Climate Koch up.

[Seth]

First, the attempts to limit CO2 emissions have nothing whatever to do with limiting CO2 buildup in the atmosphere, they are pure political power plays. This is a fact because, assuming that global warming is occurring, it has been stated by scientists that the CO2 currently in the atmosphere will be there, and will be affecting the climate, for at least the next 150 years. Therefore, NO CHANGE WE CAN MAKE TODAY OR TOMORROW will have any effect whatsoever on either global climate change or sea level rise.

I think there is a misperception here.
Yes, the CO2 currently in the air will not come down in a hurry.

However, there is a hell of a lot of CO2 not yet in the air, but which is on its way.
If we can reduce CO2 emissions ASAP, then the final top CO2 level will be less, and so will the harmful side effects. Any effort in this direction will save the world multiple trillions of dollars.

Sea level rise will be anything between 500 cm, and 80 metres (80 metres is a very unlikely extreme case with all the ice in Antarctica melting). it will not stop at 10 metres, but might be stopped at 0.5 metres with vigorous effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Hadn't heard the 80 metres figure before, but some few thousands of years ago sea levels in Puget Sound were 91 meters LOWER than they are now, as evidenced by the remains of native villages recently found 300 feet underwater.

But lets suppose you're right, "vigorous" in this context is not "do something by next week," it's at worst "take the next 25 years to carefully examine the issue, gather reliable and credible data, and make rational, reasonable affordable and universal plans to cut CO2 emissions that won't bankrupt industry and destroy entire economies in the process, and then make the prime contributors to CO2 emissions who HAVE NOT cut emissions as much as the United States has do so before asking the US to cut any more. Oh, and also, don't allow any third-world nation to begin or increase THEIR CO2 emissions based on some spurious argument that they are "entitled" to pollute the atmosphere just because developed countries have done so in the past. They snoozed, they lose and will have to remain undeveloped third-world countries because we cannot afford the environmental impact of their becoming developed countries."

In other words, there's absolutely no crisis whatever and there is no need to rush ill-considered and obviously politically motivated regulations into effect, especially ones that will destroy entire nations (deliberately) and damage the world economy. Whatever is going to happen in the next two centuries is going to happen no matter what we do tomorrow, and delaying cutting CO2 emissions for another quarter-century isn't going to make it markedly worse or better than what's doomed to happen as of right now.

What the graph I presented shows is that all the Chicken Little running about and shouting "the sky is falling" rhetoric of the IPCC and global warming zealots is just so much political bilge that has little or no connection to reality.

I said it long ago; every "climate model" ever created is just so much bullshit because it cannot accurately predict the climate next week, much less five years, and even much less a century from now. The "margin of error" in every single one of those models subsumes the maximum probable temperature deviation within a year, which means that all of them are utterly useless as predictors for the future, as the graph clearly shows.

It's smoke, mirrors and "never mind that man behind the curtain" from people who just want to create an artificial crisis to panic people so they will submit to ubiquitous government control of their every activity and will agree to one-world government.

Fucking panic mongers ought to be shot.

[Seth]

he is embarrassingly deficient in this subject.

try wilfully deficient....

Seth wrote:

First, the attempts to limit CO2 emissions have nothing whatever to do with limiting CO2 buildup in the atmosphere, they are pure political power plays. This is a fact because, assuming that global warming is occurring, it has been stated by scientists that the CO2 currently in the atmosphere will be there, and will be affecting the climate, for at least the next 150 years. Therefore, NO CHANGE WE CAN MAKE TODAY OR TOMORROW will have any effect whatsoever on either global climate change or sea level rise.

not sure how many things you can get wrong at once but then consider the soource.

The Co2 from anthro sources for the last 300 years will affect climate 1,000 years out or more.

If true, that just strengthens my argument.

Best case scenario: Climate change to continue to year 3000

New research indicates the impact of rising CO2 levels in the Earth’s atmosphere will cause unstoppable effects to the climate for at least the next 1000 years, causing researchers to estimate a collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet by the year 3000, and an eventual rise in the global sea level of at least four metres.

http://eideard.com/2011/01/15/best-case ... year-3000/[/quote]

So now it's four meters instead of 80 meters. Will you jackasses make up your minds please. Oh, wait, you can't because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Nature Reports Climate Change
Published online: 20 November 2008 | doi:10.1038/climate.2008.122
Carbon is forever
Carbon dioxide emissions and their associated warming could linger for millennia, according to some climate scientists. Mason Inman looks at why the fallout from burning fossil fuels could last far longer than expected.

