We may have just had the coldest and snowiest winter since 1963 and yes we have had the coldest spring in 60 years, but don't forget that Mozambique recently had its warmest Tuesday lunchtime since records began.
Just because you have been freezing your nuts off for the last 4 months does not mean global warming has gone away and don't you forget it! :D
All wrong, all wrong .... global warming was dropped as a reliable indicator ten years back. The Canny Politico today talks only of "Climate Change". Sort of like April this year is not the same as April last year. :roll: :roll:
Can you imagine the furore there would be had we just had the mildest winter and the hottest spring? The BBC would be melting down. Coldest? Not a pep!
Still here. The foehn winds in Antarctica are leading to the separation of what remains of the Larsen ice sheet from the continent. That's warming in my book!
The climate has always been constantly changing. Change should be measured over 1000s of years, not 10s of years. which is difficult because "models" are relied upon, which takes us into the realms of whatever fantasy the modeler wants.
Even NS mentions the Loch Lomond Readvance which puts the current man made ( ?) changes into perspective
https://www.nature.scot/landforms-and-geology/scotlands-rocks-landforms-and-soils/landforms/ice-age-landforms/ice-age
What many Scots would not give for a wee bit of global warming right now! :lol:
Quote from: emc on April 30, 2021, 09:00:17 AM
Still here. The foehn winds in Antarctica are leading to the separation of what remains of the Larsen ice sheet from the continent. That's warming in my book!
Yes but the total amount of ice in Antarctica has increased and it is only one area, sponsored by Greta and the BBC, that is losing mass. It also seems that volcanic type action under the ice has been responsible for at least a proportion of the "melting" that some have reported. Antarctica might be melting, but it might not be melting. Also if it is melting then it may not be due to "warming" as the global climate was a lot warmer 3000+ years ago and, in as far as we know, Antarctica is still there.
The science was pretty strong that increases in atmospheric CO2 have, historically, followed a period of warming so we aren't even completely sure that current increases in atmospheric CO2 are human driven. Currently about 97% of CO2 emissions are not related to humans so it would be necessary to show that our 3% has caused the increase in atmospheric concentration of CO2 while the non-human emissions haven't and it would then be necessary to demonstrate (bearing in mind that atmospheric CO2 concentrations are at an historically extremely low level) that this increase has caused the warming rather than, as has been the case in the past, that what archaeologists call the "climate optimum" has resulted in increased CO2.
On Lewis for example, and as Gordon has mentioned, we've seen and are still seeing the impact of climate change as the last ice age probably saw 2 main periods of glaciation on the island ending with the Loch Lomond Readvance. The Readvance is interesting because you can see the direction of the ice flow well illustrated by many of the mountains and even the small "hillocks" such as one beside the loch in Arnol. It is counterintuitive but the ice actually flowed from south to north on Lewis, generally speaking. When the ice melted Lewis was left as a bare and rocky island but, of course, sea level started to rise and it is likely that the land also "rebounded" from the glaciation, there is actually a quite distinct raised beach up towards Ness. When the standing stones at Callanish, and in other spots across the island, were put up the climate was much warmer than today - hence why we see Stonehenge, Callanish, pyramids, all that sort of stuff going on in this climate optimum period as people fare better with warmth and good growing conditions. After the climate optimum there was considerable cooling and eventually the conditions were suitable for peat growth, hence why the peat on Lewis of is limited depth as it has a limited growth rate and in climate terms it hasn't actually been there for very long. This peat grew up around the standing stones that were put up in the climate optimum and eventually it covered them, or nearly covered them. The famous Callanish stone circle has had about 5 - 6 feet of peat cut away to reveal the bases of the stones. There are also archaeological sites from around the Callanish period under the sea because, of course, sea level has been rising since the end of the last ice age and probably the land only had a finite amount of "rebound" once the weight of ice was removed. Where the current Grimersta River enters the sea was some miles inland with a line of lochs and interconnecting channels bounded by hills and rock reaching up Loch Roag. The fishery at Grimersta is a direct product of relatively recent physical changes which related to a change in climate that occurred many thousands of years earlier.
People call me a climate change denier because I can point to actual physical evidence of climate change that has happened and can be actually physically pointed to on the ground. This sort of climate change doesn't fit with their cult beliefs and so they assert that to be able to present physical evidence for it is denial of climate change. I've never worked out the logic of this position. Those wishing to see some physical evidence should take a look at this video where I visit a stone circle that has been partially covered with the recent peat growth, brought on by the cooling climate:
https://youtu.be/55MzVIvhvd8
The largest single contributor to total greenhouse gas warming value is apparently methane from cattle. Methane is 30+ times more of a greenhouse gas than CO2. Today there was an interesting piece about incorporating a seaweed component in cattle feed and this reduces methane production by 80-82 % which is a huge diminution in the total greenhouse gas effect. Research continues !
There is only one thing you have to remember. When an event suits the left's narrative it's climate change when it doesn't it's weather. Our cold and snowy winter and record cold spring are just weather. Move along comrade, nothing to see here. :D
The coos are worse than I thought! Apparently methane is more like 82 time more of a heating gas than CO2.
Quote from: Bobfly on May 02, 2021, 06:07:35 PM
The coos are worse than I thought! Apparently methane is more like 82 time more of a heating gas than CO2.
My understanding is that it is even more complex than that because the current levels of CO2 have mopped up a lot of the heat that CO2 is capable of "retaining" so increasing the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere does not necessarily increase the greenhouse effect of the CO2 as the CO2 out there is already doing about as much work as it can.
Historically the lowest CO2 levels were about 180ppm and the highest around 4000ppm, we are currently at about 415ppm or there abouts, having risen from about 230ppm in the late 1800s. Below about 100ppm life on earth will cease. Atmospheric CO2 encourages plant growth and a greening of the planet as it increases in concentration. I for one am relieved that CO2 concentrations are heading in the right direction as if they were to have got any lower then we would be in very deep trouble indeed. Another point to make is that CO2 concentrations were almost at the lowest level that we've ever seen on earth why would it be a surprise if they were to rise from this very low level to a higher level?