Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
robinessex said:
Todays Beeb CC puff story
This occurs when the stress of elevated temperatures causes a breakdown of the coral's symbiotic relationship with its algae, which provide the coral with energy to survive, and give the reef its distinctive colours.
Nope. Can be for a number of reasons including too much light (there are lots of other factors)........ And anyone who dives knows what a thermocline is...... Water temp can vary a few degrees and the temp of the ocean varies quite substantially between day and night (again, divers know this).This occurs when the stress of elevated temperatures causes a breakdown of the coral's symbiotic relationship with its algae, which provide the coral with energy to survive, and give the reef its distinctive colours.
It's a puzzle how corals have survived for 500 million years with atmospheric carbon dioxidel levels more than 10x current near-starvation levels and temperatures on April 19 higher than today's supposed (non)-record.
Stella Mcfrobinessex said:
Todays Beeb CC puff story
Heatwaves 'cook' Great Barrier Reef corals
Prolonged ocean warming events, known as marine heatwaves, take a significant toll on the complex ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef.
This is according to a new study on the impacts of the 2016 marine heatwave, published in Nature.
In surveying the 3,863 individual reefs that make up the system off Australia's north-east coast, scientists found that 29% of communities were affected.
In some cases up to 90% of coral died, in a process known as bleaching.
This occurs when the stress of elevated temperatures causes a breakdown of the coral's symbiotic relationship with its algae, which provide the coral with energy to survive, and give the reef its distinctive colours.
Certain coral species are more susceptible to this heat-induced stress, and the 2016 marine heatwave saw the death of many tabular and staghorn corals, which are a key part of the reef's structure...............continues
they just repeat the same old guff. bleaching is a natural process ,the water depth over the areas affected has a major effect ,along with water temp although that appears to be less critical than light levels .the area affected can see a large fluctuation in sea level during and post el nino.Heatwaves 'cook' Great Barrier Reef corals
Prolonged ocean warming events, known as marine heatwaves, take a significant toll on the complex ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef.
This is according to a new study on the impacts of the 2016 marine heatwave, published in Nature.
In surveying the 3,863 individual reefs that make up the system off Australia's north-east coast, scientists found that 29% of communities were affected.
In some cases up to 90% of coral died, in a process known as bleaching.
This occurs when the stress of elevated temperatures causes a breakdown of the coral's symbiotic relationship with its algae, which provide the coral with energy to survive, and give the reef its distinctive colours.
Certain coral species are more susceptible to this heat-induced stress, and the 2016 marine heatwave saw the death of many tabular and staghorn corals, which are a key part of the reef's structure...............continues
http://landscapesandcycles.net/falling-sea-level--...
awaits criticism of link to blog by those that don't read link and fail to realise links to papers on subject contained therein.
Prediction: They gave up with the "man made global warming" (AGW)lark, because, quite rightly, people at large scoffed at it .
They then come up with the wheeze of calling said AGW "Climate change" , what a broad brush that is , climate has always changed, FFs,. Heck sea levels have been rising since the Bronze age (at least)(as example) so like AGW, anyone with any sense is scoffing at that as well. Anything far removed from what all this garbage is, a f
king great international taxation vehicle.
So, whats the prediction then? Another rebranding is coming. As said, "Climate change" is seen by people at large for what it is, bullst. Obviously, the branding is not scaring people enough.
What's coming? I reckon Climate change will be dropped to be replaced by "Climate pollution" or less likely , just plain "pollution" . It will not surprise me at at all, a much scarier description. Mind you, I could have swore carbon dioxide occurs naturally in our atmosphere, so if it does come to what I predict, then it will just be another instance of amusement.
They then come up with the wheeze of calling said AGW "Climate change" , what a broad brush that is , climate has always changed, FFs,. Heck sea levels have been rising since the Bronze age (at least)(as example) so like AGW, anyone with any sense is scoffing at that as well. Anything far removed from what all this garbage is, a f
king great international taxation vehicle.So, whats the prediction then? Another rebranding is coming. As said, "Climate change" is seen by people at large for what it is, bulls
t. Obviously, the branding is not scaring people enough. What's coming? I reckon Climate change will be dropped to be replaced by "Climate pollution" or less likely , just plain "pollution" . It will not surprise me at at all, a much scarier description. Mind you, I could have swore carbon dioxide occurs naturally in our atmosphere, so if it does come to what I predict, then it will just be another instance of amusement.
More money than sense !!
Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
)robinessex said:
More money than sense !!
Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
Doesn't bring him close to the virtue signalling level of Bill Gates.Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
Hosenbugler said:
Prediction: They gave up with the "man made global warming" (AGW)lark, because, quite rightly, people at large scoffed at it .
They then come up with the wheeze of calling said AGW "Climate change" , what a broad brush that is , climate has always changed, FFs,. Heck sea levels have been rising since the Bronze age (at least)(as example) so like AGW, anyone with any sense is scoffing at that as well. Anything far removed from what all this garbage is, a fking great international taxation vehicle.
So, whats the prediction then? Another rebranding is coming. As said, "Climate change" is seen by people at large for what it is, bullst. Obviously, the branding is not scaring people enough.
What's coming? I reckon Climate change will be dropped to be replaced by "Climate pollution" or less likely , just plain "pollution" . It will not surprise me at at all, a much scarier description. Mind you, I could have swore carbon dioxide occurs naturally in our atmosphere, so if it does come to what I predict, then it will just be another instance of amusement.
