...I apologize to myself

Fine. Enjoy your Scotch. You are a confirmed uncaring troll.

Only you can change to a more positive view.


Meanwhile, still the reality remains the same for the rest of the world:

Still all on our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Refuse to answer question.
I apologize to myself.

Please dont apologize your self.
There are no stupid questions only stupid answers.
In this case about climate changes there are so many theories and answers...

Sky Blue. Clouds White. O2 Tasty. CO2 Tasty. When There 'is' Change in Blue and White, I Might Wonder, until then, Climate Change DENIED.

HOHUM. Da Beat Beat on dA DRum DRum goes On On. Yep

Wait A Minute! What Sky? What Clouds? I've Got Frakkin' Birds in My Eyes! Can't See Nutthin'! However, My Roots are Telling Me. Everythang 'is' TASTY. CC DENIED.


Slime Slime Slime. All The Time. What 'is' Seeing? I Feel Fine. NO CC. CC DENIED.


Yep Yep Yep

Yep

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

When the ice in your scotch melts the level in the glass will be the same unless you have had a sip or two. It is only ice that melts over solid ground that will raise the sea level and then only if there is no further snow falling over those regions in a given amount of time.

I believe we have already decided that the word "troll" is in fact an insult

I don't really wish to remove posts as it breaks up the flow of any thread.

However a little less use of certain words and a reminder again:

*No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.
*No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.

I know that might be difficult for some here but please try.

Thank you.

---

I believe we have already decided that the word "troll" is in fact an insult
I don't really wish to remove posts as it breaks up the flow of any thread.
However a little less use of certain words and a reminder again:
*No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.
*No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.
I know that might be difficult for some here but please try.
Thank you.

How can a question be hostile or insulting?
How can the the word "troll" be an insult?
Geez!
Here is a depiction of REAL trolls:)

These creatures look a lot like Trolls!


Any Icelander, Norwegian, Swede, or Fin Lander would know
that is an image of the Nome Snoory Trip Skate. He
was known as the dirtiest defenseman ever to play
hockey in all of Denmark.

---

Calling people trolls is often used as an insult to ridicule a posters opinions or point of view.

Obviously there are people who genuinely post just to get a rise out of people, but just because someone's post makes you angry, it does not mean that person is deliberately trying to upset people.

If a post is clearly made to be insulting and/or inflammatory it will be removed. Post that are simply wrong or idiotic will not be removed.

This is the politics forum, if you post your opinion here you will be expected to defend it. If your opinion cannot be defended and you resort to insults you have probably lost the argument. At this point I would advise you to go and examine your opinion and see if it really does have any merit.

Calling someone a troll is not an argument. If you genuinely think someone is a troll then we all know the best thing to do is ignore them.

Calling them a troll is not ignoring them.

So let's get back to the topic of the thread and try to remember that there are real people behind those keyboards.

---

Reality Internet Personality

It's your link Clyde not mine

i don't read news services and i specially don't read crap posts link that .I also have put up at least twice the article from NOAA saying the water currents have keep the temps down . Even if the temp is only going up in 1/10th then it proves we have a big problem . IT SHOULD BE GOING DOWN or be STABLE not continuing to go up even a small amount

Like i also said i pity the children you have teach'd

So untill you act like a teacher and not some smart alex point scorer i'll just ignore your stupidness

---

New Climate Change Study Just 400 Pages Of Scientists Telling Americans To Read Previous Climate Change Studies

Co-authored by several dozen of the nation’s top climatologists, a new climate change study released Wednesday by the U.S. Global Change Research Program reportedly consists of 400 pages in which scientists just tell Americans to read previous climate change studies.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

When the ice in your scotch melts the level in the glass will be the same unless you have had a sip or two. It is only ice that melts over solid ground that will raise the sea level and then only if there is no further snow falling over those regions in a given amount of time.

Not true. When the global temperature are rising the volume of the oceans are increasing meaning more land are being flooded.
Simple physics.
And snow falling are more rare now then 30 years ago!

When the ice in your scotch melts the level in the glass will be the same unless you have had a sip or two. It is only ice that melts over solid ground that will raise the sea level and then only if there is no further snow falling over those regions in a given amount of time.

