Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Snowleopard

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32
1
Energy / Re: Snowleapard said
« on: April 06, 2017, 08:45:43 PM »
Quote
TRUE, But the total anomoly over the entire period shown does not exceed 0.8C and it IS declining

The ANOMALY is not the temperature reading. In order for the sequential, year after year temperature to be flattened (not rising from year to year) the ANOMALY MUST BE ZERO, not 0.8 C as is the REALITY.

Quote
... 0.8C and it IS declining

The ANOMALY (departure in degrees C from the median temperature) MUST BECOME NEGATIVE in order to justify the claim that the TEMPERATURE has stopped increasing and instead is decreasing as a justification for the hypothesis that global cooling is taking place.

Here is what you are attempting to do. You say, correctly, that correlation is not causation. GOOD! That's why scientists use a lot more inputs than just CO2 in their models. You neglect this truth and fixate on any trend in a number of years to say, AHA!, looky here, the CO2 is going up and the temperature is going down! At this point you flip the "correlation is not causation" logic on its head and say LACK of CORRELATION proves CO2 doesn't have beans to do with global temperatures!

Ya CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, Snowleapard. Which is it going to be? The correct scientifically objective answer is to look at other GHG correlation, the granularity of the graph and the time scale. Mathematical models are used to design engines, aircraft, consumer goods, cars, houses, time and motion studies, integrated circuits, computers and many other technologically demanding and high number crunching applications.

Yet you want to disparage the accuracy of incredibly complex mathematical climate models (spreading DOUBT about NOT KNOWING in order to justify DOING NOTHING is DISPARAGING the science, whether you will ever admit it or not) based on the belief that some negative feedback mechanisms were left out.

Well, I've got news for you, Guy McPherson, a scientist in his own right, has listed FIVE POSITIVE FEEDBACK MECHANISMS that ARE NOT in the models. That means the IPCC global temperature increases projected in the models are STILL TOO CONSERVATIVE.

Quote
The Arctic is defrosting as warm Atlantic waters rush through the Fram Strait instead of skirting the southern coast of Greenland. This is an important event, regardless of the deafening silence exhibited by the mainstream media.

How important? First consider the background, from the perspective of long-time climate scientist James Hansen and colleague Makiko Sato, who report the disaster awaiting us at just a couple of degrees warmer is truly catastrophic (although they downplay the likelihood we’re already committed to this outcome.)

Suffocating lifestyle

At the same time Arctic ice is melting, the planet is losing its lungs.
Catastrophic drought in the Amazon has it emitting carbon dioxide more rapidly than the United States.

Simultaneously, permafrost is thawing and methane stored in eastern Siberia is venting into the atmosphere at an alarming rate.

Methane, by the way, is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Against this background, it’s easy to foresee a rapidly and profoundly warming Arctic as a trigger for accelerated responses such as the release of more methane hydrates and fewer reflective white surfaces, such as ice sheets and areas covered with snow.

These extremely dangerous feedbacks, which forecasters did not expect until the planet becomes a couple of degrees warmer than the baseline, could trigger runaway greenhouse. In other words, any of these events — never mind all of them at once — could lead directly and quickly to the extinction of you, me and everyone in between.

Is that important enough for you? Or do you still want to debate it with the likes of these guys?

- See more at: http://transitionvoice.com/2011/03/extinction-event/#sthash.CNHssq6f.dpuf

Quote
We know Earth’s temperature is nearly one degree Centigrade higher than it was at the beginning of the industrial revolution. And 1 C is catastrophic, as indicated by a decades-old cover-up. Already, we’ve triggered several positive feedbacks, none of which were expected to occur by mainstream scientists until we reached 2 C above baseline global average temperature.

We also know that the situation is far worse than indicated by recent data and models (which are reviewed in the following paragraphs). We’ve known for more than a decade what happens when the planes stop flying: Because particulates were removed when airplanes were grounded, Earth warmed by more than 1 C in the three days following 11 September 2001.

In other words, Earth’s temperature is already about 2 C higher than the industrial-revolution baseline. And because of positive feedbacks, 2 C leads directly and rapidly to 6 C, acidification-induced death of the world’s oceans, and the near-term demise of Homo sapiens.

