Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Sid Belzberg]

[Bob Gillanders]

LOL!!!!! On August 29th Greenland Ice Sheet gained 7 gigatons of mass in just one day, the largest daily gain ever recorded in the summer. Better send it to your "fact checkers" to debunk ASAP!!!

Sid, I was not able to fact check your claim, but I did run into numerous other sources along the way all supporting the continued Greenland Ice Sheet melt. I have seen reports of loss of ice of 4,700 gigatons over the past 20 years (2002-2022) with a record loss in 2019 of 532 gigatons.

I will grant you the benefit of the doubt for Aug 29th and say sure, 7 gigaton gain is possible, but doesn't this good news just get overwhelmed by the bad news? What about Aug 30, 31, Sept 1, if you have a number for Aug 29, what are the numbers for the other days?

I did search Danish Meterological Institute, your quoted source, and found this video from 2017, describing similar reports of Greenland Ice Sheet gains narrated by our good friend Potholer54. Give it a listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMfj...rldWideWeather

[Dilip Panjwani]

WEF exposed in 60 seconds
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/sta...m_medium=email

https://web.archive.org/web/20200919...ampaign=buffer

What WEF, in their own words, is trying to achieve ( hint: total authoritarianism, worse than any communist dictator ever implemented...) :
'Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy...'

[Sid Belzberg]

Sid, I was not able to fact check your claim, but I did run into numerous other sources along the way all supporting the continued Greenland Ice Sheet melt. I have seen reports of loss of ice of 4,700 gigatons over the past 20 years (2002-2022) with a record loss in 2019 of 532 gigatons.

I will grant you the benefit of the doubt for Aug 29th and say sure, 7 gigaton gain is possible, but doesn't this good news just get overwhelmed by the bad news? What about Aug 30, 31, Sept 1, if you have a number for Aug 29, what are the numbers for the other days?

I did search Danish Meterological Institute, your quoted source, and found this video from 2017, describing similar reports of Greenland Ice Sheet gains narrated by our good friend Potholer54. Give it a listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMfj...rldWideWeather

I listened to the video, and he debated other bloggers' interpretation of the data but did not in any way dispute the validity of the actual data itself. Your question is, was Aug 29th an anomaly? No, the trend has been upward since the beginning of July. and continues into September. http://polarportal.dk/groenland/iskappens-overflade/

[Dilip Panjwani]

Sid, I was not able to fact check your claim, but I did run into numerous other sources along the way all supporting the continued Greenland Ice Sheet melt. I have seen reports of loss of ice of 4,700 gigatons over the past 20 years (2002-2022) with a record loss in 2019 of 532 gigatons.

I will grant you the benefit of the doubt for Aug 29th and say sure, 7 gigaton gain is possible, but doesn't this good news just get overwhelmed by the bad news? What about Aug 30, 31, Sept 1, if you have a number for Aug 29, what are the numbers for the other days?

I did search Danish Meterological Institute, your quoted source, and found this video from 2017, describing similar reports of Greenland Ice Sheet gains narrated by our good friend Potholer54. Give it a listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMfj...rldWideWeather

Bob, the climate change data has clearly shown that Greenland is overall losing ice, and that earth temperatures are increasing. Even Sid has agreed in his post above that the opposite interpretation, by cherry-picking the data, is wrong. The questions before us, as I framed them earlier, are:
1. How threatenning this climate change really is? The answer is going to be difficult, because it involves conjecture, but we can highlight the basis of the opposing claims to conclude one way or the other.
2. Can we and should we reverse or reduce the rate of climate change? This is the key question...

[Bob Armstrong]

"Fundamental Questions" re Climate Change (My re-framing of Dilip's Questions):

1. How threatening is Climate Change currently, and what is its projected trajectory (The majority of the planet accepts that climate change is happening)?

2. What % of the negative climate change happening is due to "natural causes" (The Earth is in long cycles of eons, and we are in a warming one; warming causes other negative natural processes to happen - e.g. release of buried methane into the atmosphere)?

3. What % of the negative climate change happening is due to "mankind's technology"? Or is it simply negligible, being dwarfed by the natural factors?

4. Regardless of the causation factors, what actions must humans take to "adapt" to continuously increasing negative climate change?

5. If man is contributing substantially to climate change, what does this mean to the actions society must take to mitigate the increase of negative climate change that mankind is causing? Must, in this case, the steps taken be radical, in order to have a "sustainable society"?

