Climate Change


Bullhockey:



The whole thing is pretty good, but he covers the myth of Climate Change and Hurricanes at about 4:15.
 
Did you watch it?

yes I did...................

Don't swallow a bit of it.
Just using my own observations. I see things changing for the worse all around me.

I'll probably get ridiculed for that answer - but - it is what it is.



and I'd take NASA over Strossle any day:


see you can pretty much find anything to support your position
 
Last edited:
yes I did...................

Don't swallow a bit of it.
Just using my own observations. I see things changing for the worse all around me.

I'll probably get ridiculed for that answer - but - it is what it is.



and I'd take NASA over Strossle any day:


see you can pretty much find anything to support your position


True, but Stossel quoted NOAA. I figure they might know something about it.

Personal observation means nada on the scale we're talking about. And you can bet money that it's colored by media shrieking and sky is falling rhetoric.
 
True, but Stossel quoted NOAA. I figure they might know something about it.

Personal observation means nada on the scale we're talking about. And you can bet money that it's colored by media shrieking and sky is falling rhetoric.

I also saw NOAA lending some credence to the affect climate change is having on the weather. I too was a denier regarding climate change but after the events of this past summer - I found it hard to keep denying it.
  • Half of Europe & the West Coast on fire.
  • Drought everywhere. We had no rain here on the Shore for two & half months. That normally only takes place for most of August.
  • Rivers, lakes & reservoirs drying up both here & Europe. Germany had to keep dredging the Rhine in order for boat traffic to make it through.
  • Weeks of 90 degree temperatures or higher.

In my mind it's happening & we REALLY need to take some strong action to mitigate it as painful as that may be. The more we deny it - the more difficult it's going to be to stop it.

Let's just agree to disagree.
:)
 
I also saw NOAA lending some credence to the affect climate change is having on the weather. I too was a denier regarding climate change but after the events of this past summer - I found it hard to keep denying it.
  • Half of Europe & the West Coast on fire.
  • Drought everywhere. We had no rain here on the Shore for two & half months. That normally only takes place for most of August.
  • Rivers, lakes & reservoirs drying up both here & Europe. Germany had to keep dredging the Rhine in order for boat traffic to make it through.
  • Weeks of 90 degree temperatures or higher.

In my mind it's happening & we REALLY need to take some strong action to mitigate it as painful as that may be. The more we deny it - the more difficult it's going to be to stop it.

Let's just agree to disagree.
:)

All subjective observations about things that have happened before and will happen again no matter how many Teslas you buy. Also things, like the west coast burning that have other causes. Mostly $#itty public policy by the same people that want to tell you how to fix the problem.

My biggest issue with all the attempts to "stop it", even if it is man-made, is if we don't change our policies toward China and India who are the real polluters, are just going to cripple ourselves and have no effect on the outcome.

One thing we can agree on: More nukes!
 
Many thing can and have affected the climate over the eons...I watched a show last night on how the decimation of the natives in the Americas contributed to the little ice age

‘Great Dying’ in Americas disturbed Earth’s climate​

1 February 2019
Colonisation of the Americas at the end of the 15th Century killed so many people, it disturbed Earth's climate, according to a new study by UCL.
Bell Trail

The research, published in Quaternary Science Reviews, reveals the scale of disruption that followed Columbus’ ‘discovery’ of the Americas in 1492.
Over the 100 years after European arrival, the indigenous population of the Americas dropped from 60 million to only 6 million, due to waves of epidemics, warfare and famine.
The new research, funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council, suggests that this led to a regrowth of forests and a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, which in turn contributed to the Earth’s cooling.
“The Great Dying of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas led to the abandonment of enough cleared land that the resulting terrestrial carbon uptake had a detectable impact on both atmospheric CO2 and global surface air temperatures,” said lead study author PhD candidate Alexander Koch (UCL Geography).
The ‘Great Dying’ was triggered by the arrival of Europeans and the introduction of new pathogens to the continent. Together, with warfare and slavery, there was an epidemic of diseases such as smallpox, measles, influenza and cholera.
The scientists report that as the population plummeted, land was abandoned and farming ceased causing natural vegetation to grow back.
Scientists believe that the changes to land use led to a lowering of CO2 levels sufficient enough that the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere eventually fell by 7-10ppm.
This coincides with the ‘Little Ice Age’, a period between about 1300 and 1870 during which time many parts of the world dipped into cooler temperatures. In the 16th century global temperatures were at their lowest points.
“There is a marked cooling around the 1500s/1600s which is called the ‘Little Ice Age’, and what's interesting is that we can see natural processes giving a little bit of cooling, but actually to get the full cooling you need to have this genocide-generated drop in CO2”, said co-author, Professor Mark Maslin (UCL Geography).
The team analysed existing evidence for indigenous populations using seven geographical regions across the Americas including the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America and Inca Territory. They investigated population size and land use evidence in both the 14th and 15th century and compared this with potential natural drivers of global carbon declines.
Dr Chris Brierley (UCL Geography), co-author of the study, said: “What we see from this study is the scale of what's required to mitigate climate change. The Great Dying resulted in an area the size of France being reforested and that gave us only a few ppm. This shows reforestation can help tackle future climate change, but only up to a point.”
 