We can’t live without life-filled oceans, home to the tiny organisms that generate half the planet’s oxygen while comprising the base of the global food chain (contrary to the common belief that Wal-Mart forms the base of the food chain). So much for the wisdom of the self-proclaimed wise ape.

With completion of the on-going demise of the industrial economy, we’re there:

We’ve crossed the horrifically dire 2 C rubicon, as will be obvious when most of the world’s planes are grounded. Without completion of the on-going demise of the industrial economy, we’re there: We’ve crossed the horrifically dire 2 C rubicon, as described below. Joseph Heller, anybody?

I’ve detailed the increasingly dire assessments. And I’ve explained how we’ve pulled the trigger on five positive-feedback events at lower global average temperature than expected, while also pointing out that any one of these five phenomena likely leads to near-term human extinction. None of these positive-feedback events were expected by scientists until we exceed 2 C warming above the pre-industrial baseline.

http://www.collapsenet.com/free-resources/collapsenet-public-access/item/8363-guy-mcpherson-were-done








The above charts tell the story that you simply do not want to deal with. They are EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS, not mathematical model predictions, even though ALL those readings and many more have been incorporated in the multiple  terabyte size data bases of the climate models (that continue to grow in complexity and prediction accuracy because of this).

Fine. Do your thing.

Quote
The ANOMALY is not the temperature reading.

I didn't say it was.  It is the amount of departure from the 100 year average.

Quote
In order for the sequential, year after year temperature to be flattened (not rising from year to year) the ANOMALY MUST BE ZERO, not 0.8 C as is the REALITY

NOT TRUE: It can flatten anywhere.  And if it stays there long enough the anomaly will eventually be zero by definition.

Quote
The ANOMALY (departure in degrees C from the median temperature) MUST BECOME NEGATIVE in order to justify the claim that the TEMPERATURE has stopped increasing and instead is decreasing as a justification for the hypothesis that global cooling is taking place.

NOT TRUE:  If it can't decrease before going negative, then (other than massive decline) it would be unlikely to get from it's current moving average of  0.6C to ZERO, if it can't decline before it gets there!

Quote
Here is what you are attempting to do. You say, correctly, that correlation is not causation. GOOD! That's why scientists use a lot more inputs than just CO2 in their models. You neglect this truth and fixate on any trend in a number of years to say, AHA!, looky here, the CO2 is going up and the temperature is going down! At this point you flip the "correlation is not causation" logic on its head and say LACK of CORRELATION proves CO2 doesn't have beans to do with global temperatures!

Ya CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, Snowleapard. Which is it going to be? The correct scientifically objective answer is to look at other GHG correlation, the granularity of the graph and the time scale. Mathematical models are used to design engines, aircraft, consumer goods, cars, houses, time and motion studies, integrated circuits, computers and many other technologically demanding and high number crunching applications.


I can't have it both ways...but you can...HUH??  YES i know it is complicated, that's not the point.  I've been focused on two things here.  ONE that warming has stalled, (which BTW is generally accepted) and TWO that CO2 is unlikely to be a major cause of the mild warming before that. (which is not yet generally accepted, but true).



Quote
Both MKing and Snowleapard have it exactly backwards by claiming the models exaggerate the risk and the predicted temperature rise. But they have that CIGAR they want to smoke and think I am a killjoy for wanting to take away their fun, regardless of their protestations to the contrary or claims of boundless, 'let the chips fall where they may', slavish devotion to truth, objective scientific data, Apple pie and Wildebeest hunting. 


 
 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/kfdpcrOgUp4?feature=player_detailpage" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/kfdpcrOgUp4?feature=player_detailpage</a>

2
Japan's Asosan volcano erupted about 00:43 UTC on Monday, September 14, 2015, sending a plume of thick black smoke and ash about 2.1 km (1.2 miles) into the air and disrupting flights.

According to the Japan Meteorological Agency, Asosan erupted without warning in one of Nakadake craters. The agency has raised the volcanic alert level from 2 to 3 - do not approach the volcano.

