ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 12, 2020 at 1:40 pm

Paul Plante says:

“The temperature became torrid, and on the morning of the 6th of February 1851, the air which blew down from the north resembled the breath of a furnace.”

“A fierce wind arose, gathering strength and velocity from hour to hour, until about noon it blew with the violence of a tornado.”

“By some inexplicable means it wrapped the whole country in a sheet of flame — fierce, awful, and irresistible.”

There we are talking, of course, and I doubt poor little Greta even has a clue, because if it happened before she blessed the earth with her presence, why, it never happened, at all, given that the world was created just for her the day before she was born, about the Black Thursday bushfires which were a devastating series of fires that swept approximately 5 million hectares of the state of Victoria, Australia, on 6 February 1851.

One million sheep, thousands of cattle and countless native animals were lost in that conflagration.

According to Wikipedia, which is intended to help un-confuse poor little ignorant lost souls like Greta Thunberg who apparently prefers ignorance and hysteria-mongering to educating her young self, the Black Thursday bushfires, were caused in part by an intense drought that occurred throughout 1850 when the continent suffered from extreme heat.

On 6 February 1851, a strong furnace-like wind came down from the north and gained power and speed as the hours passed.

The weather reached record extremes.

By eleven it was about 47 °C (117 °F) in the shade.

The air cooled to 43 °C (109 °F) by one o’clock and rose to 45 °C (113 °F) around four o’clock.

end quotes

So is this something new that is happening today?

Going back to Wikipedia for some “science” on the subject to counter little Greta’s hysteria, we have:

Intense bushfires are not uncommon in southern Australia.

The region is one of the three most fire-prone in the world.

Within the last two hundred years, the area has experienced and documented at least twenty-five major fires, beginning with Black Thursday in 1851.

The intensity of these fires is due in part to natural fuels, such as sclerophyll forests in the region.

While adapting to cope with drought and predators, the trees’ leaves turn into prime fuel for fires.

They become tough as protection from dry conditions and to increase the efficiency of nutrient use.

They also develop tough spikes and chemicals to protect themselves from small animals.

The leaves’ tough surface allows them to last longer and build up on the forest floor and the chemical makes them flammable..

The abundance of flammable fuel can cause an inferno with a single spark.

end quotes

WHOA!

Scrub all of that and get it out of the record, lest we upset poor little Greta and the hysteria-mongerers at the New York Times who want us to believe that before little Greta and the Guardian newspaper came along and started warning the world that it was going to come to a fiery end because of feedback loops and carbon overshoot, and forcings, there never was a wildfire in Australia, and but for the carbon pollution the United States of America have been pumping into the earth’s atmosphere since 1751, life there would be serene.

To close, when people ask me why I needed a little Kuboda tractor with a back-hoe, my answer is so I could dig a big enough hole to bury all my engineering books and degrees in, instead of burning them to create more carbon dioxide, because the AGE OF ABJECT IGNORANCE brought forth by little Greta and the Guardian and the New York Times has made them absolutely worthless.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/c ... ent-217293
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 12, 2020 at 7:10 pm

Paul Plante says :

Speaking of not embarrassing yourself further, dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, and taking a history course (or several) at the local community college to really learn the facts about history, not what you think happened, consider that over the 263 years between 1751 and 2014, the United States produced more than twenty-five percent of global C02 emissions now in the earth’s atmosphere.

Were you aware of that fact, for fact it now is?

If you aren’t aware of that fact, why would that be, do you think, given that this fact is a fact that in the United States of America is very generally commonly known?

If you weren’t taught this fact, Chas Cornweller, why that purposeful hole in your education?

Or was it purposeful?

Could it just be a case of your teachers themselves being ignorant and unaware of this reality?

Can you see what I am talking about, Chas Cornweller?

Can you hear what I am saying?

Because over the 263 years between 1751 and 2014, the United States produced more than twenty-five percent of global C02 emissions in the earth’s atmosphere, Chas Cornweller, we in the United States of America are now in a state of war, where for something to be true, it first must be false, lest the enemy know what we are really thinking, which would shift the balance of power in their favor, not our favor, which is where it should always be.

