ice sheet losses in Greenland and Antarctica reach new highs

[jimw1960]

Are you serious ?
......she certainly is not !

Please provide an a point-by-point rebuttal of anything you disagree with in that video and include citations to peer reviewed research to support your assertions. Otherwise go back to your right-wing blog-0-sphere and keep filling yourself with disinformation while the rest of us work to solve this problem. Dr. Hayhoe is an accomplished atmospheric physicist. Everything she says in that video is well supported by the scientific literature. What are your credentials and sources that anyone should listen to your nonsense? You clearly have no science background.

Looks like a bunch of baloney to me, one of the core arguments she makes is that increased co2 levels have lowered crop yields and that's the exact opposite of what reports around the world are saying. Doesn't matter what country you can find recent reports that crops yields are excellent.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/record-co2-coincides-record-breaking-crop-yields-greening-globe
http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/csdb/en/
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/news/media-releases/2017/aus-winter-crop-production-continues-climb
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/19/2016s-record-warmth-brought-record-crop-yields-fewer-storms/
Just seems to be happening year after year 2014 http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2014-02-11/record-winter-crop-for-wa/5251438
and 2016 http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2016-09-13/abares-winter-crop-forecast-australia-wheat/7838802

They try and manipulate against basic logic and basic science like photosynthesis and sure some are fooled, that's how they make their money.
I was just watching this interview about the constantly deliberately manipulated or deleted record colds the Australian BOM (Bureau of Meteorology) keeps doing, very interesting, it really appears they were hoping if they could just delete enough days of really cold weather they could come out claiming a new average temperature increase but another scientist happen to also be watching the temperatures and caught them red-handed.
Its also interesting to note that this scientist lost her job at a University because she didn't tow the line and publish reports on climate change doom, shows you what a lot of scientists must do to keep the bosses happy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjqTxziiY9A
[youtube]qjqTxziiY9A[/youtube]

You almost had a logical discussion going until you posted those right wing conspiracy video about scientists fudging data. But let's stick to the logical part. There is evidence that higher CO2 concentrations can benefit yields of some crops. And it may adversely affect others. Corn is one of the crops that can be adversely affected. A recent study discussed on this NASA website concluded "According to the study, the impact of doubled carbon dioxide concentrations on crop water productivity and yield varies regionally. Results show that maize suffers yield losses with doubled carbon dioxide levels, due in large part to the plant’s already greater efficiency at using carbon dioxide for photosynthesis compared with the other crops. Maize yields fall by 15 percent in areas that use irrigation and by 8 percent in areas that rely on rain." https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-study-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-will-help-and-hurt-crops

I think the video I posted could have been more clear on that, but that was just one of several points made in the video.

 

[billvon]

Cool. Warmth and C02 will help grow more plants to replace the ones we are cutting and sequestering above ground, but also hopefully counteract loss in the areas we are paving and/or simply killing many plants. Humans need plants. Plants also clean the air. And supposedly oil is from the same decomposed biological material as us and them. Everything in balance - can't be any other way

So I guess that's dumb to say.?

Yep.

I've heard this before - that more CO2 and more heat means more plants means more CO2 absorbed, so what's everyone worried about? Well, in 2015 there was an El Nino that increased temperatures significantly in many parts of the world. If your theory held, then CO2 should have decreased that year (or at least not grown as quickly.) What actually happened? There was a record high spike in CO2 production.

===========
NASA Satellite Reveals Source of El Niño-Fueled Carbon Dioxide Spike
By Andrea Thompson, Live Science Contributor | October 12, 2017 03:23pm ET

. . . The [Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite] mission serendipitously coincided with one of the strongest El Niños (an ocean and atmosphere cycle that impacts global weather) on record, allowing scientists to see how the carbon cycle responded and pinpoint exactly where the resulting record pulse of CO2 that entered the atmosphere came from. The satellite's instruments also unexpectedly proved capable of distinguishing the relatively small CO2 signatures of cities and even volcano plumes.
. . .

These effects were in evidence during the 2015-2016 event, which caused the biggest year-over-year jump in global CO2 concentrations on record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The satellite's observations let project scientists piece together the sequence of events of the carbon cycle's response as the El Niño geared up and then reached its peak. They saw that at first there was a tiny dip in carbon dioxide levels over the tropical Pacific because of changes in the structure of the underlying ocean that meant waters gave off less CO2. But that slight decrease was quickly overtaken by the much larger response from terrestrial biomass as drought, heat and wildfires took a toll and caused less CO2 to be absorbed and more to be released.