According to media reports, there were about 100 tourists and other visitors in the vicinity of the volcano at the time of eruption, but they were all quickly evacuated. There are no reports of injuries.

JMA's senior coordinator for volcanic affairs, Sadayuki Kitagawa, warned that a second eruption was possible "with possibility of volcanic rocks landing in an area over a 1 km radius (0.62 miles)." Kitagawa urged people to be vigilant for flying rocks and ash within a 2 km radius.

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2015/09/14/mount-aso-asosan-on-japan-s-kyushu-island-erupted-early-monday-september-14/

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/09/14/national/mount-aso-erupts-belching-black-plume/#.VfcM1Je6Ot9

Comment: Aso is also a large caldera system capable of "supervolcano" eruption.  Though further eruption is likely there is NO current indication this eruption will become massive or "interesting" beyond the immediate area.

Further historic and geologic info on the Aso caldera is here:

http://www.volcanocafe.org/a-wedge-of-worry-aso-caldera-ndvp-4/


3
[The Japanese authorities have raised the alert level for Sakurajima volcano to level 4, issuing evacuation advisories.

TOKYO (Sputnik) – The Japanese authorities have raised the alert level for Sakurajima volcano, located on a former island connected to the main island of Kyushu by lava flows, to level 4, issuing evacuation advisories for local residents.

According to the Japan Meteorological Agency, the alert level was increased from 3 to 4 on Saturday after multiple earthquakes were detected in the area.

The Sakurajima volcano is located about 50 kilometres (31 miles) from the Sendai nuclear power plant, which was the first nuclear facility to restart one of its reactors earlier this month, after new safety rules were introduced in Japan following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.

Evacuation advisories issued on Saturday cover an area within a 3-kilometer (about 1.8-mile) radius of the Sakurajima crater.

On Friday, the Japan Meteorological Agency reported a 5.0-magnitude earthquake in the Fukushima prefecture.

In 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was hit by a giant tsunami, triggered by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake. Thousands of people were killed in the disaster, which was the largest nuclear catastrophe in the world since the 1986 Chernobyl accident.

 http://sputniknews.com/asia/20150815/1025774698.html#ixzz3ivOQ0Pig

4


After an increase in seismicity since mid-April 2015, Ecuadorian volcano Cotopaxi erupted on August 14, 2015, for the first time since 1940.

There were at least three eruptions registered on August 14, the first at 09:30, second at 15:15 UTC and third at 19:10 UTC, according to Washington VAAC. Volcanic ash reached an estimated altitude of 15.2 km (50 000 feet) by the end of the UTC day. Highways, homes and cars near the volcano were coated in ash.

Cotopaxi is an active stratovolcano in the Andes Mountains, located about 50 km (31 miles) south of capital Quito, Ecuador. It is one of the world's highest volcanoes, reaching a height of 5 897 m (19 347 feet), and is considered one of the world's most dangerous volcanoes due to a glacial cover that makes it prone to fast-moving volcanic rock and mud flows, or lahars, and its proximity to a heavily populated area.


http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2015/08/15/cotopaxi-volcano-erupts-for-the-first-time-since-1940-ecuador/

5
Economics / Re: Do Central Bankers Recognize there is NO GROWTH?
« on: June 08, 2015, 05:41:38 PM »

   
Quote
Our politicians at the national level, have to be OK'd by the corporations now, to have a chance to "win".

Have you kept track of the interlocking boards of directors controlled by the big banks?  This is the development that makes a Corp/Gov  ruling council possible.

No crystal ball here GO.  Lots of ways it can work out. 

Understood Snowleopard and agreed,

My point was we have it now, and they need each other to work. I thought you were referring to the corporations changing the laws, taxes, subsidies, declaring wars etc. with a council comprised of only them, and not the puppets they grease with cash to implement their wishes.

I cannot envision the American people taking orders from a council of corporations, but obliging a puppet they think they elected is what we now enjoy in our representative democracy. Any politician trying to break the stranglehold is immediately castigated by their controlled MSM mouthpieces as a looney or demented radical as well. It's a sad and seemingly hopeless situation. Something very depressing about voting for someone who cannot win.  :-\ :-\

Yes we have most of it now.  The CIA controls the media for TPTB and determines who is perceived as electable. The vote counters ensure that perception becomes reality.  They'd rather not have any more JFKs

To speculate further:

The change(s) amount(s) to reducing overhead while squeezing more from the serfs.