Many thing can and have affected the climate over the eons...I watched a show last night on how the decimation of the natives in the Americas contributed to the little ice age

‘Great Dying’ in Americas disturbed Earth’s climate​

1 February 2019
Colonisation of the Americas at the end of the 15th Century killed so many people, it disturbed Earth's climate, according to a new study by UCL.
Bell Trail

The research, published in Quaternary Science Reviews, reveals the scale of disruption that followed Columbus’ ‘discovery’ of the Americas in 1492.
Over the 100 years after European arrival, the indigenous population of the Americas dropped from 60 million to only 6 million, due to waves of epidemics, warfare and famine.
The new research, funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council, suggests that this led to a regrowth of forests and a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, which in turn contributed to the Earth’s cooling.
“The Great Dying of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas led to the abandonment of enough cleared land that the resulting terrestrial carbon uptake had a detectable impact on both atmospheric CO2 and global surface air temperatures,” said lead study author PhD candidate Alexander Koch (UCL Geography).
The ‘Great Dying’ was triggered by the arrival of Europeans and the introduction of new pathogens to the continent. Together, with warfare and slavery, there was an epidemic of diseases such as smallpox, measles, influenza and cholera.
The scientists report that as the population plummeted, land was abandoned and farming ceased causing natural vegetation to grow back.
Scientists believe that the changes to land use led to a lowering of CO2 levels sufficient enough that the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere eventually fell by 7-10ppm.
This coincides with the ‘Little Ice Age’, a period between about 1300 and 1870 during which time many parts of the world dipped into cooler temperatures. In the 16th century global temperatures were at their lowest points.
“There is a marked cooling around the 1500s/1600s which is called the ‘Little Ice Age’, and what's interesting is that we can see natural processes giving a little bit of cooling, but actually to get the full cooling you need to have this genocide-generated drop in CO2”, said co-author, Professor Mark Maslin (UCL Geography).
The team analysed existing evidence for indigenous populations using seven geographical regions across the Americas including the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America and Inca Territory. They investigated population size and land use evidence in both the 14th and 15th century and compared this with potential natural drivers of global carbon declines.
Dr Chris Brierley (UCL Geography), co-author of the study, said: “What we see from this study is the scale of what's required to mitigate climate change. The Great Dying resulted in an area the size of France being reforested and that gave us only a few ppm. This shows reforestation can help tackle future climate change, but only up to a point.”
Would be nice to see if they had CO2 ppm data from glacial core samples from the Rockies and the Andes to see if these were lower, while data from Alpine and Himalayan glaciers had higher CO2 levels. This observation of regional fluctuation would prove their hypothesis, if these data were the same worldwide, it renders their data as "interesting, but not definitive".
 
Grand Solor Minimums and Maxima's...

The "little ice age" referenced above coincides with 3/4 grand solar minimums. Hence...cooler temperatures.

Maxima's = Warmer Temperatures


Been going on for millennia.....

Grand solar minima and maxima[edit]​

Main article: Solar cycle
Grand solar minima occur when several solar cycles exhibit lesser than average activity for decades or centuries. Solar cycles still occur during these grand solar minimum periods but are at a lower intensity than usual. The grand minima form a special mode of the solar dynamo operation.[7]


400 year history of sunspot numbers.
Solar minimum and maximum events with approximate dates
EventStartEnd
Homeric Minimum[8]950 BC800 BC
Roman Warm Period250 BCAD 400
Medieval maximum 1 (see Medieval Warm Period)9501040
Oort minimum (see Medieval Warm Period)10401080
Medieval maximum 2 (see Medieval Warm Period)11001250
Wolf minimum12801350
Spörer Minimum14501550
Maunder Minimum16451715
Dalton Minimum17901820
Modern Maximum19142008
A list of historical Grand minima of solar activity[9] includes also Grand minima ca. 690 AD, 360 BC, 770 BC, 1390 BC, 2860 BC, 3340 BC, 3500 BC, 3630 BC, 3940 BC, 4230 BC, 4330 BC, 5260 BC, 5460 BC, 5620 BC, 5710 BC, 5990 BC, 6220 BC, 6400 BC, 7040 BC, 7310 BC, 7520 BC, 8220 BC, 9170 BC.



Further reference
 
Solar Cycle 24 & 25
Too much to paste but a good reference for the past decade and today




The following table gives the number of days so far in cycle 25 (to Oct 6 2022), and up to the same point in cycle 24 (to Oct 6 2011), which have passed various thresholds for the numbers of sunspots:

Solar Cycle 24Solar Cycle 25
≥75102185
≥1005188
≥1252142
≥150410
≥17520
As at Oct 6 2022, solar cycle 25 is averaging 23% more spots per day than solar cycle 24 at the same point in the cycle (Oct 6 2011).
 
Last edited:
Would be nice to see if they had CO2 ppm data from glacial core samples from the Rockies and the Andes to see if these were lower, while data from Alpine and Himalayan glaciers had higher CO2 levels. This observation of regional fluctuation would prove their hypothesis, if these data were the same worldwide, it renders their data as "interesting, but not definitive".
The little ice age affected mainly Europe and the Americas both of which had a massive human kill off due to plague in Europe and mainly small pox in the Americas. Yes the CO2 levels is key.