Hence, lies are now the only truth you will ever hear.

For national security reasons, Chas Cornweller.

How do I know we are not only at war, but in the fight of our lives which requires us to sacrifice our liberty to the cause of social and climate justice?

By goodness, man, how can you possibly not know, when the news is all over town, as follows:

Alicia Barton, President and CEO, NYSERDA, said, “Climate scientists have made frighteningly clear that averting the worst effects of climate change will require bold action, not incremental steps, and Governor Cuomo’s Green New Deal boldly goes where no others have before.”

“His unwavering climate agenda includes the most aggressive clean energy target in U.S. history, the largest commitments to renewable energy and to offshore wind in the nation, a massive mobilization of clean energy jobs and an unprecedented investment in offshore wind port infrastructure.”

“Together these actions make New York the clear national leader in the fight against climate change, and will show the world that New York can and will achieve a clean energy future for the sake of future generations.”

end quotes

That fight, Chas, is because for the 263 years between 1751 and 2014, the United States produced more than twenty-five percent of global CO2 emissions now in the earth’s atmosphere, and all we can say is we must have brought it on ourselves, and hopefully, when the war is finally over, which may well not be in our lifetimes, we will get at least some of our liberty back.

In the meantime, Chas, the imposition of a totalitarian form of government to fight this invisible enemy in the corrupt third-world ****-hole of New York has begun, as a result of Democratic Socialist governor and tyrant Young Andy Cuomo’s Green New Deal, to wit:

The Green New Deal will create the State’s first statutory Climate Action Council, comprised of the heads of relevant State agencies and other workforce, environmental justice, and clean energy experts to develop a comprehensive plan to make New York carbon neutral by significantly and cost-effectively reducing emissions from all major sources, including electricity, transportation, buildings, industry, commercial activity, and agriculture.

end quotes

The dictatorship has begun, Chas.

For something to be true, it must first be a blatant lie, like for the 263 years between 1751 and 2014, the United States produced more than twenty-five percent of global CO2 emissions now in the earth’s atmosphere.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/1 ... ent-217761
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 14, 2020 at 7:41 pm

Paul Plante says:

Actually, and this according to NASA, regardless of what the ocean might do, or might not do, and it is speculated about what the Gulf Stream might be doing, not scientifically proven, Norfolk is subsiding, which to say, Norfolk is on its way to sinking beneath the waves whether the ocean rises or not.

Consider the Nov. 27, 2017 article “NASA Finds Virginia Metro Area Is Sinking Unevenly,” which article is from NASA Earth Research Findings based on a paper in Scientific Reports titled “Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar Survey of Subsidence in Hampton Roads, Virginia (USA),” where we learn as follows about the reality of the situation, as opposed to the hysteria being peddled in just about every news outlet but the Cape Charles Mirror, to wit:

A new NASA-led study shows that land in the Hampton Roads, Virginia, metropolitan area is sinking at highly uneven rates, with a few trouble spots subsiding 7 to 10 times faster than the area average.

Whereas earlier estimates had suggested the area is subsiding evenly, the new study found that major differences in subsidence rates occur only a few miles apart.

Hampton Roads has one of the highest rates of relative sea level rise — the combined effects of sinking land and rising seas — along the U.S. East Coast, about an inch (23 millimeters) every five years.

It has experienced a steady and dramatic increase in high-tide flooding over the last 90 years.

end quotes

So, it is not like this is any kind of new or unforeseen problem, and we Americans who live on higher ground figure the people who live in Norfolk will adapt like the people in Venice and install duck boards so they can get around, and there will be a new job market opening up for gondoliers, especially if they are good singers.

Getting back to what NASA has to say about the issue:

Accurate, local subsidence maps are necessary for the area to prepare for increasing flood risks in the future.

The region comprises seven Virginia cities, including Norfolk and Virginia Beach, as well as Naval Station Norfolk, the country’s largest naval base.

The new study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, found that much-higher-than-average subsidence is occurring at Craney Island, a depository for material dredged from shipping channels, and at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, where the subsidence was most likely related to local construction during the study period.

In other areas with similarly high subsidence rates, the causes of the sinking are not known.

end quotes

Could it be that the extra weight of all the carbon dioxide the United States of America has put into the earth’s atmosphere since 1751 is exerting extra pressure on that land to make it sink?

It’s a thought, anyway, something for the scientists to hopefully consider while there is still cause for hope.

As to what is known as the Gulf Stream, that is part of what is known as thermohaline circulation in the earth’s oceans.

The National Center for Atmospheric Research has an excellent and informative article on that very subject entitled “Ocean on the Move: Thermohaline Circulation – A trip through the ocean on the path of thermohaline circulation, also known as the great ocean conveyor,” as follows, so one can gain a perspective on the subject that is not whipped-up hysteria from the main-stream media, to wit:

The currents flowing through the ocean, a process called thermohaline circulation, can have an impact on climate.

What is thermohaline circulation?

Cold water, in general, is denser than warm water.

Likewise, water with a high salinity is denser than water that contains less salt.

Surface ocean currents are primarily driven by winds.

Deep ocean currents, on the other hand, are mainly a result of density differences.

The thermohaline circulation, often referred to as the ocean’s “conveyor belt”, links major surface and deep water currents in the Atlantic, Indian, Pacific, and Southern Oceans.

Multiple mechanisms conspire to increase the density of surface waters at high latitudes.

Cold winds blowing over the oceans chill the waters beneath them.

These winds also increase evaporation rates, further removing heat from the water.

These chilled waters have increased densities, and thus tend to sink.

Formation of sea ice also helps to increase the density of water near Earth’s poles.

As seawater freezes, salt is forced out of the ice in a process called “brine exclusion”.

The ice is essentially not salty.

The excluded salt increases the salinity of the cold water immediately below the ice, making it denser still.

The salty, cold water near the poles sinks toward the ocean floor.

Just as rivers on land flow downhill towards the sea, deep density-driven currents in the oceans move along submarine valleys towards the deepest parts of the ocean.

The cold, salty waters that drive the thermohaline circulation form in the Arctic Ocean, the North Atlantic, and the Southern Ocean.

The shallow ocean floor along the Bering Straight prevents deep currents from flowing out of the Arctic Ocean into the Pacific.

Dense water on the floor of the North Atlantic moves southward, eventually joining the sinking waters of Southern Ocean in the far South Atlantic.

Once again, a shallow section of the ocean floor blocks the flow from moving into the Pacific.

In this case the Drake Passage, between the Antarctic Peninsula and the southern tip of South America, prevents the current from flowing westward.

So the thermohaline circulation turns to the east.

Here the current splits; some flows northward along the east coast of Africa into the Indian Ocean, while the rest continues eastward along the southern coast of Australia and finally, veering northward, makes it into the vast Pacific basin.

At this point the two branches of the thermohaline circulation finally begin to mix with the lighter, warmer waters above and work their way back to the surface.

Scientists estimate that the trip from the North Atlantic to the deep water upwelling sites in the Pacific takes about 1,600 years.

To balance the flow of deep water into the Indian and Pacific basins, surface water must flow back out.

Warm surface waters from the Pacific flow through the Indonesian Archipelago into the Indian Ocean, where they join with other currents that have risen from the depths.

This combined flow works its way westward around the southern tip of Africa into the South Atlantic.

Next, the surface flow moves northward through the Atlantic.

Aided by a nudge from the warm Gulf Stream surface current, this water makes its way once again to the extreme North Atlantic, where the cycle begins again.