I doubt the coming financial crisis will be enough.  The puppets likely stay until a further major crisis can be used to eliminate them, or make them mostly ceremonial;  perhaps after a manufactured WWIII threat, as part of a world peace treaty??  Maybe subjugated to Corps as enforcers of a world climate treaty to control individual, company and government energy use, except for the enforcing major international corps?? 

Currently TPP seeks to give the major corps some immunity from the puppet show.  Likely more steps will follow.

 Yes USA citizens, notwithstanding decadence, dumbing down, and numb acceptance of police tactics after the Boston bombing approaching defacto marshall law, will probably resist to some extent.  Likely some shock and awe show is planned for that to ramp up acceptance of authority another notch or three. 

6
Economics / Re: Do Central Bankers Recognize there is NO GROWTH?
« on: June 08, 2015, 12:59:36 PM »
My latest two cent speculation on where this might go.

USA is China's biggest customer, until that changes don't look for a financial or military confrontation. 

If USA financials byte the dust they take EU with them.  EU is Russia's largest customer and China's second largest.  The Bear-Dragon alliance is not about to shoot itself in the head, but it IS preparing to survive the inevitable.

About 2020 they (Bear-Dragon) may have a fully developed alternate financial system.  If they can indeed get Germany to join up then most of EU will follow.  Russia will be cranking out its new (better than Abrams) tanks by then.  If India joins, such an alliance could be unbeatable in a decade or so.  Nonetheless I don't see an empire emerging out of this any time soon. that requires a unified command structure. 

Alternatively. (And IMHO more likely)  the major multinational corporations gain control of the major governments enough to set up a world system that benefits corporations and lets governments atrophy.  IF that happens we could see a move to up China's influence for awhile, because the "China-way" has the lowest per worker cost.  Once the "China-way" is established, governments are allowed to  devolve into sectors ruled by a corporate world council with some high sounding name.

I like most of what you say Snowleopard, but differ on the total corporate control council

The politicians that rule or dictators are corrupt enough to be bought, bribed, whores for the various corporate pigs but will never in my opinion surrender control of the military button, or perks they enjoy by being in charge.

Corporations also have much different vested intersts depending of their busines while those in power are united in their lust for power and control and their ability to extract bribes for favors from the big pigs. Look no further than the Clintons as but one example of what I mean. Then of course there is Cheney, Bush and the Halliburton crew.

Taking bags of money and favors from the piggies is much too splendid a business for our leaders to ever give up. The corporation's enjoy the setup as well.

Our politicians at the national level, have to be OK'd by the corporations now, to have a chance to "win".

Have you kept track of the interlocking boards of directors controlled by the big banks?  This is the development that makes a Corp/Gov  ruling council possible.

No crystal ball here GO.  Lots of ways it can work out. 

I think RE's suggested outcome is plausible too, but not the timing.  The end of all major governments,  to include my corporate council possibility as a possible world government (if it goes that way) looks to me to be about a century away, short of a worldwide physical  (EMP, nuclear or biological war, mega volcano eruption, nearby supernova etc.) disaster.  Other than disaster conditions preventing it, at least one attempt to put Humptey Dumptey back together should last for awhile.

7
Surly Newz / Re: The Surlynewz Channel
« on: June 08, 2015, 11:08:22 AM »

So other than badmouthing the source, (which, though irrelevant to me, might be deserved FAIK)) did you  find a problem with the article itself??

And yes, I'm fully aware that the majority of "establishment" science has been bought by government funds to publish what is politically correct.  Since they have billion$, and the skeptics/deniers have pittance, the PC scientists will win any contest decided by appeal to authority or volume of papers published.

I find it beneficial to my health to not drink from a poisoned trough.

What I find interesting is that you are quick to accuse the great majority of climate scientists as participating in a conspiracy to defraud the public, but blind to the financial motives of the handful of deniers and their fossil-fuel-financed agenda.

