What are your thoughts on global warming?

[MitchM]

Yes, the fire chief was from the UK.

I would like to see more attention paid to the methane topic. As I would water vapor and solar activity.
Methane is apparently 4 times worse than CO2, so you would think that livestock operations would be under more study.

 

[MoonShadows]

I always thought methane was upwards of 30 times worse than Carbon Dioxide as far as global warming is concerned.

 

[MitchM]

You could be right, I don't recall.

 

[adavisus]

yup, methane is 20x or so more than co2, though it dissipates after a decade. Last time I looked at scientists estimates of methane deposits in cold arctic waters the methane emissions will scale up global warming 6x more than the the current co2 pollution. Numbers like 900 gigatons of methane thrown about. Which pushes the planet into the realms of 1000ppm co2 equivalent

Persuading folk to switch from guzzling hefty methane producing livestock meat, to veggies, probably not going to happen until you run out of cannibals

The planet has done that level of atmospheric pollution before, it was known as the permian period. Interesting read, that stuff

 

[MitchM]

..

You may want to fact check the carbon cycle

...

I'm pretty confidant about the carbon neutral impact of forest fires.

From the attached report:

Dr. Ryan emphasizes the point: “Regeneration is absolutely critical to carbon. If you don’t get regeneration, the ecosystem loses about half of its carbon.” But if the forest does regenerate—and exists on the landscape long enough before the next stand-replacing fire—it will recover the carbon lost over the fire cycle.

This is the report:
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=jfspbriefs

 

[Meyer Jordan]

I'm pretty confidant about the carbon neutral impact of forest fires.

From the attached report:

Dr. Ryan emphasizes the point: “Regeneration is absolutely critical to carbon. If you don’t get regeneration, the ecosystem loses about half of its carbon.” But if the forest does regenerate—and exists on the landscape long enough before the next stand-replacing fire—it will recover the carbon lost over the fire cycle.

This is the report:
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=jfspbriefs

Although this is absolutely true in the natural cycle, it hardly applies to slash and burn practices that are ongoing in the Amazon and in Indonesia as well as other places.. In those locations, regeneration is non- existent.

 

[MitchM]

Although this is absolutely true in the natural cycle, it hardly applies to slash and burn practices that are ongoing in the Amazon and in Indonesia as well as other places.. In those locations, regeneration is non- existent.

Right.
And along with the carbon that is being released from those slash and burn practices, I imagine the water vapour no longer being held in those ecosystems is contributing to global warming.
My post was more in respect to the Ft Mac fire.

 

[Mucky_Waters]

Persuading folk to switch from guzzling hefty methane producing livestock meat, to veggies, probably not going to happen until you run out of cannibals

Actually if there were more cannibals we might get a better handle on our over population problem and be able to reduce our need to raise livestock thus reducing greenhouse gasses.

 

[Bullfrog]

Yes, the fire chief was from the UK.

I would like to see more attention paid to the methane topic. As I would water vapor and solar activity.
Methane is apparently 4 times worse than CO2, so you would think that livestock operations would be under more study.

Oh plenty of attention is being paid to livestock, California has recently found a way to tax cow farts.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...ulations-approved-by-californias-legislature/

A lot of money is being made from global warming even though the information is being falsified to meet certain agendas, even from NOAA.

https://www.iceagenow.info/whistleblower-noaa-manipulated-global-warming-data/

No doubt the earth is warming, but normal cycles of warming and cooling have been going for millions of year before there was money or control to be gained by it.

 

[adavisus]

It does not take long to fact check denier frauds

http://www.snopes.com/2017/02/08/noaa-scientists-climate-change-data/

https://www.desmogblog.com/iceagenow

IceAgeNow regularly publishes articles skeptical of climate change by its author, and sole employee, Robert Felix — a former architect. George Monbiot at The Guardian describes IceAgeNow as primarily serving to promote Felix's book about the “coming ice age.” Monbiot says that Felix selectively picks evidence in his attempt to disprove man-made global warming. [2]

“Is Felix a climatologist, a volcanologist or an oceanographer?” Monbiot asks. “Er, none of the above. His biography describes him as a 'former architect'. His website is so bonkers that I thought at first it was a spoof. Sadly, he appears to believe what he says.”

Its fairly obvious who is peddling what to make bucks off the gullible flock

IceAgeNow was a co-sponsor of the Heartland Institute's Seventh International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7) in Chicago, IL. [8]

DeSmogBlog researched co-sponsors behind the conference and discovered that they had received a total of over $67 Million from ExxonMobil, Koch, and Scaife family foundations.

 

[MitchM]

A lot of money is being made from global warming even though the information is being falsified to meet certain agendas, even from NOAA.

https://www.iceagenow.info/whistleblower-noaa-manipulated-global-warming-data/

.

I saw that report when it first came out in the Daily mail. I waited on it for a few days and the story seemed to fade from the headlines, so I kept looking into it.
It sounds like there was a dispute about which set of data NOAA was using, data from ocean buoys or data from ships. Apparently there's a discrepancy between ocean temperature readings between the two.
When you think about it, we really don't have that much accurate data to go on for climate history. Core samples and such are taken from specific areas and from a very long time ago and the further back we go the more estimating we have to do.

 

[Bullfrog]

Snopes is far from a reliable source of unbiased and true information.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/f...act-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/

http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/

There are many sources that fly against the warming agenda other than the nut case named in ice age now.

With champions like Al Gore and Decaprio there is plenty of doubt to go around. They wag their finger at us then jump into their limo, fly on a private jet and get on their yacht for the weekend.

The planet is warming and has been warming for thousands of years, long before man had any influence on it.

 

[adavisus]

Habitual liars would have a problem with snopes, or anyone else fact checking them

http://www.snopes.com/tag/daily-caller/

Angry Patriot publishes information that cannot be validated and that is anti scientific fact. The information provided should be regarded as speculative opinion or propaganda and cannot be substantiated by fact or evidence. It is among the most untrustworthy sources in the media.

http://www.fakenewschecker.com/fake-news-source/angry-patriot

 

[sissy]

Pretty soon will will all be wearing shorts year round and the poor outwear companies will need to rethink what they make .I wonder how that will effect the fashion industry .We really need a lot less people and more farmers .

 

[Bullfrog]

Habitual liars would have a problem with snopes, or anyone else fact checking them

http://www.snopes.com/tag/daily-caller/

Angry Patriot publishes information that cannot be validated and that is anti scientific fact. The information provided should be regarded as speculative opinion or propaganda and cannot be substantiated by fact or evidence. It is among the most untrustworthy sources in the media.

http://www.fakenewschecker.com/fake-news-source/angry-patriot

Snopes has not only been wrong but has also been caught lying for political reasons. This thread has been warned not to get political but before anyone relies on or even remotely believes Snopes they need only to Google "Snopes wrong again" to find the outright lies and whitewashing of any criticism of their politics. It is a very biased and now unreliable source of information.

What began as a mom and pop kitchen table operation with no research staff has now graduated to a very unethical team of a few people who all believe the same way and have been proven wrong too many times to be quoted.

Scientific based websites all agree that the earth has been warming for about 11,700 years, long before man was a contributing factor, if it in fact is.

As long as there is a large amount of money to be made and control over other people's lives any data is debatable depending on what you choose to believe. There is good evidence to support both sides of this debate.