. . .

The team was able to take the analysis a step further by using OCO-2's capability to detect a signature of photosynthesis, which is a marker of the productivity of land plants. Together, the data showed that while the tropical areas of Southeast Asia, South America and Africa all added about the same amount of CO2 into the atmosphere, they did so for different reasons. In Southeast Asia, the hot, dry conditions brought on by El Niño made the region more vulnerable to fire, which releases CO2 into the atmosphere. In South America, dry conditions tamped down plant productivity, meaning the biosphere took up less carbon dioxide, so that the region became a net source of CO2. And in Africa, while rainfall was about normal, exceptional heat increased plant respiration, which caused more CO2 emissions.
https://www.livescience.com/60670-nasa-satellite-reveals-source-co2-spike.html
==================

So when it's warm:
1) Plants release more CO2
2) Droughts increase, killing plants
3) More things burn, releasing more CO2.

And from other studies, we know that warmer temps mean melting permafrost (=more CO2, more methane) and faster decay (=more CO2.)

Another denier myth - BUSTED.

 

[LockH]

Possibly an interesting read...

6 Questions About Hurricane Irma, Climate Change and Harvey
("As global temperatures rise, warmer oceans are expected to fuel stronger hurricanes, with disastrous consequences."):
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...-climate-change-warm-atlantic-ocean-questions

Starts:

A third of the way into the 2017 Atlantic hurricane season, NOAA looked at the ocean and air temperatures and issued an ominous new forecast: the region would likely experience "an above normal hurricane season" that "could be extremely active," with more named storms than previously expected—14 to 19 this season—and two to five major hurricanes.

Includes:

Records are tumbling in quick succession this year. Irma, among the strongest Atlantic hurricanes on record, barreled over the islands of the Caribbean as a Category 5 storm this week en route to Florida, while Houston, Texas, was still draining from Harvey's five-day deluge that broke the continental U.S. rainfall total for a single event.

Major storms are falling outside their normal range (Ophelia became the easternmost on record when it struck Ireland), and at strange times of the year (Tropical Storm Arlene hit in April of this year—one of only two named tropical storms in April, and the northernmost on record for that time of year).

 

[jimw1960]

An interesting read. I remember this guy Dr. Mueller from Berkeley used to be an outspoken critic of climate science until Heritage Foundation funded him to prove the IPCC findings wrong. Looks like his research convinced him otherwise.

Once were skeptics: What convinced these scientists that climate change is real?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2017-10-25/climate-change-sceptics-converted/9053406

A deep-sea core sample, containing layers of sediment laid down over millions of years, demonstrated first-hand that Professor Fenner's prediction had a historic precedent. One of the layers in the core sample was around 55-million-years old, from what is known as the Palaeo-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM). Core samples show layers of sedimentA deep-sea core sample, containing layers of sediment laid down over millions of years, demonstrated first-hand that Professor Fenner's prediction had a historic precedent. One of the layers in the core sample was around 55-million-years old, from what is known as the Palaeo-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM). "All of a sudden that [carbon-rich material in the sediment] vanishes and it's just this dingy mud with no evidence of biological activity at all," he said. "That was a response to a four-degree temperature increase that occurred over 20,000 years. We're looking at something that's a hundred-times faster than that."

 

[MadRhino]

Climate change is real, and it is too late to stop it. We could slow down the progression, but sooner or later the earth will react to a new equilibrium of mass and force. Global warming leads to ice era, inevitably. Wether it will start breaking in 300 years or 2 milleniums, the earth geography will change dramatically, like it did many times before. The process of re-equilibration does break tectonic plates and moves continents. Thousands of years of high volcanic and tectonic activity making the athmosphere so dirty that a very long ice era does follow. From this ice era, the earth does emerge clean and stable, until this stability is broken again for a reason or another. For us, this is far in the future, and it is not sure what of us will be left after the big change. For the earth, a few million years cleaning our mess is nothing. Life is permanent, it will find its way and evolve to a new balance, adapted to the new environment. I know this is a great worry to some, yet reassuring to others. Sorry to announce the apocalyptic future, but things are what they are.

