Why is the climate changing. (Page 177) zeffur: Lol. There are people today who have similar neanderthal skull features. View some pics here: zeffur's Pictures Neanderthal is also the same kind as us--they just weren't able to survive either due to disease or rejection by others, until their numbers dwindled to extinction--but their genes live on in humanity. And no--that isn't evolution---it's all part of the human genome. Sasquatch is a myth. (Edited by zeffur)  darkstar5d2011: the poles melt and reform 100k yrs ago the north cap was mostly upon the US, 50k it formed via alaska, soon it will form via Russia near the land bridge between Russia and the US. Remember this ... zeffur: From what I've read, they don't know exactly where the new poles will arise. Apparently the shift occurs due to changes in the solidification, liquification, & movement of the core materials (mostly iron). In general, this is how scientists think the magnetic field of earth is formed: "Scientists know that today the Earth's magnetic field is powered by the solidification of the planet's liquid iron core. The cooling and crystallization of the core stirs up the surrounding liquid iron, creating powerful electric currents that generate a magnetic field stretching far out into space." (Edited by zeffur) zeffur: re: "darkstar5d2011: Also there is no pole reversal just a relcation change and a grand melt down..." What is your source for that claim?  ghostgeek: For more than a decade, policy discussions in Europe and beyond about cutting back on gas, oil and coal emphasized safety and the environment, at the expense of financial and economic considerations, said Lucia van Geuns, a strategic energy adviser at the Hague Center for Strategic Studies. Now, it’s the reverse. “Gas prices became very high, and all of a sudden security of supply and price became the main subject of public debate,” she said. The renewed emphasis on energy independence and national security may encourage policymakers to backslide on efforts to decrease the use of fossil fuels that pump deadly greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. [ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/business/economy/russia-ukraine-energy-security-climate-change.html ] ghostgeek: Already, skyrocketing prices have spurred additional production and consumption of fuels that contribute to global warming. Coal imports to the European Union in January rose more than 56 percent from the previous year. In Britain, the Coal Authority gave a mine in Wales permission last month to increase output by 40 million tons over the next two decades. In Australia, there are plans to open or expand more coking coal mines. And China, which has traditionally made energy security a priority, has further stepped up its coal production and approved three new billion-dollar coal mines this week. [ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/business/economy/russia-ukraine-energy-security-climate-change.html ] ghostgeek: Europe’s transition to sustainable energy has always been an intricate calculus, requiring it to back away from the dirtiest fossil fuel like coal, while still working with gas and oil producers to power homes, cars and factories until better alternatives are available. For Germany, dependency on Russian gas has been an integral part of its environmental blueprint for many years. Plans for the first direct pipeline between the two countries, Nord Stream 1, started in 1997. A leader in the push to reduce carbon emissions, Berlin has moved to shutter coal mines and nuclear power plants, after the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. The idea was that Russian gas would supply the needed fuel during the yearslong transition to cleaner energy sources. Two-thirds of the gas Germany burned last year came from Russia. Future plans called for even more gas to be delivered through Nord Stream 2, a new 746-mile pipeline under the Baltic Sea that directly links Russia to northeastern Germany. On Tuesday, after President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia recognized two breakaway republics in Ukraine and mobilized forces, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany halted final regulatory review of the $11 billion pipeline, which was completed last year. [ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/business/economy/russia-ukraine-energy-security-climate-change.html ] ghostgeek: For critics of the European Union’s climate policies, the sudden focus away from greenhouse gas emissions and on existing fuel reserves is validating. Arkadiusz Siekaniec, vice president of the Trade Union of Miners in Poland, has long argued that the European Union’s push to end coal production on the continent was folly. But now he hopes that others may come around to his point of view. The climate policy “is a suicidal mission” that could leave the entire region overly dependent on Russian fuel, Mr. Siekaniec said last week as American troops landed in his country. “It threatens the economy as well as the citizens of Europe and Poland.” For Mateusz Garus, a blacksmith at Jankowice, a coal mine in Upper Silesia, the heart of coal country, politics and not climate change are driving policy. “We will destroy the power sector,” he said, “and we will be dependent on others like Russia.” [ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/business/economy/russia-ukraine-energy-security-climate-change.html ] zeffur: Just wait until 2030-2035 when most cars will be electric & renewable energy cannot meet that demand. Energy will definitely come from fossil fuel & nuclear--unless someone finally cracks the fusion nut with a tech that reliably works. ghostgeek: European scientists say they have made a major breakthrough in their quest to develop practical nuclear fusion - the energy process that powers the stars. The UK-based JET laboratory has smashed its own world record for the amount of energy it can extract by squeezing together two forms of hydrogen. ... The experiments produced 59 megajoules of energy over five seconds (11 megawatts of power). ... It's not a massive energy output - only enough to boil about 60 kettles' worth of water. But the significance is that it validates design choices that have been made for an even bigger fusion reactor now being constructed in France. [ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60312633 ] ghostgeek: How did the Romans manage to grow grapes in northern England when most climate studies suggest the weather was much cooler then? We may now have an answer: it wasn’t that cold at all. Long-term temperature reconstructions often rely on the width of tree rings: they assume that warmer summers make for wider rings. Using this measure, it seems that global temperatures changed very little over the past two millennia. Such studies are behind the famous “hockey stick” graph, created by Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University in University Park, which shows stable temperatures for a millennium before the 20th century. Jan Esper of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, thinks that at least some of those tree rings actually show something else: a long-term cooling trend that lasted right up until the Industrial Revolution. The trend came about because of reduced solar heating caused by changes to the Earth’s orbit known as Milankovitch wobbles, says Esper. His results suggest the Roman world was 0.6 °C warmer than previously thought – enough to make grape vines in northern England a possibility. Esper and his colleagues say that warmer summers do not necessarily make tree rings wider – but they often make them denser. He studied the density of tree rings in hundreds of northern Scandinavian trees and found that they showed evidence of a gradual cooling trend that began around 2000 years ago. The finding fits with other proxies for temperature – such as the chemical make-up of air trapped in glaciers and the organic remains in ancient lake sediments – which have also suggested a cooling trend. Esper’s study is the latest to indicate that temperatures were less stable than originally thought. In 2009, Darrell Kaufman of Northern Arizona University at Flagstaff published evidence, using a range of proxies, that indicated a cooling in the Arctic for most of the past 2000 years (Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1173983). Esper’s findings suggest that the cooling trend was even stronger than Kaufman concluded. [ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22040-tree-rings-suggest-roman-world-was-warmer-than-thought/ ]  kittybobo34: Ghost,, totally agree. Consider that Hannibal attacked Rome with elephants he brought through the Alps, little snow and no Glaciers. The climate didn't start cooling until some time around 400ad, cutting off Rome from the North, and pushing Germanic tribes south..  mistermature: 6,000 years ago the Sahara Desert was a dense jungle. Atlantic Hurricanes are 'new' and only developed recently, as the desert hot air reached the cool Atlantic Ocean. The ONLY certainty in Life is: Never ending changes ahead. Be Prepared (as you can be). The Ruble is worth less than an American penny. ghostgeek: A major survey of 30,000 people around the world found that nearly half believed climate change would make humanity extinct. Mental-health professionals now routinely find themselves addressing adolescent anxiety over climate. In January, pollsters found that one in five UK children reported having nightmares about it. And yet the IPCC doesn’t predict billions or even millions of deaths from climate change. That’s in part because economic development and preparedness mitigate natural disasters, diseases and other environmental impacts of climate change. And scientists expect our ability to mitigate harms to expand and improve long into the future. There has been a 92 percent decline in the per-decade death toll from natural disasters since its peak in the 1920s. In that decade, 5.4 million people died from natural disasters. In the 2010s, just 0.4 million did. The decline occurred during a period when the global population nearly quadrupled and temperatures rose more than 1 degree centigrade over pre-industrial levels. Would deaths have been even lower had temperatures not risen that 1 degree? Maybe, but we will never know. Huge reductions in deaths outweighed any increase in deaths from more forceful disasters. Could future temperature increases reverse the trend of declining mortality? Perhaps, but the IPCC doesn’t predict that happening. That’s partly because — again — we are so much better at protecting people from natural disasters, climate-fueled or not. [ https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/climate-change-hysteria-costs-lives-but-activists-want-to-keep-panic-alive/ ] ghostgeek: So why do some alarmists claim that climate change is making disasters worse? In part, it’s so they can use the world’s most visual and dramatic events, from Hurricane Sandy to California’s forest fires, to make the issue more salient with voters. If it were acknowledged that Hurricane Sandy’s damage owed overwhelmingly to New York failure to modernize its flood-control systems or that California’s forest fires were due to the buildup of wood fuel after decades of fire suppression, alarmist journalists, scientists and activists would be deprived of the visually powerful events and “news hooks” they need to scare people, raise money and advocate climate policies. Climate alarmism isn’t just about money. It’s also about power. Elites have used climate alarmism to justify efforts to control food and energy policies in their home nations and around the world for more than three decades. In just the last decade, climate alarmists have successfully redirected funding from the World Bank and similar institutions away from economic development and toward charitable endeavors, such as solar panels for villagers, which can’t power growth. [ https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/climate-change-hysteria-costs-lives-but-activists-want-to-keep-panic-alive/ ] ghostgeek: Contrary to the claims of CNN’s top environment reporter, using energy that emits carbon dioxide isn’t like smoking cigarettes. People need to consume significant amounts of energy in order to enjoy decent standards of living. Nobody needs to smoke cigarettes. In the end, climate alarmism is powerful because it has emerged as the alternative religion for supposedly secular people, providing many of the same psychological benefits as traditional faith. Climate alarmism gives them a purpose: to save the world from climate change. It offers them a story that casts them as heroes. And it provides a way for them to find meaning in their lives — while retaining the illusion that they are people of science and reason, not superstition and fantasy. There is nothing wrong with religious faith and often a great deal right about it. Religions have long provided people with the meaning, purpose and consolations they need to weather life’s many challenges. Religions can be a guide to positive, pro-social and ethical behavior. The trouble with the new environmental religion is that it has become increasingly destructive. It leads its adherents to demonize their opponents. And it spreads anxiety and depression without meeting the deeper spiritual needs. [ https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/climate-change-hysteria-costs-lives-but-activists-want-to-keep-panic-alive/ ] ghostgeek: Happily, real-world events, starting with the coronavirus pandemic, are undermining the notion that climate change is an “emergency” or “crisis.” After all, it was a disease that brought civilization to a halt, not climate-fueled natural disasters. And while COVID-19 has killed more than half a million people and counting, alarmist scientists struggle to explain how climate change will make diseases and disasters worse. Meanwhile, emissions are declining in much of the world. In Europe, emissions in 2018 were 23 percent below 1990 levels. In the United States, emissions fell 15 percent from 2005 to 2016. And emissions are likely to peak and start to decline in developing nations, including China and India, within the next decade. As a result, most experts believe that global temperatures are unlikely to rise more than 3 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. No amount of warming is ideal, since it will change conditions for both people and wildlife. But 3 degrees isn’t catastrophic for, much less an existential threat to, human societies and economies. [ https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/climate-change-hysteria-costs-lives-but-activists-want-to-keep-panic-alive/ ] kittybobo34: Ghost,, How have you missed the consequences. If you know anything about fish,, the slightest change in temp and salinity can wipe out a whole species. The oceans will be the first to die as the temp goes up, and the acidity increases. Half the human population depends on fish, they will likely be eating the other half's food, Competition for resources will likely start wars all over. As Islands and equatorial nations go under, the refugee crisis will boil over, again war and crime as food gets scarce. Then as the ocean levels go up, you have the issue of factories and port facilities lost. All this could threaten the very survival of our civilization. What makes you think it will stop at 3 degrees, already the huge frozen methane deposits are bubbling up. The last time this happened the average world temp was around 140 F zeffur: re: "The average temperature on Earth lies somewhere around 57 degrees Fahrenheit (13.9 degrees Celsius). According to climate information from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), that was the 20th century average temperature, measured across land and ocean, night and day." Just 83 °F more degrees to go! Gail, what is the crisis temp from the latest doomsdayers & when do they anticipate that will occur?? What is your source for 140 °F? This source indicates 90+ °F https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been (Edited by zeffur) | Science Chat Room 1 Person Chatting Similar Conversations |