stock and flux, from the soil and vegetation, to the bemused sheep and ‘blue carbon’ of the seaweed beds. Each gnarled tree trunk will be hugged with a tape measure, every soggy field corner will be probed, sampled and analysed. We’ll then plant trees. Lots of them — native tree species that will boost biodiversity, draw down carbon dioxide and withstand the inevitably turbulent decades and centuries to come.
As a research project, it is a chance to verify the science, and test the concepts of climate-smart land use in the teeth of Atlantic storms and hungry deer. As our future home, it is the chance to finish life as we started it: with an atmospheric blank slate.
Of course, this dream of sustainability is not itself sustainable. My family and I are fortunate to be well-off people in a rich country. To replicate this for every person in the world would require many, many times the area of land that is actually available. We are embarking on a privileged journey that billions could never hope to take, and that, even at its emissions-trapping best, will hardly register in Scotland’s national carbon account. Hopefully, my students can magnify its impact — learn from our trials and errors and help to take such carbon-management expertise global.
We’ve long known that reaching ‘net zero’ globally will require our emissions to plummet, but that some emissions are unavoidable. Worldwide, this will necessitate large increases in tree planting, soil enhancement and other such carbon-capture strategies.
The Keeling curve might remain a monthly glimpse into the abyss, but alongside it will now be a personal emissions curve that holds a real possibility of hitting the x-axis. Field trips for my climate-change classes are about to get a whole lot more hands-on. As a carbon geek, I’ve never been so excited to take my work home with me
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07765-4
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Dec 17, 2018 20:42:11 GMT
Nyx,
...and man has nothing to do with climate change...
Really ?
Can I ask you a personal question ?
What kind of vehicle do you own, if any ?
If you would rather not say, it's alright.
HAL
|
|
|
Post by nyx on Dec 18, 2018 3:08:00 GMT
Well Hall,
I own a 2010 Honda, why?
All science reports are written with bias.
Besides UFOs are messing with the Sun, first noted by Russia.
Just make the Sun change very little one way or the other, and the earth will become a dead planet.
|
|
|
Post by gus on Dec 18, 2018 5:19:33 GMT
Ok I have been avoiding this discussion as I live in Australia and will possibly be hardest hit by Climate Change.
Climate Change is real here. We break a record every year here, the Polynesian Islands are visibly sinking. My own drinking water has been effected by the biggest king tides ever. My Grandparents have see the change in weather in their life times. We have the fastest desertification in the world.
In short I think we can turn it around but I’m utterly convinced we a looking into the new normal of catastrophic climate change. To keep on topic I suspect that if we reach catastrophic climate change we become vulnerable to an all out Alien Invasion, where by the only thing to do is an unconditional unilateral ceasefire.
We forfeit the right to run this planet if catastrophic climate change happens.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2018 9:16:04 GMT
Rest assured..While some point to vehicles..others to volcanos..the race to see how like the famous Eds Hole Mother Nature can take continues www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2178214/china-and-russia-band-together-controversial-heating-experimentsChina and Russia have modified an important layer of the atmosphere above Europe to test a controversial technology for possible military application, according to Chinese scientists involved in the project.SCMP Today: HK Edition Get updates direct to your inbox E-mail * By registering you agree to our T&Cs & Privacy Policy A total of five experiments were carried out in June. One, on June 7, caused physical disturbance over an area as large as 126,000 sq km (49,000 square miles), or about half the size of Britain. The modified zone, looming more than 500km (310 miles) high over Vasilsursk, a small Russian town in eastern Europe, experienced an electric spike with 10 times more negatively charged subatomic particles than surrounding regions. Operation Z machine: China’s next weapon in the nuclear ‘arms race’ In another experiment on June 12, the temperature of thin, ionised gas in high altitude increased more than 100 degrees Celsius (212 degrees Fahrenheit) because of the particle flux. The particles, or electrons, were pumped into the sky by Sura, an atmospheric heating facility in Vasilsursk built by the former Soviet Union’s military during the cold war. [High-power antennas at the Sura atmospheric heating facility in Vasilsursk, Russia, which was built by the former Soviet Union’s military during the cold war. Photo: Handout] The Sura base fired up an array of high-power antennas and injected a large amount of microwaves into the high atmosphere. The peak power of the high frequency radio waves could reach 260 megawatts, enough to light a small city.