 

[nutnspecial]

It's so easy to end up a tad fanatical about just about anything.

I aim at only being fanatical about being not fanatical

Ash to Ash and Dust to Dust. <quote?>

Life will always need death, from the smallest to the largest things it's just energy transforming/being transformed inside a closed system (regardless what you think of the universe/ "space") . . . At least until we can earn our understanding of infinity . The idea that something may not have a beginning or an end blows my mind.

And if there is even one thing that doesn't begin or end, all things we know are included within it. All time and space.

 

[Dauntless]

The idea that something may not have a beginning or an end blows my mind.

Left wing and right wing fanatisim has no beginning and (GASP!) no end. But what about this thread? Clearly it has no end, but does it really have a beginning? Could it be the first post is merely where we first noticed its' existence?

 

[MadRhino]

It's so easy to end up a tad fanatical about just about anything...

I was not fanatic, only fatalist.

It is easy to predict that what happened so many times before, will happen again.

Everything has a begining and an end. It’s always been so, and forever will.

 

[LockH]

Hehe... 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years old... and still spinning and rotating:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

:wink:

 

[nutnspecial]

I was not fanatic, only fatalist.

My post was in the intent to back yours up. I didn't think you fanatical (more like anti).
Or even 'fatalist'. We all have that 'fatal' condition lol so imo it's dumb not to acknowledge and try to understand 'fatality' or 'fate'. My mind is s t r e t c h i n g.

---------------------

Everything has a begining and an end. It’s always been so, and forever will.

You're being facetious? ? ? :wink:

Just in case not: : :
'EVERYTHING has a begining and end' . . . -there is no seeable beginning or end in the CONCEPT of that statement.

Same with 'AND FOREVER WILL'. . . . . Heheh right there at least your words relate to something INfinite

And just to punctuate, iirc Even modern science can see no beginning or end to their rudimentary understanding of our 'cosmos', or ENERGY for that matter HAHA. Awesome stuff.

 

[Dauntless]

Everything has a begining and an end. It’s always been so, and forever will.

You're being facetious? ? ? :wink:

Just in case not: : :
'EVERYTHING has a begining and end' . . . -there is no seeable beginning or end in the CONCEPT of that statement.

Same with 'AND FOREVER WILL'. . . . . Heheh right there at least your words relate to something INfinite

If it's always been so, that would mean from before the beginning, so before there was infinite. And after infinite ends, it will still be so. Dang.

But does that mean this thread, as well as other fight threads, will keep going. . .and going. . .and going. . . ?

 

[TheBeastie]

You almost had a logical discussion going until you posted those right wing conspiracy video about scientists fudging data.

I don't know how to discreetly point this out but I only posted the video because I have posted the well-respected text article about 2-3 times now? I was hoping maybe if it was in video form it would actually be absorbed..
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/temperatures-plunge-after-bureau-orders-weather-station-fix/news-story/9230dd914ac532fa735700ffc7799203
Temperatures plunge after BoM orders fix (backup / try loading via incognito tab to pierce paywall)
"Temperatures plunge after BoM orders fix"
The BoM said it had taken immed­iate action to replace the Thredbo station after concerns were raised that very low temperatures were not making it onto the official record. Controversy has dogged the bureau’s automatic weather station network since Goulburn man Lance Pigeon saw a -10.4C reading on the BoM’s website on July 2 automatically adjust to -10C, then disappear.

So much information is manipulated and people are massively manipulated.
For example watching some of these death of the great barrier reef videos are very convincing but are based entirely on baloney.
This video claims the great barrier reefs death is entirely caused by co2 induced global warming, and its very well presented and very convincing.
https://youtu.be/BO44JlAElXM
[youtube]BO44JlAElXM[/youtube]

But it fails to point out basic stuff like that there are plenty of coral reefs all around the equator that are if anything more healthy and alive in waters that average a signifcant 5c warmer, well beyond the 1.5c increase co2 warming is expected to induce.