Glaciers around the world have been retreating for decades, with evidence that has been abundantly generated, not to mention the melting of the Arctic and Antarctic regions, and this is all supposed to be a "librul plot" of some kind? Left to the choice of believing my own lying eyes or the Likes of Fucker Tiresome, Steve Doocy, Craig Idso, Anthony Watts, Fred Singer and the rest of the Heartland-Institute-funded crowd... I'm supposed to believe it's all a plot?

Filing this in the David Icke file with the Greys and their underseas bases.

Quote
I find it beneficial to my health to not drink from a poisoned trough.

What is poison and what is not is then decided by who runs the trough, rather than testing. 

IMHO there is no clean source, and any trough popular enough to attract a crowd will soon have its poisons.  One is left with picking a favorite poison or filtering everything.  Most pick a favorite poison.  Filtering (questioning) everything is only for those who can live without a support group, team or side.

Quote
What I find interesting is that you are quick to accuse the great majority of climate scientists as participating in a conspiracy to defraud the public, but blind to the financial motives of the handful of deniers

It was not quick, it took me over ten years and many interim positions to go from "The world is warming, but I'm not sure man-made CO2 is a major factor".  to "The world is actually cooling, on all time scales that matter, and man-made climate change is a TPTB/bankster hoax".

 In 2007, expecting warming,  I built a lightly insulated log cabin in New Hampshire, above mean elevation on land that slopes north and west.  It has gotten progressively cooler here since then, and I now expect that to continue for my expected life span and beyond.


IN CONSIDERING THE MOTIVES OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, LET'S FIRST CONSIDER THE MOTIVES OF SOME FOLKS YOU MAY ACTUALLY KNOW:


Is your dentist trying to poison you when he fills a cavity with mercury-silver amalgam? 

Is the water treatment specialist adding chlorine and/or fluoride to the local water supply intentionally poisoning the local population? 

Is your doctor intentionally poisoning your child when he administers a vaccine containing mercury and formaldehyde (and or other toxins) into your child's bloodstream?

Is your local grocer trying to poison you when he sells foods containing GMO ingredients and laced with residue of toxic pesticides and herbicides?

IN LIKE MANNER CLIMATE SCIENTISTS ARE DOING A JOB AS TAUGHT TO THEM.  Likely they see no reason to question it either.   The funding is there for studies supporting the paradigm, and it is almost absent for studies going against the paradigm.  Furthermore doing a study for "the other side" means you become a heretic who will not get any more paradigm funding.  If you did not believe in man made warming, it is unlikely you would have entered this field in the first place, and you might not even be aware it IS a belief. Thus looking for results in line with your beliefs (and your paycheck) does not seem strange.

The so-called climate gate scandal showed a certain amount of fudging is going on under pressure to achieve desired results.  But those folks still believe they are doing the right thing.  In a few cases this could be considered fraud, but just because a few scientists caved to pressure says nothing about reality.  The vast majority are not intentionally fudging, just looking where they are most likely to find results that confirm their beliefs and drawing faulty conclusions from those results.

Yes some folks on either side might be mostly motivated by politics or a paycheck.  I think those folks are a minority, and it is easier to evaluate actual statements than to assume evil motivations.  Besides, I often learn things from those I disagree with, refusing to listen to them would deprive me of that knowledge.

Quote
Glaciers around the world have been retreating for decades, with evidence that has been abundantly generated, not to mention the melting of the Arctic and Antarctic regions, and this is all supposed to be a "librul plot" of some kind? Left to the choice of believing my own lying eyes or the Likes of Fucker Tiresome, Steve Doocy, Craig Idso, Anthony Watts, Fred Singer and the rest of the Heartland-Institute-funded crowd... I'm supposed to believe it's all a plot?


The above invites a series of full length posts.

1. Glaciers: Retreat, Recovery and Prognosis,   from the Little Ice Age into the near future

2. Greenland: A history of the ice mass and projections.

3. The Arctic Ocean:  History and Legends of the Northwest Passage

4.  Antarctica: the Non-Meltdown

5. Oil Money and Climate funding:  How Big Oil Overwhelmingly Supports Green Causes and "Climate Science" over Skeptics and Deniers

6. Above Politics:  The Climate Change Hoax at the Bankster Level.


I might find time to write these posts, or not.