I'd be pleased to have ChessTalker's re-word some parts of this list of questions (But try to keep the same question numbers, and question concept).....I'd like to post it elsewhere where I am involved in climate change discussions. It would be our little contribution.

Thanks.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Gillanders]

Bob, the climate change data has clearly shown that Greenland is overall losing ice....

Dilip, are we all in agreement then, on at least this one point?
I'm not sure that we are.

I do note this passage from the Danish Meterological Institute website in their 2021 report.

Greenland’s Ice Sheet lost around 166 billion tonnes of ice during the 12-month period ending in August 2021. This means that 2021 is the 25th year in succession in which Greenland’s Ice Sheet has shrunk. Winter snowfall in 2020-2021 was close to average for the period 1981-2010, which was good news for the Ice Sheet. A combination of low winter snowfall and a warm summer can result in very large losses of ice, as was the case in 2019.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Dilip, are we all in agreement then, on at least this one point?
I'm not sure that we are.

I do note this passage from the Danish Meterological Institute website in their 2021 report.

Greenland’s Ice Sheet lost around 166 billion tonnes of ice during the 12-month period ending in August 2021. This means that 2021 is the 25th year in succession in which Greenland’s Ice Sheet has shrunk. Winter snowfall in 2020-2021 was close to average for the period 1981-2010, which was good news for the Ice Sheet. A combination of low winter snowfall and a warm summer can result in very large losses of ice, as was the case in 2019.

Of course you and me agree on this point, Bob G! (I am not sure about 'all'). I have always said that Climate Change is a reality now, as it has always been. It also does seem that the rate of change has intensified...

[Bob Gillanders]

Of course you and me agree on this point, Bob G! (I am not sure about 'all'). I have always said that Climate Change is a reality now, as it has always been. It also does seem that the rate of change has intensified...

Good to hear. Thank you.

[Bob Gillanders]

"Fundamental Questions" re Climate Change (My re-framing of Dilip's Questions):

5. If man is contributing substantially to climate change,..........

I'd be pleased to have ChessTalker's re-word some parts of this list of questions (But try to keep the same question numbers, and question concept).....I'd like to post it elsewhere where I am involved in climate change discussions. It would be our little contribution.

Thanks.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

I suggest change #5 to read,

5. Since man is contributing substantially to climate change........

[Sid Belzberg]

I suggest change #5 to read,

5. Since man is contributing substantially to climate change........

I disagree vehemently, who are you to make presumptions as to what the discussion is about?

[Dilip Panjwani]

How about first determining:
How threatenning this climate change really is?

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G and Sid:

On this one I have to agree with Sid........I have tried to avoid in the questions taking a position unless there is some general agreement (Like negative climate change is occurring, though some debate the cause of it).

Even though I agree with you that the majority consensus is that man is substantially contributing to climate change, the argument that s/he is not, is the main opposition point.

So the point of the questions is to generate material from both sides in one place, that we ordinary plebs may have some chance of evaluating, and coming to our conclusion.

At least that is my perspective on what I am trying to achieve by my "The 5 Fundamental Questions about Climate Change".

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Gillanders]

On this one I have to agree with Sid........I have tried to avoid in the questions taking a position unless there is some general agreement

Then I don't really see the point of continuing this thread. There is general consensus agreement globally that climate change is real and predominantly man made.
It has taken the world 50+ years to reach this conclusion. We have 50 years of solid data to back it up. If your goal is to debate whether climate change is real or a hoax, there is plenty of old denier propaganda on the internet to keep the debate alive until the end of time. But except for a tiny minority, we all know it's real.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G:

Agreed there is a wide general consensus that climate change " is real".

With respect to the division of responsibility, there is a wide general consensus that climate change is "man-made", to some extent.

I feel it is still a live issue as to whether there is in fact

a) any long cycle of eons, through which Earth passes, of heating and cooling;
b) whether Earth currently is in one of the heat cycles; and
c) if so, what is its contribution percentage-wise to the increasing rate of climate change we are experiencing.

I also agree that the issue of "natural climate change cycles" is being put forward by a minority. But it is the one source of confusion in all this, as far as I am concerned. And I believe it must be met and knocked out of the park, for things to solidify around positive anthropogenic climate change action.

For this reason, I am tolerating it being one of the "Fundamental Questions".

Despite possible disagreement by some (Many?) with "The 5 Fundamental Questions on Climate Change" that I've posited, I do hope that everyone continues to document, and have opinions on, here on ChessTalk, our worsening Earthly habitat.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)