Then you can watch more scientifically direct videos on the great barrier reef that claim that most of the deth of coral is caused by the corel muching starfish COTS ( crown-of-thorns starfish ). A single cot can destroy 1.5m2 of coral per day, and one single COT can produce 65 million eggs over the spawning season.
COTS are widely viewed as responsible for most of the destruction of coral in the great barrier reef and the only reason this isn't basic common knowledge is because theres no political power or money to be made from the masses by telling people this truth.

Some good news is a fed government funded breeding program of its natural predator the Giant Triton seasnail has begun to bare fruit with more than 100,000 swimming snail larvae already hatched during the early stages of the project. The reason with the Triton seasnail needs a breeding program is because the beautiful shells of the giant snail had caused it to be hunted to near extinction in the great barrier reef.

Short youtube to understand the gist of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTUxUMNrxkQ
[youtube]jTUxUMNrxkQ[/youtube]

Longer video on the subject, or go look at some others on YT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tG60zUFW-A
[youtube]-tG60zUFW-A[/youtube]
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/giant-triton-sea-snails-recruited-to-rescue-reef-from-crownofthorns-starfish/news-story/0464334d41e57bb32ac753051752dad6

The core argument of this post is that you can look at the first video and chose that to be your core source of information and have a view of the great barrier reef that is largely just baloney and its the view that most people have but it was really done because it was the most profitable.

 

[Punx0r]

COT outbreaks and the resulting reef destruction are widely known The causes are debated, but most involve human influence (surprise!). People may not directly cause things but we usually contribute to making them worse. Nature is a finely balanced system.

The BoM said it had taken immed­iate action to replace the Thredbo station after concerns were raised that very low temperatures were not making it onto the official record. Controversy has dogged the bureau’s automatic weather station network since Goulburn man Lance Pigeon saw a -10.4C reading on the BoM’s website on July 2 automatically adjust to -10C, then disappear.

Someone saw one glitched reading from one weather station? You're right - that proves global warming is an international hoax!

But it fails to point out basic stuff like that there are plenty of coral reefs all around the equator that are if anything more healthy and alive in waters that average a signifcant 5c warmer, well beyond the 1.5c increase co2 warming is expected to induce.

Reefs that have evolved in warmer waters are (obviously) adapted to live there. Life can evolve to survive all sorts of inhospitable conditions over a long enough timescale (small rate of change). It can't cope with sudden changes, like we're seeing now.

Also, 1.5°C is a pipe-dream. It almost certainly will be greater.

You are pretty much beyond hope. You seem desperate to believe almost anything that seeks to deny AGW

 

[TheBeastie]

COT outbreaks and the resulting reef destruction are widely known The causes are debated, but most involve human influence (surprise!). People may not directly cause things but we usually contribute to making them worse. Nature is a finely balanced system.

The BoM said it had taken immed­iate action to replace the Thredbo station after concerns were raised that very low temperatures were not making it onto the official record. Controversy has dogged the bureau’s automatic weather station network since Goulburn man Lance Pigeon saw a -10.4C reading on the BoM’s website on July 2 automatically adjust to -10C, then disappear.

Someone saw one glitched reading from one weather station? You're right - that proves global warming is an international hoax!

It goes without saying it but I guess have to explain it greater detail for you (maybe I should make a meme/video just for you so it can be more easily absorbed?)
It was constant deliberate removal of data the most important weather stations that contain the record lowest temperature readings in the whole of Australia, removing the lowest temperature readings in Australia massively helps skew the average mean temperature for Australia as a whole and helps those who want to claim Australia is getting warmer a great deal, but with heavily manipulated information, its not right or scientific.

I am not claiming anything other than facts but your accusing me of trying to suggest global warming is an international hoax, why don't you just accuse me of being a paedophile while you're at it, if anything I might just have more respect for you somehow.
It wouldn't have made the biggest main-stream-media headlines if it wasn't a big deal.

 

[Punx0r]

It doesn't matter if one station, a host of stations or the whole of Australia gets colder (or mistakenly appears to). AGW does not mean everywhere always gets hotter without exception. It means changing weather patterns and while some get colder. Even if all the temperature reporting in Aus turned out to be crooked, that absolutely does not invalidate observations in the rest of the world.

Critical thinking time. Probable reasons for casual observers seeing temperature logs being "altered" in order of likelihood:

Artefacts of normal data correction
Human error
Equipment error
Incompetence
Personal dishonesty
National conspiracy

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

Ya don't think if Australia was fiddling their reported figures none of the other climate scientists or meteorologists in the world would catch on? Or is everyone in cahoots?