So the fuck what? It's a closed system, you do understand that right? All the carbon that can possibly be released already exists and has been coming and going for billions of years. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for 150 million years in climate conditions that most likely didn't include very much snow and ice, and life has survived repeated ice ages.

Human beings can adapt to an entirely tropical planet. The ski industry may not survive, but who cares. More CO2 in the air, more vigorous growth of vegetation. More vegetation, more carbon binding and transpoevaporation. More transpoevaporation and carbon binding, less CO2 and more clouds. More clouds, higher albedo. Higher albedo, less surface energy input from the sun. Less surface energy input from the sun, less temperature rise due to solar input. Less temperature rise from solar input, lower global temperatures.

It's a self-regulating mechanism, you see, which is why the actual temperature increases recorded are far lower than predicted by the climate models, and why all the hysteria about global warming is just bilge and political posturing. So far, global temperatures as actually recorded have not strayed outside of the long-term global temperature norms over thousands and thousands of years. And yet life goes on even at those global temperature extremes.

I'm far more worried that mucking about with the atmosphere without careful consideration is more likely to result in the long-overdue ice age, which humanity will find very difficult to survive and which will kill off most humans. We can get along quite nicely in tropical conditions, but not nearly so well when there's a mile of ice on top of us.

Each year is cumulative - very little drops out annually so slowing emissions slows the onset of the worst impacts.

Horseshit. Every change we can make in the next century short of mass suicide will make indetectable changes because human CO2 input is a microscopic fraction of the normal CO2 cycle. The largest contributor either way is the oceans.

Your comment is like saying I've already smoked thousands of cigarettes - what's a few more.

Yup, it is. That's because the harm caused by one cigarette is infinitesimal. The notion that there's a "tipping point" beyond which earth is doomed to Venus-like conditions has been debunked by history. I heard that specious argument back in the 1970s, and it's not come to pass. I doubt it will come to pass, ever. It's all hysterical rhetoric by people who want to get government grants to study "climate change" who need to tow the party line and stick to the AGW agenda of the globalists in order to get that funding. Apply for funding for research that might prove AGW is a giant scientific fraud and you're unlikely to get a dime.

In other words.....pure bullshit.
In many ways it's worse as in that case you only you die.
IN the case of C02, the legacy goes on in human terms indefinitely.

So what? Adapt or die.

The climate IS already altered significantly and there is more to come even if we stopped cold but we won't.
Just eliminating coal as a power source would help immensely both C02 and human health.

Yeah, it would help immensely to kill billions of people and drive civilization back to wattle-and-daub huts and grubbing in the ground with pointy sticks for food alright.

You don't get an advanced technological culture, which is the ONLY type of culture capable of finding scientific solutions to the problems of CO2 and other pollutants from coal burning, like the new scrubber technology being tested in Colorado Springs for removing sulphur dioxide and other pollutants that is much more effective and less costly than current scrubber technology, by shutting down the power sources needed to fuel that technological society in a panic when coming up with a cogent and affordable plan for replacing coal and natural gas can be worked out over the next 25 to 50 years on a global basis without destroying entire economies and societies.

All you do by panicking is ensure the destruction of the technological society that could solve the problem and return civilization to a primitive, pre-electrical subsistence-living hunter-gatherer condition.

Carbon neutral can be done but not with the rightwingdings spewing fossil funded crap and buying politicians.

The problem is it can't be done quickly. We will be using coal power plants and fossil fuel sources for vehicles and industry for the foreseeable future, which means at least a hundred years, and probably 200 or more years simply because no other resources or technologies are available in a shorter term to replace those energy sources.
That's the part of the equation that you climate alarmists simply refuse to consider and factor in to your hysterical "the sky is falling" rhetoric.

We don't have another choice yet. So, focus on coming up with viable alternative energy sources (and wind and solar are NOT among such viable sources) and provide the energy (power) needed to research, develop and deploy realistic, workable, affordable alternatives to fossil fuels rather than focusing on destroying the world's economy out of panic over the short-term effects of not cutting CO2 emissions without careful economic analysis.