This global circulation pattern mixes the waters of the world’s oceans, turning the ocean reservoirs into a single, vast, interconnected system.

end quotes

Thus, we can see by taking a look at some facts versus the hysteria being peddled by the main-stream media that the reality of the Gulf Stream is more complex than those who claim the Gulf Stream can come to a complete halt, so water starts piling up on top of itself and then as a result flows into Chesapeake Bay to sink Norfolk beneath the waves forever, which incidentally, would not be the first time in history that the ocean has taken over a naval base.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ent-218260
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 15, 2020 at 10:05 pm

Paul Plante says :

“In an extensive country, it will of course be expected that the climate is not the same in all its parts.”

“It is remarkable, that proceeding on the same parallel of latitude westwardly, the climate becomes colder in like manner as when you proceed northwardly.”

“This continues to be the case till you attain the summit of the Alleghaney, which is the highest land between the ocean and the Missisipi.”

“From thence, descending in the same latitude to the Missisipi, the change reverses; and, if we may believe travellers, it becomes warmer there than it is in the same latitude on the sea-side.”

end quotes

That, of course, was United States president Thomas Jefferson making those remarks in his “Notes on the State of Virginia” in 1781 about the indisputable fact that in the United States of America, there is no such thing as a “stable climate,” nor is there a such a thing as a climate that is common to all places in the United States of America.

So what can we then say when we are confronted with the following from the conclusion to the 54-page decision in KELSEY CASCADIA ROSE JULIANA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants, to wit:

A deep resistance to change runs through defendants’ and intervenors’ arguments for dismissal: they contend a decision recognizing plaintiffs’ standing to sue, deeming the controversy justiciable, and recognizing a federal public trust and a fundamental right to climate system capable of sustaining human life would be unprecedented, as though that alone requires its dismissal.

end quotes

Recognizing a fundamental right to climate system capable of sustaining human life would be unprecedented precisely because it is impossible for the federal government, or a district court judge in Oregon, for that matter, who is engaging in judicial legislation, making new laws and rights from the bench, and thereby usurping the responsibilities of the legislative branch and executive branch, to provide such a climate!

So, why didn’t the Obama administration simply make that point to the judge, instead of laying down and taking a dive and allowing this lawsuit to continue, which only serves to further warp and twist the minds of these young people in America who now believe that they have a constitutional right to the climate they desire, which the federal government has a duty to provide to them?

Consider the statements of the various child litigants in the lawsuit, to wit:

“I believe that climate change is the most pressing issue my generation will ever face, indeed that the world has ever faced.”

“This is an environmental issue and it is also a human rights issue.”

end quotes

Except the truth is that the earth does not give a damn about human rights, and climate change has been going on for literally thousands of years, so it is hardly the most pressing problem the world has ever faced, given that the earth’s changing climate is probably the only real constant we have in life.

And then we have this dramatic statement, to wit:

“Our government refuses to protect our basic rights to life.”

“If those we have put in power aren’t protecting our necessities, what purpose are they serving?”

end quotes

That, of course, is hysteria, which takes us to this, to wit:

“Our federal government has not been held accountable for their gross failure to protect the life and the future life on this earth, forcing us children to take drastic actions to procure the needed motivation in order to save life on this planet.”

And this:

“I want my government to understand that climate change is real, changes are happening right now, and things aren’t going to get better on their own.”

“Climate change should be the government’s first priority.”

end quotes

Personally, I feel sorry for these children that they have been so misled by these lawyers, the federal judge, and the Obama administration which bears the greatest responsibility for warping and twisting the minds of these children so that they actually think the federal government can change the climate of the United States of America at will.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/c ... ent-218729
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 16, 2020 at 6:58 pm

Paul Plante says:

Ah, dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, words cannot express the sheer joy I felt this morning when I sat down with my morning coffee, made by pouring boiling water from a kettle through coffee grounds in a paper filter in a cone above a regular plain old coffee pot for a negligible to zero carbon footprint compared to a latte, and opened up the morning edition of the Cape Charles Mirror to find this quite eloquent dissertation of yours above here on the crimes of your generation, Chas, when it comes to treatment of the environment, the ecology and the climate, and your sincere apology to young Nick and his generation for totally ******* up the world his generation is now stuck with, as follows:

“That said, the legacy of our having done little to nothing to curb an exacerbating climate situation will fall on our children to deal with.”

end quotes

One can feel the pain of your guilt there, Chas, truly so, and what a terrible burden it must be, to know that you are responsible for stealing the childhood of not only Greta Thunberg, but countless millions of children, some or many yet unborn, who are now in the same fix as is Nick, especially when you know that it was your support for Hussein Obama, who was impeached by a federal judge on November 16, 2016 for what I consider to be criminal negligence and high crimes and misdemeanors for which he should have been removed from office in a more perfect world.