Zhangheng-1, a Chinese electromagnetic surveillance satellite, collected the data from orbit with cutting-edge sensors. The pumping and fly-by required precise coordination to achieve effective measurement. When Zhangheng approached the target zone, for instance, the sensors would switch to burst mode to analyse samples every half-second, much faster than usual, to increase data resolution. Storm clouds continue to brew over Sky River rain-making project The results were “satisfactory”, the research team reported in a paper published in the latest issue of the Chinese journal Earth and Planetary Physics. “ The detection of plasma disturbances … provides evidence for likely success of future related experiments,” the researchers said.Professor Guo Lixin, dean of the school of physics and optoelectronic engineering at Xidian University in Xian and a leading scientist on ionosphere manipulation technology in China, said that the joint experimentation was extremely unusual. “Such international cooperation is very rare for China,” said Guo, who was not involved in the experiment. “The technology involved is too sensitive.” [The Zhangheng-1 electromagnetic surveillance satellite is launched. Photo: Handout] The sun and cosmic rays produce a large amount of free-flying, positively charged atoms known as ions at altitudes from 75km to 1,000km in the Earth’s upper atmosphere. The layer, or ionosphere, reflects radio waves like a mirror. The ionosphere allows radio signals to bounce long distances for communication. The militaries have been in a race to control the ionosphere for decades. The Sura base in Vasilsursk is believed to be the world’s first large-scale facility built for the purpose. Up and running in 1981, it enabled Soviet scientists to manipulate the sky as an instrument for military operations, such as submarine communication. High-energy microwaves can pluck the electromagnetic field in ionosphere like fingers playing a harp. This can produce very low-frequency radio signals that can penetrate the ground or water – sometimes to depths of more than 100 metres (328 feet) in the ocean, which made it a possible communication method for submarines.
Changing the ionosphere over enemy territory can also disrupt or cut off their communication with satellites. We are not playing God. We are not the only country teaming up with the Russians Chinese researcher involved in the experiment The US military learned from the Russian experiment and built a much larger facility to conduct similar tests. The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, or HAARP, was established in Gakona, Alaska, in the 1990s with funding from the US military and the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency. The HAARP facility could generate a maximum 1 gigawatt of power, nearly four times that of Sura. China is now building an even larger and more advanced facility in Sanya, Hainan, with capability to manipulate the ionosphere over the entire South China Sea, according to an earlier report by the South China Morning Post.There have been concerns that such facilities could be used to modify weather and even create natural disasters, including hurricanes, cyclones and earthquakes. The ultra-low frequency waves generated by these powerful facilities could even affect the operation of human brains, some critics have said. Beijing and Taipei team up in space to track earthquakes But Dr Wang Yalu, an associate researcher with the China Earthquake Administration who took part in the study in June, dismissed such theories. “We are just doing pure scientific research. If there is anything else involved, I am not informed about this,” she said in an interview. The earthquake administration was involved because the Zhangheng-1, launched in February, was the first Chinese satellite capable of picking up precursory signals linked to earthquakes. It is operated by the Chinese military and has served both civilian and defence uses. In the China-Russian experiment, researchers found that even with a small power output of 30MW, the radio beam could create a large abnormal zone. But they also found that the effects dropped sharply after sunrise, as the man-made perturbation easily became lost in the noise created by sunlight. “We are not playing God. We are not the only country teaming up with the Russians. Other countries have done similar things,” said another researcher who was involved in the project and asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue. Chang’e 4 launches China’s bid to be first on dark side of the moon The Sura facility has also conducted joint research with France and the United States, according to papers published in academic journals. The National Centre for Space Studies, a French government agency under the supervision of the ministries of defence and research, has deployed the micro satellite Demeter to monitor Sura’s radio emissions. The Defence Meteorological Satellite Programme run by the US Department of Defence also contributed fly-by data in several heating experiments conducted at the Russian site before 2012. The countries were willing to collaborate in part because many scientific and technical problems remain to be solved, the Chinese researcher said. Such international cooperation is very rare for China. The technology involved is too sensitive Professor Guo Lixin For example, though there is general consensus that human disturbances can cause the irregularities, how they happened and why remains a subject of debate, with different research teams providing varied explanations. Professor Gong Shuhong, a military communication technology researcher at Xidian University, formerly the Radio School of the Central Military Committee, said he had been closely following the Russia-China heating experiment. “The energy emitted was too low to trigger a global environmental event,” he said. “Human influence is still very small compared to the power of Mother Nature. But the impact to a small region is possible.” In theory, a butterfly flapping its wings might be amplified in a sophisticated weather system and cause a storm in a distant location several weeks later. “Such studies must strictly follow ethical guidelines,” Gong said. “Whatever they do, it must not cause harm to the people living on this planet.”
|
|