Tweet
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong
View Post
-
Have you watched the video yet? -
Not yet........my on-line life is on Life-Support!
But I am optimistic about my survival (Unlike my attitude towards my species' survival). So I expect, like Lazarus, to one day be brought back from my near-death experience (Though it is said Lazarus had gone beyond near-death).
Bob AComment
-
Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (For Transparency - The Position of this Poster in our Conversation Format)
"MEET THE VILLAINS BEHIND CANADA'S CLIMATE CRISIS
Oil and gas companies want everyday people to believe that we're driving the climate crisis. In fact, here are the influential players behind Canada's oil and gas industry who are truly to blame. They play key roles in expanding and financing climate-wrecking fossil fuels, blocking climate action, and spreading disinformation. These villains are more concerned about their profits and wealth than the future of the planet."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vPuOvDRckg
~ Bob A (T-S/P)Comment
-
LOL! You really need to listen to the video as you said you wouldOriginally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostComment
-
LOL. A youtube video by a guy that calls himself "environmental defence? Gimme a break. Here's a page from their websiteOriginally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
"For decades, oil and gas companies have profited from harmful activities that fuel the climate crisis. The oil and gas lobbyists use their power to delay, weaken or kill every environmental policy. In fact, Big Oil is the biggest barrier to climate action in Canada.
This is a critical time for Canada’s climate future. If the federal government continues to bend to the pressure of the oil and gas companies, Canada will remain one of the worst contributors to the global climate crisis.
To be successful in meeting our climate goals, we must stop the ongoing harm to our climate and the communities most impacted by the sector, especially Indigenous and frontline communities. We must fulfill the longstanding promise to end all fossil fuel subsidies, without exception. We must place a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions to limit and reduce their growth, and limit the ability of the oil and gas lobby to derail climate action.
The Canadian government must stand up to the oil and gas industry, and support Canadians’ vision to cap and cut their emissions and end all fossil fuel subsidies. Take action today and tell the federal government to put the interest of the people in Canada ahead of the narrow self-interest of oil and gas companies."
-----------------------------------------------
You call this evidence? Logic? Maybe logic, but as is always the case, unsupportable premises. Give us a little credit, please. It sounds like one of your posts, Bob. Did you write this yourself? As is so typical of just about all of your "analyses", it's all conjecture and hyperbole, based apparently on your understanding of human nature As always, you don't provide one example in support of these politically motivated claims. Not one example for us to work with. Not even a shred of evidence.
Comment
-
ChessTalk
Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC) Thread: A Conversation Mainly Between Anthropogenicists and Naturalists
(Started: 21/12/9)
Week # 21 (23/5/22 – 28: 7 days)
Weekly Stats:
Views
.....................................................2023 Average.... 2022 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day..........Views/Day
Views/Day........Views/Day.............(21 wks.)___________
........29....................30.........................29.....................44
Responses (Posts)
......................................................2023 Average.........2022 Average
....Last Week's.....Prior Week's......Responses/Day......Responses/Day
Responses/Day....Resp./Day............ (21 wks.)__________________
.............2....................2............................2.........................5.
Analysis of Last Week's Stats
Last week's stats keep pace with those of the prior week and with the 2023 average so far. There is steady interest in the critical issue of climate change, regardless of the perspective on the issue.
Climate Change Thread “Responses”
There are lots of climate change articles out there, both on negative anthropogenic climate change, and negative natural climate change.
This thread encourages CT'ers on all sides to re-post here, as responses, the climate change posts of interest they see elsewhere. Overall, ChessTalker's have been quite active here in posting “responses” and it seems that chessplayers across Canada are wanting information on climate change, a challenge unlike any our species has ever faced before.
Note:
1. The goal of this thread is not to woodshed an opposing view into submission. Every position is entitled to post as it sees fit, regardless of the kind of, and amount of, postings by other positions. What is wanted is serious consideration of all posts........then you decide.
2. I personally, as the thread originator, am trying to post a new response at least every 2nd day, but admit my busy schedule means I am sometimes falling short on this. So it is great that a number of other CT'ers are posting responses here somewhat regularly.