Some supposed libbies just can't own up to their responsibility for damage through fossil fuel use so try to deny its impact.
Hypocrites the fucking lot of them

Well, since there is no other viable alternative in process much less widespread production and deployment, perhaps they realize that there is no other choice, and that the priorities are skewed at the moment towards reducing CO2 emissions in the short term while ignoring the long-term consequences of doing so, rather than reacting rationally by developing workable and affordable alternatives BEFORE destroying the only infrastructure for energy production we happen to have.

Cart before horse fail going on in the climate alarmist community right now.

Adapt or die.

[Blind groper]

it's at worst "take the next 25 years to carefully examine the issue, gather reliable and credible data, and make rational, reasonable affordable and universal plans to cut CO2 emissions that won't bankrupt industry and destroy entire economies in the process, and then make the prime contributors to CO2 emissions who HAVE NOT cut emissions as much as the United States has do so before asking the US to cut any more. Oh, and also, don't allow any third-world nation to begin or increase THEIR CO2 emissions based on some spurious argument that they are "entitled" to pollute the atmosphere just because developed countries have done so in the past.

Up to a point, there is some sense here. However, I would like to add a couple of things.
Basically, we do not have to wait 25 years to make a start. There are things that can be done now, which will help a great deal, which will not harm our way of life.

For example :

1. Replace coal burning power stations with nuclear, wind and solar cell. We now have access to Generation IV technology in nuclear power which does not have the safety concerns of older technology, and which produces a lot less nuclear waste.

2. Plant a hell of a lot more forest. We need to replant at twice the rate of deforestation, and this can be done easily without significant negative economic problems.

3. Change the way we farm, so that the organic content of soils increases, rather than gets used up. We know how to do this today (eg. no till methods, and terra preta), and it has the extra benefit of improving soils and improving future harvests.

I agree that we need to develop newer and better methods. Some of these developments will take 25 years. Some will take a lot less time (eg superior electric cars, superior and cheaper photo voltaic cells, and practical thorium nuclear power stations).

On third world nations.
The main 'culprit' is China, which is burning more and more coal for energy. We cannot force China to change, without a third world war, which would do far more harm than good. However, the leaders in China are well aware of the problem, and will make changes as and when it is expedient to do so. Developing low emission technology which China can use will help. China is already working on the problem. It is, for example, engaged in a major forest planting program.

On the 80 metres sea level rise - that is, as I said, an extremely unlikely result. But I wanted to show the uncertainties in sea level rise and I listed the least possible, and the greatest possible rises. Reality will probably be somewhere in between, probably in the 1 to 10 metre region, though only time will tell. Early action will help to keep the rise as small as possible.

[pErvinalia]

If you want to lead by example, young Seth, and volunteer to be the first to move 20 meters vertically, I'll have a whip round to buy you enough rope.

Too late. I'm currently 2140 meters above sea level and well above all local floodplains. I'm not stupid. The same can't be said of billions of other people who are going to stand there for two hundred years wondering what's happening like the pinheaded microcephalic morons they are, as the water rises around their nostrils.

Adapt or die.

You still don't understand what the real problem is.

[pErvinalia]

I said it long ago; every "climate model" ever created is just so much bullshit because it cannot accurately predict the climate next week,..

If I was you, I wouldn't be boasting about saying that.

[macdoc]

Aside from Seth's nonsense which would put the climate into the dino age.....let me address your points.

1> Replace coal with natural gas - much easier cheaper and far less harmful while pursuing nukes and other tech. Switching to shale gas is very straight forward for existing coal plants - start with the oldest and dirtiest first.

2). yes but the lead time for uptake will not make much impact.

3> Yes - farm and eat. there are numerous ways to reduce both the fossil fuel content of agriculture and the methane release. Eating less red meat would help world wide ( Argentina and McDonalds ) or switching to roo burgers as roos do not emit methane and are far lighter impact on land use than hoofed animals.

China IS doing it's part, it is building more nukes, more solar, more wind than anywhere and has stricker car emission rules than North America.........but there is simply no moral ground to say they cannot build their economy the same way the West did....the same goes for India.

The West tho has the moral imperative to help them with technology where appropriate.

Sweden is a modern industrial nation in a cold climate and is already half way to their goal of carbon neutral by 2050 - it's only right wing ditzes in denial and unwilling to take responsibility that get in the way.

Sea level rise is inevitable but of relatively minor consequence in the short term tho it will magnify the impact of the stronger storms that are already evident. It's one more fucking diversion by the deniers.