Fortunately, no one needs achieve the impossible task of convincing you - time will eventually force you to witness the evidence with your own eyes as the world changes around you.

 

[billvon]

Ya don't think if Australia was fiddling their reported figures none of the other climate scientists or meteorologists in the world would catch on? Or is everyone in cahoots?

It's a conspiracy, I tell you! It's all those rich university professors and grad students who sit around eating caviar and lighting their cigars with $100 bills while dreaming up ways to scam the world. They call each other up and say "hey, Arvind, let's delete all the low temperatures reported by weather stations; no one will notice! That way we can claim it's getting warmer! No one will ever check. Muahahaha!"

Meanwhile those poor, starving Exxon executives are fighting the good fight, hoping that the truth comes out, struggling to just put food on their family's tables. Their children are starving. Won't someone please think of the children?

 

[MadRhino]

---------------------

Everything has a begining and an end. It’s always been so, and forever will.

You're being facetious? ? ? :wink:

.

This sentence is a demonstration in itself, that infinity does exist. Beginings and ends are essential parts of it.

 

[Punx0r]

"Record surge in atmospheric CO2 seen in 2016"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-41778089

Last year's increase was 50% higher than the average of the past 10 years.

Researchers say a combination of human activities and the El Niño weather phenomenon drove CO2 to a level not seen in 800,000 years.

2016 saw average concentrations of CO2 hit 403.3 parts per million, up from 400ppm in 2015.

"It is the largest increase we have ever seen in the 30 years we have had this network,"

El Niño impacts the amount of carbon in the atmosphere by causing droughts that limit the uptake of CO2 by plants and trees.

Emissions from human sources have slowed down in the last couple of years according to research, but according to Dr Tarasova, it is the cumulative total in the atmosphere that really matters as CO2 stays aloft and active for centuries.

Over the past 70 years, says the report, the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is nearly 100 times larger than it was at the end of the last ice age.

The study notes that since 1990 there has been a 40% increase in total radiative forcing, that's the warming effect on our climate of all greenhouse gases.

"Geological-wise, it is like an injection of a huge amount of heat," said Dr Tarasova.

"The changes will not take ten thousand years like they used to take before, they will happen fast - we don't have the knowledge of the system in this state, that is a bit worrisome!"

According to experts, the last time the Earth experienced a comparable concentration of CO2 was three to five million years ago, in the mid-Pliocene era. The climate then was 2-3C warmer, and sea levels were 10-20m higher due to the melting of Greenland and the West Antarctic ice sheets.

Another concern in the report is the continuing, mysterious rise of methane levels in the atmosphere, which were also larger than the average over the past ten years. Prof Nisbet says there is a fear of a vicious cycle, where methane drives up temperatures which in turn releases more methane from natural sources.

"The rapid increase in methane since 2007, especially in 2014, 2015, and 2016, is different. This was not expected in the Paris agreement. Methane growth is strongest in the tropics and sub-tropics. The carbon isotopes in the methane show that growth is not being driven by fossil fuels. We do not understand why methane is rising. It may be a climate change feedback. It is very worrying."

So much for the denialist claim that more CO2 means more plant growth, food for everyone and greater uptake of CO2.

 

[LockH]

“IceAge Shift:10,000-year Collection of Clues to decode a Holocene Mystery" Critical Randall Carlson
[youtube]-W6Lftgq8mg[/youtube]

 

[LockH]

Climate Science Special Report
Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4), Volume I

This report is an authoritative assessment of the science of climate change, with a focus on the United States. It represents the first of two volumes of the Fourth National Climate Assessment, mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990.

U.S. Global Change Research Program:
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/


Executive Summary

This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.

In addition to warming, many other aspects of global climate are changing, primarily in response to human activities. Thousands of studies conducted by researchers around the world have documented changes in surface, atmospheric, and oceanic temperatures; melting glaciers; diminishing snow cover; shrinking sea ice; rising sea levels; ocean acidification; and increasing atmospheric water vapor.