The Pressing Climate Change Issue
The core issue:
Building a sense of URGENCY on this issue in society. We must realize that we cannot kick it down the road any longer!
The public is aware of the climate change issue.......
BUT.....
climate activists must find strategies to “AWAKEN” the public to the “urgency”.
It is expected, though somewhat disheartening, to see other negative issues of the day climb immediately to the top of the public's agenda, with climate change being sometimes substantially downgraded in importance. We will all pay for this.........
The Time Line
Nature's Tipping point is estimated to be, on current trajectory, only 9 years away (Around Jan. 1, 2031). Capping the temperature rise at only 1.5 degrees Celsius (the original international target) is now impossible (UN Climate Change Panel's most recent report in March, 2023). Their position is that the problem at this time is mostly due to human activity, and that radical change in our method of living is the only way to avoid this rising, very problematic, temperature. UNCCP noted that current government deadlines were totally insufficient to solve the problem. CO 2 must be capped by 2025 since it is the main contributor to the problem! Methane is another greenhouse gas of concern, with some maintaining it contributes more to the problem than CO2. The extent of involvement in the greenhouse effect of water vapour is somewhat controversial.
Also, it has now become necessary to add in the process of CO 2 “removal”, along with “eliminating” the spewing of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere by human activity.
Our window of opportunity is fast closing.
The Large Picture Solutions
Can we come up with at least one viable suggestion of some impressive, radical thing that might wake up the public, that we could then put out there to other concerned climate activists?
Negative “Natural” Climate Change
This thread has had a number of CT'ers arguing for Natural Climate Change, and arguing that the human economic activity contribution to negative climate change is negligible. We are just in one of Nature's long warming cycles.
We would encourage everyone to consider the materials being presented, and then see whether they in any way change your perspective, if you are an adherent of negative Anthropogenic climate change. Whether you change anything, or not, your assessment of the evidence would be most welcome in this thread.
Negative Climate Change: The Conversation Project
All sides have been trying to come up with accurate statements on climate change that will gain general acceptance. We have reached now Post # 1293 (See below), and are working on some CT'er comments made after this post re possible revisions.
Here is the Post # 1293 (Slightly amended):
"Commonly Accepted Statements on Negative Climate Change (Layman's Terms)"
(Following a "Conversation Format" protocol)
Statement # 1: Solar Activity is the main driver of climate change". It is heat from the sun that is the "source" of the problem.
Statement # 2: Earth's mean temperature is now rising, has been for some time, and will likely continue to rise for some time in the future."
Statement # 3: From 1650 (200 years before the Industrial Revolution [Started: 1850]; 1650 is earliest global temperature recording), the Earth's mean temperature has been rising naturally (Earth has been in a natural warming cycle; it has gone through various cooling and warming cycles before this current warming one). There is surface temperature data for the period 1650 to 1850, and beyond, from the records of the UK Meteorological Observatory. Some propose that they are sufficient to use to analyze our increasing temperature problem.
Statement # 4 [Edited after posting]. For 650,000 years, CO2 in Earth's atmosphere never rose beyond 300 parts per million (to 1949). In 1950, 100 years after the start of the Industrial Revolution [1850], the percentage of the air/atmosphere that is CO2 had spiked dramatically to 380 parts per million. Since 1950, we have now had another 75 years of the Industrial Revolution. We are seeking a source for the 2023 count for CO2 parts per million.
[Note: The significance of CO2, and the Industrial Revolution, as factors in negative climate change is hotly debated. But it is necessary to include a factual finding on these two items, to have some common factual statement concerning them, for future Statements & debate.]
CT'ers of all stripes are now invited to propose amended statements, for the majority to chose between.
Take a hand at drafting "critical scientific statements"
!
CT'ers' Local Actions on Climate Change
Besides contributing to the Statements, you can also do other things! When you like one of this thread's links on an aspect of climate change, spread the news by posting it to your social media accounts and other Websites/Discussion Boards you participate in!