Interesting to find that Europeans because of domesticating animals (and living with them) and getting many diseases from them over the centuries had developed resistance. The natives of the Americas did not domesticate or live with animals and had no resistance to disease brought by Europeans and possibly 90% were wiped out in short order enabling the conquest of both continents. Many of them had never even see a white man...but trade carried the disease between tribes
 
The little ice age affected mainly Europe and the Americas both of which had a massive human kill off due to plague in Europe and mainly small pox in the Americas. Yes the CO2 levels is key.

Interesting to find that Europeans because of domesticating animals (and living with them) and getting many diseases from them over the centuries had developed resistance. The natives of the Americas did not domesticate or live with animals and had no resistance to disease brought by Europeans and possibly 90% were wiped out in short order enabling the conquest of both continents. Many of them had never even see a white man...but trade carried the disease between tribes
Know all about the Little Ice Age. They made a very, large and encompassing claim. Just curious if they could provide data to back up the new world part of that claim.
 
Know all about the Little Ice Age. They made a very, large and encompassing claim. Just curious if they could provide data to back up the new world part of that claim.
check this out

‘Little Ice Age’ caused by death of 55-million Indigenous people after colonization: study​

john_hadden_headshot_220.jpg

By John Hadden Global News
Posted February 6, 2019 4:50 pm
Updated February 6, 2019 5:12 pm

According to the study, a spike in plant life was responsible for up to 67 per cent of a significant drop in carbon dioxide levels between 1520 and 1610. Carbon had been transferred from the atmosphere to the land surface through photosynthesis.

Previously cored Antarctic ice samples were investigated. Researchers observed that 7.4 petagrams — or 7-billion metric tonnes — of carbon had suddenly disappeared at that point in time.

‘Little Ice Age’ caused by death of 55-million Indigenous people after colonization: study - National | Globalnews.ca
 
check this out

‘Little Ice Age’ caused by death of 55-million Indigenous people after colonization: study​

john_hadden_headshot_220.jpg

By John Hadden Global News
Posted February 6, 2019 4:50 pm
Updated February 6, 2019 5:12 pm

According to the study, a spike in plant life was responsible for up to 67 per cent of a significant drop in carbon dioxide levels between 1520 and 1610. Carbon had been transferred from the atmosphere to the land surface through photosynthesis.

Previously cored Antarctic ice samples were investigated. Researchers observed that 7.4 petagrams — or 7-billion metric tonnes — of carbon had suddenly disappeared at that point in time.

‘Little Ice Age’ caused by death of 55-million Indigenous people after colonization: study - National | Globalnews.ca
FIRST, and most importantly, Climate Change because of man-induced CO2 increase is REAL, the Little Ice Age is a fact, and the atrocities committed during the colonization and conquest of the Americas is a horrid example of genocide by all involved. However this study only presents circumstantial evidence to tie things together. This "study" was published back in 2019 and was greeted by the strict scientific community with the enthusiasm as a fart in church...

As I suspected. They got their CO2 data from Antarctic cores so the data are circumstantial; there’s no definitive proof that the drop in population in the New World caused the global decrease in CO2. Hell some zoologists could point out to a major phytoplankton explosion in the mid-Pacific for a 100 years bridging 15th and 16th centuries and tie that to the Little Ice Age too based on this study's logic flow.

Had they compared CO2 levels from New World and Old World cores, and saw differences, their claims would have far more validity. No matter how you cut it, this was NOT a well-designed scientific study, and only found a "home"' in a 3rd Rate journal. If it was a definitive study, they would have been able to publish in Nature or Science...
 
Last edited:
Had they compared CO2 levels from New World and Old World cores, and saw differences, their claims would have far more validity.

can that be done ?
 
Had they compared CO2 levels from New World and Old World cores, and saw differences, their claims would have far more validity.

can that be done ?
Yes, get ice cores from New World glaciers (Rockies and Andes) and Old World (Alps & Himalayans) and do the CO2 analyses. Very simple, but probably would have entailed new samples instead of just data mining the published Antarctic database.

Devil is in the details, and these guys weren't equipped/motivated to deal with the Devil - Rank Amateurs.
 
Go anywhere on earth where there are large, flowing glaciers - not small cirque glaciers that expand and contract each winter/summer cycle. Compare what you see to photos or actual recollections from 50 years ago. Not 1050 years ago, 50 years ago.
The difference is incredible.

For example, to visit the Columbia ice field in the Canadian Rockies in the 60's, you used to have to merely cross the road from the visitor center. Now, you can barely see it and have to take a bus. You can see on the rock walls with your own eyes where the glacier had been, high above you, and how wide it used to be.

Ask farmers in California if they're still planting new almond and vegetable fields, or agave and other desert plants. But I guess, like the title of the movie, Don't Look Up.
 
📱 Fish Smarter with the NYAngler App!
Launch Now

Members online

Fishing Reports

Latest articles

Back
Top