Not true. When the global temperature are rising the volume of the oceans are increasing meaning more land are being flooded.
Simple physics.
And snow falling are more rare now then 30 years ago!

Totally agree.
Of course, we will then be unable to support our Earth's population. Solution?
Also, a Drastic reduction in life expectancy, for those allowed to live (see above). 18th Century living, wasn't that great.

Dont worry:)
http://www.gapminder.org/videos/the-river-of-myths/

Also, a Drastic reduction in life expectancy, for those allowed to live (see above). 18th Century living, wasn't that great.

Most 18th century living was dangerous because science was still in it's infancy and most dangers in the home where from not knowing what things did like uranium sold as Radium cream.

If things went back to the days of the 18th century then the biggest problem would be antibiotics all the other dangers from that time are well known so it would not be as bad as some people here think .

---

Good to see your of small mind .

Smart people won't stay in the city's they will go and live of the land which a city slicker like you may not handle well

---

When the ice in your scotch melts the level in the glass will be the same unless you have had a sip or two. It is only ice that melts over solid ground that will raise the sea level and then only if there is no further snow falling over those regions in a given amount of time.

Not true. When the global temperature are rising the volume of the oceans are increasing meaning more land are being flooded.
Simple physics.
And snow falling are more rare now then 30 years ago!

Totally agree.

Can we really bring Co2 back to Pre-Industrial Standards, quickly enough?

Of course, we will then be unable to support our Earth's population. Solution?

Also, a Drastic reduction in life expectancy, for those allowed to live (see above). 18th Century living, wasn't that great.

Or perhaps:

Accepting, without barbaric solutions, THE CHANGE, and adjust to it. While taking measures to reduce (stop?) any FURTHER Damage.

Clyde,

You seem to be further along than most here in understanding the problem and the ramifications of trying to solve it.

To answer some of your questions and comment on your comments:

Can we really bring Co2 back to Pre-Industrial Standards, quickly enough?

Of course, we will then be unable to support our Earth's population. Solution?

Also, a Drastic reduction in life expectancy, for those allowed to live (see above). 18th Century living, wasn't that great.

Short answer: No, we can not.
Longer answer: Humanity has been perturbing the natural climate for a VERY long time (order of magnitude: 10 thousand years) through a WIDE range of activities. Some of these activities involve anthropogenic GHG release, some do NOT.

Frankly, it is just TOO LATE. In one of the climate change threads here, I linked a paper a number of months ago on the lifetime of the CO2 we have been releasing. It is a LOT longer than even most of the Warmists realize. Per that paper, after 100,000 years, 7% of the CO2 is still running around causing trouble.

Per the IPCC report that I have previously linked, CO2 emission from fossil fuel use AND industrial activity is only around 60% of the anthropogenic GHG emission total. Industrial activity is a quite sizable source. So that leaves fossil fuel use responsible for a bit less than half. Just stopping use of Fossil Fuels won't be enough.

Frankly, also stopping industrial activity (leaving us as you say '18th century' and Martin's joke about going Amish) won't be enough either. Agriculture and other land use just produce too much GHG for the planet to deal with.

Per another paper I have previously linked, agricultural GHG emissions (both CO2 and Methane (which decays into CO2 in between 5 and 20 years)) between the start of the agricultural revolution (about 7000 BCE to 10000 BCE) and the beginning of the industrial revolution (around 1800 CE) raised the CO2 concentration from 240ppm to 280ppm, producing (according to the computer models) about a 1.5C warming... quite a bit more than the 0.8C warming we have had so far since the start of the industrial revolution due to CO2 rising from 280ppm to 400ppm.

No, even if humanity disappeared totally right now, the climate would continue to get warmer for a very long time to come. We are totally boned, and it is a mess of our own making, and we started making it when we first figured out 'put this seed in the ground and it grows'.

There is, as I see it, one and only one solution. A Great Project on a planetary scale to scrub the CO2 out of the air and keep it down around 240ppm, and the carbon from the CO2 will need to be sequestered somewhere 'permanently'.