Seen on CBS Austin:
http://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-wo...trump-team-warming-mostly-man-made-11-04-2017

 

[LockH]

ESB "Search found 2 matches: +Totten +Glacier" (both in this thread... from last year)... "problem" doesn't seem to be "going away"... [sigh]

Sea levels could rise to 11 FEET as Antarctica glacier is melting:
https://arynews.tv/en/sea-levels-could-rise-to-11-feet-as-antarctica-glacier-is-melting/

Starts w/a YT vid Wind Driving Warm Water Under East Antarctica's Totten Glacier Ice Shelf
[youtube]fx56rbki_kI[/youtube]

 

[Punx0r]

I'm quoting this by resident denialist TheBeastie from another thread (https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=89002&start=950) because it's such a gem. Fear not! AGW is not only a conspiracy, but even if it was real, it doesn't matter because the greenhouse effect of CO2 is self-limiting and can't make the Earth hot enough to cause problems! 8)

The fact with this is why can't we now point the finger at solar panel manufacture everytime see a global warming temperature increase claim/chart than co2? Especially considering the fact that increase co2 ppm levels past a certain point doesn't increase its greenhouse effect anymore due to the fact co2 only absorbs a certain spectrum of the suns energy. Its like sticking your arm in a bucket of water after a while the bucket can't get any warmer.

 

[billvon]

The fact with this is why can't we now point the finger at solar panel manufacture everytime see a global warming temperature increase claim/chart than co2? Especially considering the fact that increase co2 ppm levels past a certain point doesn't increase its greenhouse effect anymore due to the fact co2 only absorbs a certain spectrum of the suns energy. Its like sticking your arm in a bucket of water after a while the bucket can't get any warmer.

1) The above statement implies a fundamental misunderstanding of the greenhouse effect. The problem with CO2 is not that it absorbs the SUN's energy; it is because it absorbs the EARTH's energy. The infrared radiation that the Earth emits (thus cooling the Earth) is blocked by water vapor, CO2, methane and several other gases. Block that radiation and the Earth gets warmer. How much warmer? That leads to point 2 -

2) The absorption band of CO2 is ALMOST saturated. (This is a very, very good thing - if it wasn't true, we would now all be dead from the 10-20C rise we would see.) However, it is not completely saturated. That is why we are seeing a relatively small amount of temperature increase, on the order of a few degrees C, even after increasing CO2 concentrations by 50%. We will see further increases as we increase CO2 concentrations further - once again, because the CO2 absorption band is not completely saturated. We might someday see atmospheric conditions like those on Venus, where CO2 does effectively block all re-radiation of IR within its absorption band. That's a good thing to avoid.

3) You use an example of thermal equilibrium attained through conduction. There's no conduction in the Earth's global heat balance - only radiation. And if you affect the amount of heat radiated, you warm or cool the Earth. If we trapped 100% of the incoming energy, the Earth would slowly warm until everything on it first melted, vaporized and then finally turned to plasma. There would be no equilibrium; no "getting the bucket as warm as your arm" or something. Fortunately, that sort of heating can't happen - warm things radiate more heat as they get warmer, and thus eventually find a new equilibrium. How warm will that new equilibrium be? That's up to us.

Education is a good antidote for misconceptions like the post above.

 

[LockH]

News from the province of Ontario in Canada...

What climate change has in store for Ontario
("Between the extreme heat and the floods, we won’t recognize the Ontario of our grandchildren"):
https://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/climate-watch/what-climate-change-has-in-store-for-ontario

Starts:

This week, the nations of the world are meeting in Bonn, Germany, for the annual United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP23), where they’ll discuss the progress being made toward cooling down the planet. The news is not good.

In preparation for the summit, the UN released an Emissions Gap Report on October 31. The report details what needs to happen if the world wants to avoid a catastrophic temperature increase greater than 2 C versus pre-industrial levels.

Slotted between colourful charts and paragraphs of soothing bureaucratese is this uncomfortable conclusion: even if all nations meet their commitments under the 2015 Paris climate treaty (which, according to research group Climate Action Tracker, none are currently on track to do), the report estimates a global average temperature increase of 3 C or more by 2100.

To summarize: we’ve collectively set the bar for climate action so low as to ensure disaster, and we’re missing even that inadequate bar.

And it gets worse...

 

[LockH]

The most accurate climate change models predict the most alarming consequences, study finds:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-the-most-alarming-consequences-study-claims

[Sigh]