 I will say it is not a "librul" plot, they are just the foot soldiers.  Those who own the generals hatched the plot circa 1974 at the Club of Rome.

My overall outlook might be best pictured by these quotes:

“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director (from first staff meeting, 1981)

“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”
– William Colby, former CIA director


Quote
Filing this in the David Icke file with the Greys and their underseas bases.

No one would ever look down that rabbit hole!

Icke reminds me of the traditional fool or Court Jester, who could say whatever, because he was assumed insane by most.

Sifting and investigating the Icke stuff publicly might be a good hobby for a bored billionaire with a death wish.  I have neither the billion$ nor the wish.

I'll offer one hint. 

This source (I picked a leftie one) suggests Defense Dept funds on the order of 8.5 trillion$ cannot be accounted for over the last twenty years.

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/06/report-reveals-85-trillion-missing

My research indicates the actual figure may run four times that amount. 

I doubt it was all actually stolen.  Surely there could be at least one secret program afoot.  Maybe more?


8
Surly Newz / Re: The Surlynewz Channel
« on: June 07, 2015, 09:07:44 PM »
Quote from: Snowleopard
Arctic sea ice comes and goes, and there are many indications that the arctic was open enough to navigate at times during the last glaciation.  I suspect that arctic ice is currently building back from a long decline, but all it takes is the right sea currents and winds to reverse that. 

On the other hand the Idea that the Antarctic is melting down is just ludicrous.

You keep suspecting. Me and others, we're just slaves to evidence.


https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/06/07/arctic-sea-ice-continues-to-track-2006-5/

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/06/07/june-temperatures-in-greenland-have-plummeted-to-record-low-levels/

9
Surly Newz / Re: The Surlynewz Channel
« on: June 07, 2015, 08:23:55 PM »
Quote
As the paragraph stated and has already been explained to u,  ice melting underneath that which is submerged and thinning enough to break off. The last few years of surface ice driven by wind is not the issue. The ocean is warming and tropical fish are swimming near tasmania and NZ, not so far from antarctica. The warmer water melts the ice from underneath.

I will agree a bit of that is happening on the West Antarctic peninsula, but on average the antarctic sea ice is much thicker than it was a century ago.  In fact ice thickness is problem enough that some scientific stations might have to be abandoned due to the difficulty in supplying them.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/11/antarctica-has-so-much-sea-ice-scientists-have-trouble-getting-there/

Splendid, SL. The Daily Caller, a ideological supermarket flyer, as a source of climate change wisdom? What's next? Newsmax? CO2Science? Stormfront? Never forget that TDC was founded by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian conservative political pundit, whose career was seen going up in flames some years ago, and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney in 2010. They'll never have trouble finding right wing sugar-tits to suck from, but never forget for a minute who they serve. Or expect us to, either.

Fucker Tiresome, pilot of a bathysphere in search of wherever it was that his career sank,  used to be a TV pundit until the whistling from wind whistling through his ears was audible even in the executive offices of MSNBC and CNN.

Now for some other views:

Big Shelves Of Antarctic Ice Melting Faster Than Scientists Thought

Some Quick Facts on Ice Sheets from the liberal conspirators at the NSIDC.

Oh, yeah, and to the point of the original: it's winter in the southern hemisphere.
Antarctic Ice Melt
Quote
The sea ice-extent is increasing as expected based on observations and model studies. Context is important here. While it is warming in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), there are other things changing that influence Antarctic Sea Ice Extent. While it is warming in and around Antarctica, It remains cold during winter which allows ice extent to grown each winter. The growth of Antarctic Sea Ice is likely due to changes in ocean and wind circulation combined with changes in moisture levels and related factors that are related to the ice extent increase.

I've no interest in defending any news source overall, and there are very few that do not deserve a brick today!

I'll quote Pravda or Press TV if they have the better writeup. 

Of the free sources I had for that conference on how to deal with resupply of antarctic stations and how to better forecast sea ice
growth, the DC seemed to have the better article. 