Holland, Venice, New Orleans and other low lying areas have to take a long view and some are. They understand the score.

China knows it MUST clear the massive clouds of pollution and emissions or face even more dire consequences than the cost of going carbon neutral. The air in Beijing is 40 times the safe level of pollutants recently - off the scale of the measuring instruments. China at least is able to make a decision to build 20 nukes and go ahead with out a bunch if idiotic anti-nukes getting in the way.....and they have and are building them plus the worlds largest solar facility as well amongst other efforts.....do you really think something as disruptive as the 3 Gorges dam would get built in the west??

The stress on health and productivity is enormous but there is no short fix. It took the West about 20 years to fix the horrid air pollution of the 70s with effective S02 regulation - the irony is that the warming then took off.

I suspect China can make a dent faster than that.
India will take much longer.

The first world tho can follow Sweden and to a degree Europe ( tho Europe fucked up with the cap and trade ).
Industries and individuals - in California in particular have improved the their efficient use of power and reduced car emissions despite the dithering at the Federal level which might finally be over.

Portland is a model green city - people won't even order a pizza unless it's delivered by an electric vehicle. That's the mindset that is needed in all the global economies.
Denmark - the tax on a gasoline vehicle is 180% of the purchase price...as a result you see very few - most are hybrid and there are more bicycles than cars in the urban area with trains delivering commuters from the outlying regions.

Bill Gross thinks it will take a million small Manhattan projects to deal with AGW. And there are trillions to be made doing it.

The fossil fuel interests and their willing or unwitting mouthpieces will fight it tooth and nail. More's the pity.

••

Seth wrote:
I said it long ago; every "climate model" ever created is just so much bullshit because it cannot accurately predict the climate next week,..

still don't understand weather versus climate??? - too typical of the right wing stoneage mindset.

Adapt??

indeed you will adapt to a lower C02 footprint.....your taxes are already funding the military for that

[pErvinalia]

The fossil fuel interests and their willing or unwitting mouthpieces [i.e. Seth] will fight it tooth and nail. More's the pity.

[Jason]

Option B) Since Climatologists are now telling us we're fucked regardless, and climate change deniers are still denying, fuck it all. Burn coal, eat farting cows, and drive motorcycles with absurdly, and completely unnecessarily, large engines spewing out ghg like there's no tomorrow. Because there isn't.

[Blind groper]

like there's no tomorrow. Because there isn't.

The best way to ensure that, is to follow your advice.

[Jason]

Meh. It's how it is. Deal with it.

[pErvinalia]

Option B) Since Climatologists are now telling us we're fucked regardless, and climate change deniers are still denying, fuck it all. Burn coal, eat farting cows, and drive motorcycles with absurdly, and completely unnecessarily, large engines spewing out ghg like there's no tomorrow. Because there isn't.

We're not fucked if we do something about it. We are only fucked if we do what you and Seth want us to do about it - i.e. nothing.

[JimC]

Option B) Since Climatologists are now telling us we're fucked regardless, and climate change deniers are still denying, fuck it all. Burn coal, eat farting cows, and drive motorcycles with absurdly, and completely unnecessarily, large engines spewing out ghg like there's no tomorrow. Because there isn't.

We're not fucked if we do something about it. We are only fucked if we do what you and Seth want us to do about it - i.e. nothing.

Well, I think we're going to be a bit fucked up whatever happens, but we can reduce the impact significantly by quite moderate actions, as BG suggested...

[pErvinalia]

Yep. Levels of fuckedness. But we aren't quite totally fucked yet.

[Clinton Huxley]

I said it long ago; every "climate model" ever created is just so much bullshit because it cannot accurately predict the climate next week,..

A big round of applause for Seth, everyone! Now, enjoy your chicken in a basket and don't forget to tip your waitress.

[aspire1670]

If you want to lead by example, young Seth, and volunteer to be the first to move 20 meters vertically, I'll have a whip round to buy you enough rope.

Too late. I'm currently 2140 meters above sea level and well above all local floodplains. I'm not stupid. The same can't be said of billions of other people who are going to stand there for two hundred years wondering what's happening like the pinheaded microcephalic morons they are, as the water rises around their nostrils.

Adapt or die.

Yeah, young Seth, but you could still do your bit to make the world a better place by hoisting yourself up a few more meters. You know, adapt and die.