~ Bob A (Anthropogenicist)Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 1st June, 2023, 09:33 AM.Comment
-
Bob, reading your statement #4, I was surprised to hear CO2 levels now at 380 ppm, I thought it was much higher. But I guess you meant that as the 1950 number right? please confirm.Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
I found this website which tracks the CO2 levels,
https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2
Our current level as of yesterday is 424.66 ppm.
Comment
-
Rounding off in 1950: CO2 in air we breathe in was 0.04%Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post
Rounding off yesterday: It is still 0.04%!
No need to get anxious...Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Wednesday, 31st May, 2023, 03:13 PM.Comment
-
Hi Bob G (Post # 1358):
You are correct........I've made a revision.........see below:
Statement # 4. For 650,000 years, CO2 in Earth's atmosphere never rose beyond 300 parts per million (to 1949). In 1950, 100 years after the start of the Industrial Revolution [1850], the percentage of the air/atmosphere that is CO2 had spiked dramatically to 380 parts per million. Since 1950, we have now had another 75 years of the Industrial Revolution. We are seeking a source for the 2023 count for CO2 parts per million.
[Note: The significance of CO2, and the Industrial Revolution, as factors in negative climate change is hotly debated. But it is necessary to include a factual finding on these two items, to have some common factual statement concerning them, for future Statements & debate.]
Is this clearer?
Bob A (Anthropogenicist)Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 1st June, 2023, 09:31 AM.Comment
-
Hi Dilip:
I think you are looking at the wrong stats..........the percentage of CO2 in the air/lower atmosphere is not a relevant fact (0.04 %).
The problem is a layer of various gases at the outer atmosphere that encircle the globe, forming a non-porous (To heat) canopy, causing global warming.
The correct issue is the percentage of various gases making up "The Canopy" and trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere, causing the mean temperature to rise.
I do not have a source for the percentage of relevant gases that form this canopy.
But what we do know is that CO2 is one of them + that the parts per million of CO2 has spiked since the start of the Industrial Revolution (Approx. 1850 for ease of calculation).
Bob A (Anthropogenicist)Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 1st June, 2023, 09:30 AM.Comment
-
Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (ANCC)
Green Energy
A Seismic Shift
2022 - "the biggest single-year investment in clean energy ever", and, the first year "the world is finally spending more on solar than oil production"!
https://www.technologyreview.com/202...eid=c1a8ffafd2
Bob A (Anthropogenicist)Comment
-
Hi Bob, Do you have a figure to estimate the thickness of the canopy? I just converted the PPM to percentage, which my teachers, me and my basic science students have always used... (and incidentally the answer of 0.04% is still the figure used validly now as it was in 1950, despite the anxiety about megatons of CO2 emitted over the last 75 years). Also, one has to consider, as Sid pointed out, that the figures have likely been manipulated, to increase the anxiety...Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostLast edited by Dilip Panjwani; Thursday, 1st June, 2023, 10:28 AM.Comment
-
Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)
Global Warming
The Oceans
"In mid-March [2023], measures of global sea-surface temperature plotted against recent years took a sharp turn away from the pack. By April 1, it had hit a record high. Then, in line with historical seasonal patterns, it began to slightly decline — only to reverse course in the middle of the month, heating up to about three quarters of a degree above the 1982-2011 mean. That represented what Robert Rohde, the lead scientist of the Berkeley Earth institute, identified as the largest global ocean temperature anomaly on record."
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/01/o...it_ty_20230602
~ Bob A (T-S/P; for transparency - "Anthropogenicist)Comment
-
Hi Dilip:
Your Post # 1363
I am trying to pin down accurate information on "The Canopy" that Anthropogenicists refer to. Here is what I have found so far:
Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change
Placement of the non-porous (to heat) canopy within Earth's Atmosphere
The Warming/Cooling Paradox
"There is a paradox at the heart of our changing climate. While the blanket of air close to the Earth’s surface is warming, most of the atmosphere above is becoming dramatically colder. The same gases that are warming the bottom few miles of air are cooling the much greater expanses above that stretch to the edge of space."
https://www.wired.com/story/the-uppe...nl&utm_term=P7
Bob A (Anthropogenicist)Comment
Comment