There was a better (pay-walled) article here:

 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/australian-antarctic-division-battles-record-ice-considers-moving/story-e6frg6xf-1227350881836

So other than badmouthing the source, (which, though irrelevant to me, might be deserved FAIK)) did you  find a problem with the article itself??

And yes, I'm fully aware that the majority of "establishment" science has been bought by government funds to publish what is politically correct.  Since they have billion$, and the skeptics/deniers have pittance, the PC scientists will win any contest decided by appeal to authority or volume of papers published.


10
Economics / Re: Do Central Bankers Recognize there is NO GROWTH?
« on: June 07, 2015, 07:35:25 PM »
My latest two cent speculation on where this might go.

USA is China's biggest customer, until that changes don't look for a financial or military confrontation. 

If USA financials byte the dust they take EU with them.  EU is Russia's largest customer and China's second largest.  The Bear-Dragon alliance is not about to shoot itself in the head, but it IS preparing to survive the inevitable.

About 2020 they (Bear-Dragon) may have a fully developed alternate financial system.  If they can indeed get Germany to join up then most of EU will follow.  Russia will be cranking out its new (better than Abrams) tanks by then.  If India joins, such an alliance could be unbeatable in a decade or so.  Nonetheless I don't see an empire emerging out of this any time soon. that requires a unified command structure. 

Alternatively. (And IMHO more likely)  the major multinational corporations gain control of the major governments enough to set up a world system that benefits corporations and lets governments atrophy.  IF that happens we could see a move to up China's influence for awhile, because the "China-way" has the lowest per worker cost.  Once the "China-way" is established, governments are allowed to  devolve into sectors ruled by a corporate world council with some high sounding name.

11
Environment / Re: Say Goodbye to the Holocene Epoch
« on: June 05, 2015, 09:33:22 PM »
Quote
So what are your thoughts on the planet warming from the inside outward.
The inner core appears to have more energy these days.

I find it interesting.  I think there is something there, but we lack data.

Overall I have only questions.

What would cause these changes?

Who is measuring any change in core heat received at land surface?  If there were a small increase in this heat at land surface it does seem to follow that there would  be a larger increase in the deep ocean, but who would measure that?  (And how could I trust either of them?)

Larger magnitude earthquakes and volcanic activity seem to be increasing.  But in the case of volcanic activity,  how much of the undersea volcanic activity are we actually aware of though?  So how do we know?

RE touched on some of this awhile back with his "Geotectonic Heat Transfer Theory"

I've seen some other related hypotheses: wandering magnetic poles,  magnetic reversal and expanding planet.  None convincing.

Does the return of the magnetic pole to north suggest a weakening of the Sun's magnetic influence on the Earth? 

Does that movement of the magnetic pole have geotectonic effects??  Does it stir magma currents?  If so, how long would it take us to notice?

If these effects do keep the ocean warm(er), does that in effect dump more moisture on cold land and grow glaciers? 



 

12
Surly Newz / Re: The Surlynewz Channel
« on: June 05, 2015, 08:16:25 PM »
Quote
As the paragraph stated and has already been explained to u,  ice melting underneath that which is submerged and thinning enough to break off. The last few years of surface ice driven by wind is not the issue. The ocean is warming and tropical fish are swimming near tasmania and NZ, not so far from antarctica. The warmer water melts the ice from underneath.

I will agree a bit of that is happening on the West Antarctic peninsula, but on average the antarctic sea ice is much thicker than it was a century ago.  In fact ice thickness is problem enough that some scientific stations might have to be abandoned due to the difficulty in supplying them.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/11/antarctica-has-so-much-sea-ice-scientists-have-trouble-getting-there/


13
Environment / Re: Say Goodbye to the Holocene Epoch
« on: June 05, 2015, 08:02:51 PM »
I suspect we will be (as a species) saying goodbye to the Holocene interglacial period soon, (in geological time). 

The Modern Warm Period has yet to reach the temperatures of the Medieval Warm Period and needs continual data revisions from government to keep it "alive".  The current cooling phase could be the end of it, or it could yet perk up again in a century or so.  Either way the Iceman will be returning "soon", and the Holocene will end.