Of course, this will take the bulk of our industrial capacity and energy production to accomplish. This will reduce the amount of water we make available for use, and consequently the amount of food we can produce. Yes, then we won't be able to support the current population level, and it will have to be imposed and have strict limits on a number of things (such as reproduction so that we can keep the population at a more sustainable level).

On another note, ML1/Martin has for quite some time been focused on only the Fossil Fuel aspect, seemingly convinced that we can solve the problem by just stopping Fossil Fuel use without having much of a decline in standard of living. It seems that he has a joygasm every time someone puts up a wind turbine or a solar panel.

Well reading a few of his posts over the last few days, I think that he is beginning to understand the magnitude of the problem, but yet he still persists in bashing the Fossil Fuel industry. Yes, the Fossil Fuel industry shares part of the blame, but so do we ALL. The larger the population the greater the demand for agricultural products (yeah food...) and water. We have such a large population now that just the food production to feed them all produces GHG emissions at a DANGEROUS level.

Or perhaps:

Accepting, without barbaric solutions, THE CHANGE, and adjust to it. While taking measures to reduce (stop?) any FURTHER Damage.

I used to think that this MIGHT work, but upon further reflection on the subject, I no longer believe this to be possibly successful in the long term.

But,

Perhaps a better version of your statement might be:

Accepting, without barbaric solutions, THE CHANGE, and trying to adjust to it for as long as it possible.

Sadly, this is not going to be a successful approach in my opinion, and I consider it equivalent to the dance bands on the Titanic playing 'Nearer my God to Thee' as the ship sank.

Major the dismal view you put forth is true I feel. The human race does not have anything but a short term view. Frankly I feel the only viable chance our specie has is to get off planet and that isn't going to happen unless something that is profitable for the short term is found. Self sustaining colonies are our only chance IMO.

---

Major the dismal view you put forth is true I feel. Th human race does not have anything but a short term view. Frankly I feel the only viable chance our specie has is to get off planet and that isn't going to happen unless something that is profitable for the short term is found. Self sustaining colonies are our only chance IMO.

I agree, but there is precious little will to do so nowadays. In other words 'not likely to happen'.

I agree, but there is precious little will to do so nowadays. In other words 'not likely to happen'.

The only way it could happen is if some guy like Elon Musk sees a way to make a buck and grabs the ball and runs with it.

---

Thanks for a very good post and very good comment.

Re the:

On another note, ML1/Martin has for quite some time been focused on only the Fossil Fuel aspect, seemingly convinced that we can solve the problem by just stopping Fossil Fuel use without having much of a decline in standard of living. It seems that he has a joygasm every time someone puts up a wind turbine or a solar panel.

:-)


More seriously, my main distaste is for how the Fossil Fuels industry appear to be committing gratuitous outright vandalism with their sponsored FUD campaigns to poison anything that might reduce the burning of their products or restrict their pollute-us-all-to-hell without a care.


To turn around our two centuries of ever more significant industrialized pollution, we already have solutions if we can overturn the old oil corruption...

At the moment for "Fossil business as usual", we are indeed doomed. No question about it. However, that isn't necessarily the case IF we can do something positive...

Wind and solar are a nice headline grabbing and very visible start. There is a lot more also that needs to be done and sooner rather than later.


Technology and our civilization can save us, but only if we smash the stifling corruption so that we can let sustainable new clean ways succeed.


All on our only one world,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Those country's that continue to make excuses will be the ones that will suffer the most as there will come a day when theses country's will have not fall back when it comes time to turn everything that is not using renewables off thoses country's will fail .

Tony Abbott is now a dead duck and gonski at the next elections , even his own people are now sticking the knifes in so we here in Australia will be able to continue to go green and reduce our carbon generation and be in a good position when the time comes to turn off mans machines .

Will your country be ready ............?????

reduce power gen from coal and gas will lead to a 40% drop in Co2 output add car's then you have another 10%
If we did this then instead of only 65 yrs till we get to the critical point we would have 150 yrs enough time to develope fusion or other forms of power gen if we don't do this then start looking for your family plot if you do not live in a country that has made the change to a green economy as all hell will take place and you will probabally be shot or killed .

glad i live in a sensible country where money is not the be all and end all of every argument and common cents prevales as well a vision for the future .

---