Global warming is part of climate change. They then come up with the wheeze of calling said AGW "Climate change" , what a broad brush that is , climate has always changed, FFs,. Heck sea levels have been rising since the Bronze age (at least)(as example) so like AGW, anyone with any sense is scoffing at that as well. Anything far removed from what all this garbage is, a f
king great international taxation vehicle.So, whats the prediction then? Another rebranding is coming. As said, "Climate change" is seen by people at large for what it is, bulls
t. Obviously, the branding is not scaring people enough. What's coming? I reckon Climate change will be dropped to be replaced by "Climate pollution" or less likely , just plain "pollution" . It will not surprise me at at all, a much scarier description. Mind you, I could have swore carbon dioxide occurs naturally in our atmosphere, so if it does come to what I predict, then it will just be another instance of amusement.
NASA (on the take scientists and an agency infiltrated by ‘agents’) explain it to you.
https://pmm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name...
NASA said:
Global warming: the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.
Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth.
Within scientific journals, this is still how the two terms are used. Global warming refers to surface temperature increases, while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas amounts will affect.
Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth.
Within scientific journals, this is still how the two terms are used. Global warming refers to surface temperature increases, while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas amounts will affect.
robinessex said:
More money than sense !!
Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
The USA is still paying into the deal isn’t it? Donald is just saying he’s not going to continue when it’s up for renewal in a couple of years. In fact the USA has already met its 2020 commitments. Climate change: Michael Bloomberg pledges $4.5m for Paris deal
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will pay $4.5m (£3.2m) to cover some of the lapsed US commitment to the Paris climate accord.
He said he had a responsibility to help improve the environment because of President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the deal.
The withdrawal was announced last June and sparked international condemnation.
It will make the US in effect the only country not to be part of the Paris accord.
The Paris agreement commits the US and 187 other countries to keeping rising global temperatures "well below" 2C above pre-industrial levels...continues
Bloomberg is then actually making contributions to US commitments to a deal that hasn’t actually lapsed yet. Plenty of other countries like India and China aren’t actually paying into it as they’re classed as developing.
https://www.greenclimate.fund/how-we-work/resource...
NASA's former engineers, scientists and other space programme people were already shaking their heads in disbelief at NASA's unscientific stance on climate fairytales some time ago. I've posted their open letter to NASA on PH a couple of times and others almost certainly did the same in one of the many 'appeals to authority' logical fallacy attrition loops.
turbobloke said:
NASA's former engineers, scientists and other space programme people were already shaking their heads in disbelief at NASA's unscientific stance on climate fairytales some time ago. I've posted their open letter to NASA on PH a couple of times and others almost certainly did the same in one of the many 'appeals to authority' logical fallacy attrition loops.
Another of many ‘appeals to self authority’ logical falllacy attrition loops. If an organisation like NASA agreed with you, you’d be quoting them as experts instead of trying to discredit them. Interesting that you don’t comment on Hosenbugler who is clearly talking nonsense.
People, talking nonsense that sort of agree with you = critical thinking
All the multitude of actual scientists and experts that disagree with you = climate fairytales.
El stovey said:
Another of many ‘appeals to self authority’ logical falllacy attrition loops. If an organisation like NASA agreed with you, you’d be quoting them as experts instead of trying to discredit them.
Interesting that you don’t comment on Hosenbugler who is clearly talking nonsense.
People, talking nonsense that sort of agree with you = critical thinking
All the multitude of actual scientists and experts that disagree with you = climate fairytales.
Total carp is welcomed too!Interesting that you don’t comment on Hosenbugler who is clearly talking nonsense.
People, talking nonsense that sort of agree with you = critical thinking
All the multitude of actual scientists and experts that disagree with you = climate fairytales.
El stovey said:
Another of many ‘appeals to self authority’ logical falllacy attrition loops. If an organisation like NASA agreed with you, you’d be quoting them as experts instead of trying to discredit them.
That's rubbish.You may (or may not) lack the scientific knowledge and understanding to know when NASA - and the IPCC for that matter - are talking out of their missing sink, but there are several PHers more than able to distinguish between scientific fruits and political nuts.
So can NASA's former engineers and scientists.
If you have the necessary understanding you're hiding it well, based on your post content not the fact that we disagree.
turbobloke said:
El stovey said:
Another of many ‘appeals to self authority’ logical falllacy attrition loops. If an organisation like NASA agreed with you, you’d be quoting them as experts instead of trying to discredit them.
That's rubbish.You may (or may not) lack the scientific knowledge and understanding to know when NASA - and the IPCC for that matter - are talking out of their missing sink, but there are several PHers more than able to distinguish between scientific fruits and political nuts.
So can NASA's former engineers and scientists.
If you have the necessary understanding you're hiding it well, based on your post content not the fact that we disagree.
Vs all the thousands of actual climate scientists currently working for NASA with decades of climate expertise and hundreds of published papers.
You think this is evidence that discredited NASAs position on man made climate change?
If you were neutral on this topic, you would not think this is evidence at all.
Here’s an ex head of NASA saying “active disinformation” and fake news (that’s all your graphs and click and pasting from blogs) is leaving Americans and 7 PHers oblivious to the threat of climate change.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/08/am...
turbobloke said:
Ali G said:
:yawn:
Looping is such fun.
Primary school kids can get the gist of causality but it escapes either the notice or the understanding (or both) of certain grown-ups.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff