71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 01:54 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Whether or not there is validity to the expressed concerns it is undeniable that the Global Left has seized upon the issue as a means for a massive global redistribution of wealth never before seen in history. Many of the CC players have admitted as much. 

Your problem is that you see GW as a left vs right wedge issue, and since you're on the right you reject it as a serious concern (another form of denial). But that's only remotely true in the US. Elsewhere there are plenty rightist governments and politicians and voters who take it seriously, as the existential threat that it is.

In sum, you're falling along American party lines, which was predictable.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 02:07 pm
Arctic In Dire Condition As Climate Change Ravages Long-Frozen Region, Report Warns

“The impacts of a changing Arctic are not confined to those who live there," researchers wrote in the 14th annual Arctic Report Card.

11/12/2019 5:08 PM IST
By Nick Visser, HuffPost US

Climate change is transforming Arctic ecosystems in unprecedented and troubling ways, causing vast sheets of ice to melt, impacting local wildlife and threatening not just indigenous populations who live there, but communities around the world, researchers warned in a dramatic new report issued on Tuesday.

The findings were laid out in the 14th annual Arctic Report Card, compiled by more than 80 scientists for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.

Researchers observed many troubling trends in the region: Temperatures in the Arctic were the second-warmest on record for an 11-month period ending in August. The permafrost continues to thaw, potentially releasing up to 600 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year. And some fish populations in the Bering Sea, which supplies about 40 percent of the American seafood catch, have begun to migrate north as waters warm, threatening food webs.

“This warming is transforming Arctic ecosystems and presenting unique challenges for the region’s Indigenous peoples who rely on the stability of the environment for cultural and economic well-being, as well as for subsistence foods taken from their local lands and waters,” three of the report’s authors wrote in a summary of their findings. “The impacts of a changing Arctic are not confined to those who live there. Through global sea-level rise, the release of permafrost carbon, and its role in regulating global weather patterns, the Arctic is vitally connected to people worldwide.”

The researchers noted that the Arctic is warming more than twice as fast as the rest of the planet, due in large part to the region’s ice and snow. When temperatures rise and the ice melts, the color of the ground changes and absorbs more sunlight, further warming the region in a feedback loop that contributes to more climate change.

“This cycle is a critical reason why the Arctic has warmed at more than twice the rate of the global mean since the mid-1990s, a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification of global warming,” the report reads, which notes the Greenland ice sheet is losing about 267 billion tons of ice each year.

The report card also included perspectives from Indigenous elders who have lived in the region for generations for the first time. The Arctic is home to more than 70 Indigenous communities, who warned of a rapidly changing landscape that threatens “the entire Bering Sea food chain.”

“The world from our childhood is no longer here,” the group wrote in the report. “Our young children today are seeing so much change, but it is difficult for them to understand the pace. We are losing so much of our culture and connections to the resources from our ocean and lands.”

A separate paper published this month found Greenland’s ice sheet is melting seven times faster than in the 1990s, threatening hundreds of millions of people with sea level rise and impacting many of the Arctic’s enigmatic species. If the trend continues, the sheet alone would add an additional three inches of sea level rise by the end of the century.

Delegates from more than 190 countries are currently meeting in Madrid this month as part of the United Nations’ annual climate summit, where they hope to hammer out how, exactly, the world can dramatically scale back greenhouse gas emissions. This year’s summit is the first “blue” conference, a nod to the importance the world’s oceans play in regulating the climate.

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 03:44 pm
the Arctic meltdown is prime example of how these things tend to increase almost logarithmically
0 Replies
 
livinglava
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 05:59 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

We dont have to expect that ALL the billionaires deny CC, just enough influential millenialists (like the late Koch brother). Money in hand often has a habit of convincing one to act in a means opposite to ones best interests. How many people will expect there to be enough time so they can hve both? A lot, Id suspect.

Why, ifn I didnt know better , Id think you were preaching the moralistic discourse from a liberals POV.

It's not billionaires; it's the middle-class believing that the industrial-consumerist status quo is better and more lucrative than reforming industrialism to minimize its resource footprint.

In short, it's people not believing they can have a high quality of life with transit instead of cars, less pavement, smaller buildings, and less use of energy and other resources.
snood
 
  3  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 06:08 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
it is undeniable that the Global Left has seized upon the issue as a means for a massive global redistribution of wealth never before seen in history. Many of the CC players have admitted as much.

Is that so? You will surely provide links to the "many" instances where this has happened.


Surely
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 07:43 pm
@blatham,
I will within the next 24 to 48 hours and shove them up your pompous snout. Be prepared.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 08:27 pm
@livinglava,
no, its the billionaires. they start it because they have Power and INFLUENCE. They can fund all kind of negative"research" tht the mega mass or morons will believe because to understand facts takes TIME and EFFORT. You think guys like Finnsy and Oral get facts from juried pubs and scientidic journals??? Hell no, they gt the Koch /Singer spcials where new is concocte based on really good conspiracy theories.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 08:47 pm
@farmerman,
How often do e get to read ANY GW denialist "Science" in web sites ending in .gov, .edu, .org, .

farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Thu 12 Dec, 2019 09:09 pm
@farmerman,
I went over to "seek some science" from the Discovery Institute nd its sub group "Physicians and SUrgeons for Scientific Integrity" These two had been quite vocal in how they , besides supporting Intelligent Design Creationism, were avowed deniers of Global Warming or Anthropogenic Climate Change.
Seems theyve left the planet without leaving a forwarding address. Too Bad, they were always good for some cartoonish views about my field and how they really wanted everyone to believe as they do.
apparently, the Discovery Institute hd spent some money creating a new phrase for their CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND CULTURE. They admitted in 2017 tht they were , indeed, a branch of believers in Creationism.and doubters of GW

(I suppose I can now put away that argument that science has nothing to do with ID, they have so admitted to it all by themselves).
Then, after all that, they seem to have vanished. ANYBODY from the great NW hear from any of these guys??
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Fri 13 Dec, 2019 10:01 am
The Party That Ruined the Planet

Republican climate denial is even scarier than Trumpism.

Quote:
The most terrifying aspect of the U.S. political drama isn’t the revelation that the president has abused his power for personal gain. If you didn’t see that coming from the day Donald Trump was elected, you weren’t paying attention.

No, the real revelation has been the utter depravity of the Republican Party. Essentially every elected or appointed official in that party has chosen to defend Trump by buying into crazy, debunked conspiracy theories. That is, one of America’s two major parties is beyond redemption; given that, it’s hard to see how democracy can long endure, even if Trump is defeated.

However, the scariest reporting I’ve seen recently has been about science, not politics. A new federal report finds that climate change in the Arctic is accelerating, matching what used to be considered worst-case scenarios. And there are indications that Arctic warming may be turning into a self-reinforcing spiral, as the thawing tundra itself releases vast quantities of greenhouse gases.

Catastrophic sea-level rise, heat waves that make major population centers uninhabitable, and more are now looking more likely than not, and sooner rather than later.

But the terrifying political news and the terrifying climate news are closely related.

Why, after all, has the world failed to take action on climate, and why is it still failing to act even as the danger gets ever more obvious? There are, of course, many culprits; action was never going to be easy.

But one factor stands out above all others: the fanatical opposition of America’s Republicans, who are the world’s only major climate-denialist party. Because of this opposition, the United States hasn’t just failed to provide the kind of leadership that would have been essential to global action, it has become a force against action.

And Republican climate denial is rooted in the same kind of depravity that we’re seeing with regard to Trump.

As I’ve written in the past, climate denial was in many ways the crucible for Trumpism. Long before the cries of “fake news,” Republicans were refusing to accept science that contradicted their prejudices. Long before Republicans began attributing every negative development to the machinations of the “deep state,” they were insisting that global warming was a gigantic hoax perpetrated by a vast global cabal of corrupt scientists.

And long before Trump began weaponizing the power of the presidency for political gain, Republicans were using their political power to harass climate scientists and, where possible, criminalize the practice of science itself.

Perhaps not surprisingly, some of those responsible for these abuses are now ensconced in the Trump administration. Notably, Ken Cuccinelli, who as attorney general of Virginia engaged in a long witch-hunt against the climate scientist Michael Mann, is now at the Department of Homeland Security, where he pushes anti-immigrant policies with, as The Times reports, “little concern for legal restraints.”

But why have Republicans become the party of climate doom? Money is an important part of the answer: In the current cycle Republicans have received 97 percent of political contributions from the coal industry, 88 percent from oil and gas. And this doesn’t even count the wing nut welfare offered by institutions supported by the Koch brothers and other fossil-fuel moguls.

However, I don’t believe that it’s just about the money. My sense is that right-wingers believe, probably correctly, that there’s a sort of halo effect surrounding any form of public action. Once you accept that we need policies to protect the environment, you’re more likely to accept the idea that we should have policies to ensure access to health care, child care, and more. So the government must be prevented from doing anything good, lest it legitimize a broader progressive agenda.

Still, whatever the short-term political incentives, it takes a special kind of depravity to respond to those incentives by denying facts, embracing insane conspiracy theories and putting the very future of civilization at risk.

Unfortunately, that kind of depravity isn’t just present in the modern Republican Party, it has effectively taken over the whole institution. There used to be at least some Republicans with principles; as recently as 2008 Senator John McCain co-sponsored serious climate-change legislation. But those people have either experienced total moral collapse (hello, Senator Graham) or left the party.

The truth is that even now I don’t fully understand how things got this bad. But the reality is clear: Modern Republicans are irredeemable, devoid of principle or shame. And there is, as I said, no reason to believe that this will change even if Trump is defeated next year.

The only way that either American democracy or a livable planet can survive is if the Republican Party as it now exists is effectively dismantled and replaced with something better — maybe with a party that has the same name, but completely different values. This may sound like an impossible dream. But it’s the only hope we have.

nyt/krugman
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Fri 13 Dec, 2019 10:27 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
I will within the next 24 to 48 hours and shove them up your pompous snout.


I've seen some of the quotes which supposedly make up these "many" instances you speak of. All the ones I've seen have been taken out of context and presented as "policy proposals" when, in reality, they were simply asides and part of a larger discussion. If some of these ideas were subsequently picked up by the "Global Left" that's a totally separate phenomenon and has nothing to do with the intentions or motivations of climate scientists.

For instance, liberals have long called for more public housing. Well, when tens of thousands of USAmericans start leaving their flooded coastal communities and are heading for higher ground maybe the government will help construct housing. See? Liberals have long decried the amount of money spent on the military. Well, when the military is employed to aid in emergency evacuations, fight forest fires, and reinforce levees liberals will likely approve these expenditures. See? If we do experience a real climate crisis (and we're headed in that direction) of course there will be a "redistribution of wealth" — but it's not part of some progressive plan to equalize incomes or anything like that. It will be the cost of our survival.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Dec, 2019 10:43 pm
@hightor,
This is something that will never happen under a republican government. They won't even supply body bags. After all if they just leave the bodies nature will take its course. And its cost effective.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 02:29 am
@hightor,
Obama ruined the planet too by undermining the Copenhagen summit. It's a mistake to make of GW a left vs right issue.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 04:35 am
@Olivier5,
I disagree. It's not being framed as a left-right issue. It's the policies put into place by this current administration and the Republican Party's absolute unwillingness to recognize the seriousness of the problem. Whatever Obama did or didn't do at the Copenhagen summit is pretty well eclipsed by the number of environmental regulations his administration put in place — and which have all been dismantled by the Republicans.
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 06:07 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

I disagree. It's not being framed as a left-right issue. It's the policies put into place by this current administration and the Republican Party's absolute unwillingness to recognize the seriousness of the problem. Whatever Obama did or didn't do at the Copenhagen summit is pretty well eclipsed by the number of environmental regulations his administration put in place — and which have all been dismantled by the Republicans.

Republicans don't have to recognize the problem to work against solutions that will worsen it anyway.

If you put policies in place that tax carbon or otherwise create opportunities for some countries/governments to gain power to fine/tax/punish other countries for CO2 output and reforestation failure, then those same countries can invest in stocks that trigger the fines/taxes/punishments that ultimately benefit them financially.

In short, irresponsible trade undermines international cooperation in solving global problems like climate unsustainability.

What's worse is that Democrats support policies that encourage global trade over local import-substitution that has the potential to reduce trans-oceanic shipping, which is a huge CO2/energy waste.

Instead of fighting over tariffs and trade, as is currently the case, the same governments that want to cooperate in reducing emissions should be cooperating to reduce industrial resource use and trade. They don't and probably won't, however, because that is how they make money from other countries, which is a fundamental economic motive in a global economy where capitalism is driven by international competition to exploit import/export commerce for revenues.

Have you noticed that most all the media coverage of Trump's tariffs have focused on rising costs of imported goods instead of on ideas for import-replacement and innovation to reduce trade? Probably this is because the investors/banks that make money on trade don't want to invest in more local production that would serve local markets.

The global economy could become much more efficient by shipping/trading equipment to be used to support more local supply-chains and local production, but it can only happen if investors accept the need to pay local workers to produce products locally instead of investing in offshore production and transcontinental shipping to segregate production sites from the markets where their products are consumed.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 06:13 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
It's a mistake to make of GW a left vs right issue.
Hightor has it right, Olivier. Opposing (or very different) ideological stances on regulation and deregulation are at the core of this problem now. And that situation is made far worse because of the spread of a far right media universe that pushes GW denial on a daily basis.
livinglava
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 06:22 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
It's a mistake to make of GW a left vs right issue.
Hightor has it right, Olivier. Opposing (or very different) ideological stances on regulation and deregulation are at the core of this problem now. And that situation is made far worse because of the spread of a far right media universe that pushes GW denial on a daily basis.

Why is GW denial worse than GW 'problem-solving' that makes the problem worse while spending money on stimulus projects that support an unsustainable economy?

Infrastructure-footprint reforms could be achieved by replacing large numbers of personal motor vehicle with transit and bicycle usage, for example, but the focus is on EVs because those generate more economic growth.

EVs may be better than combustion vehicles in many if not most motor-vehicle applications, but they are no substitute for replacing vehicles with transit and bicycle use and thus reducing the footprint of paved infrastructure.

The economics of transitioning large numbers of people from driving to transit don't require more government spending and growth-stimulus but less. Transit and bicycle use cost less than private automobile ownership, which is why there is political-economic resistance to it as a solution.

When we prioritize revenues over reforms, we ignore solutions that cost less instead of more.

0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 07:35 pm
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/05/29/global-warming-alarmism-when-science-is-fiction/#243f0f727012

https://www.dailysignal.com/2010/11/19/climate-talks-or-wealth-redistribution-talks/

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/global-warming-fake-news-from-the-start

I know, string us all up!



0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 07:37 pm
@hightor,
Happy Bullshit
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Dec, 2019 07:38 pm
@RABEL222,
Can you be more of an imbecile?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.19 seconds on 11/28/2024 at 08:33:21