The Medieval Warm Period, did not reach the temperatures of the Roman Warming and the previous Minoan Warming was warmer yet.

So not only are we not outside of the long term climate trend, but that trend is cooling, not warming.  For some reason most of your governments have been instructed to lie to you about this (and spend billion$ to support those lies) by their corporate masters.

Yes, I'm aware that  most of Africa, Australia, Alaska and India are warmer than normal, but the places that are cooler than normal include the areas where the glaciers began last time.

14
Environment / Re: Oz PM exposes UN led climate hoax
« on: June 05, 2015, 07:22:43 PM »
  Bingo. Brilliant analysis. Thank you, Snowleopard. You must do this more often and in even greater detail.  Wow.                                                                  Karpatok

Hi K 

Thanks for the applause. 

Yes, it would be good to expand on that little PTB summary.  Perhaps distill the volumes of others into a concise historical essay, while dodging their conflicts.

But what I "must" do (chop wood, carry water, feed animals, milk goats, till gardens etc) often takes up all available time, to the point of not turning on the computer for days at a time.  Then there are last week's little extras:  like an injured dog, marauding bear(s), two frost/freeze warnings and new chicks to care for.  So I won't make any promises.
Well Snowleopard, still your life is blessed with the farm and all. Being able to take care of the animals is a blessing also for them and for you, I hope. Be kind to the bear. He is magnificent and also has his place in nature. Me, in my little life here feeding and watering all the wildlife I can draw, I too am blessed and get to know each one as they all have individual personalities just like us. Right now, I have six new shiny baby skunks whose mother has brought them to this little oasis[for them] to learn how to be weaned. They are like little ducks with their plumey tails, all skittering about with the newness of it all. And the raccoons come, and the squirrels and possums and the California brown ground birds. And all share in peace, if there is enough, and are most grateful for the water in this drought. When I change it, I feed the tree, which shelters them all, all except the skunks of course who have their burrows somewhere in a nearby empty field. They are all a valuable part of great nature if only mankind could understand that fact, Karpatok



I too enjoy, respect and support most of the wildlife that visits my "farm".  Water and birdseed is provided with an eye to hawk avoidance.

Skunks, racoons, mink, and fisher cat smell my dogs and go elsewhere.  Usually the dogs also keep the bears at a distance, but not this year.  Wild turkey, deer and moose will occasionally wander in.

But no, I'm not "kind" to the bear, who "visited" again last evening.  My dogs are somewhat scared of the bear(s?) and the bear is somewhat more scared of them.  This keeps the dogs alive and limits bear damage.   

Due to "global warming" ::)  the berries are very late this year, and the bear has little to eat.  I do sympathize, but feeding bears is illegal here (and dangerous).   There is no easy way to make friends with a bear and attempting to do so is also illegal in my state.  So I front load a shotgun with "less lethal" rubber buckshot for bear scaring and aim to miss but intimidate (per fish and game officer instruction).  The officers would rather I not feed the birds either, because the birdseed attracts the bears, but I like to watch the birds.  Thus far (~20yr) I've not had to aim AT a bear, and have not used a whole box (25) of special shells yet.

 

15
''Imminent'' Collapse of the Antarctic Ice Shelf and a ''New Era'' in the Arctic
By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | Report

(Photo: Iceberg via Shutterstock)
As human-caused climate disruption progresses, sea level rise is happening far faster than previously expected. (Photo: Iceberg via Shutterstock)

As human-caused climate disruption progresses, recent scientific reports show the collapse of a massive Antarctic ice shelf is "imminent," changes in the Arctic Ocean are so profound scientists say the region is entering a "new era" and sea level rise is happening far faster than previously believed.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31089-imminent-collapse-of-the-antarctic-ice-shelf-and-a-new-era-in-the-arctic

Arctic sea ice comes and goes, and there are many indications that the arctic was open enough to navigate at times during the last glaciation.  I suspect that arctic ice is currently building back from a long decline, but all it takes is the right sea currents and winds to reverse that. 

On the other hand the Idea that the Antarctic is melting down is just ludicrous.






Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32