So it is good for your immortal soul, Chas, that you are in here unburdening yourself to Nick.

And Chas, when it comes to a total lack of climate justice here in the United States of America, where since 1751, this nation has been spewing gobs of carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere in complete and blatant disregard of Greta Thunberg, and Nick’s generation, and a real American people getting a real crappy climate, as a result, consider what these poor people had to go through, to wit:

Floods were a frequent occurrence along the Poesten Kill, as spring run-off annually flooded low-lying fields and the threat of ice dams was ever present.

Major flooding occurred along the Poesten Kill, or on the Hudson at the mouth of the kill, in 1852, 1857 (highest flood ever recorded at Albany, almost twenty-two feet), 1869, 1871, 1874 (when a portion of the Congress Street bridge fell in), 1890, 1891, 1913 (which did a great amount of damage along the Poesten Kill in Troy), 1914, 1918, 1922, 1927, 1936, 1938 (which damaged the mills on the lower Poesten Kill), 1948, 1949, 1955 and 1977.

About 2:00 a.m. on September 18, 1890, the dam at the outlet of Bonesteel Pond in East Poestenkill gave way “and water rushed down through the narrow valley, tearing up trees and carrying away everything standing in its course.”

According to the New York Times, six bridges were destroyed, along with three sawmills and the barns and shed of George Cottrell.

At the hamlet of Barberville, John Randall’s shoe shop was demolished but the water spread out along the flats there, saving the rest of the hamlet from destruction.

At the village of Poestenkill, the streets were flooded and Wheeler’s shoe shop was washed from its foundation.

In Troy, the water “rose alarmingly, but did not flood its banks, even though Bonesteel Pond was completely drained of its water.

John Randall rebuilt his shop at Barberville but less than a year later it was washed away again, this time in a much more destructive storm.

It began the day before when a heavy rain swelled both the Poesten and Wynants Kills.

Already the locals were worried, and the next day, when news of a large storm was received, “several men immediately mounted horses and proceeded to the farm houses on the banks of the creek and gave the alarm.”

By 7:00 p.m., the water had risen considerably and carried away several bridges and sluices, including the iron bridge near Hammond Herrington’s in East Poestenkill.

“Mr. Herrington’s large flats are completely submerged,” the New York Times reported the next day, “completely destroying a large crop of potatoes and almost ruining the flats.”

“A barn occupied by Porter Herrington, who lives in the house, was carried away.”

“The roads are all gullied or washed out so as to be almost impassable, especially on the hills.”

end quotes

And that story of flooding goes on and on up to this present day!

So believe me, Chas, when Nick talks about the streets of Cape Charles flooding that same way, we feel his pain, because that is the history I grew up with, Chas, which gives me a real healthy respect for the power of Mother Nature when she is in a rampage, which happens often enough if you ended up in a place with a real crappy climate compared to that of Monticello or Cape Charles like those poor people of Poestenkill did, all because since 1751, the United States of America spewed tons upon tons of carbon dioxide into the air to cause all of that flooding in Poestenkill to happen the way it did.

And Chas, I am glad you are feeling remorse here, it is good for your soul, but don’t take all the burden of guilt on your shoulders when it is Hussein Obama who is the truly guilty party, that according to a federal court judge who should know what she is talking about when she proclaims Hussein guilty of destroying the ecology with his wanton and wasteful policies that encouraged people to make more carbon dioxide instead of less, and your sin was merely supporting him, perhaps out of ignorance and blind faith and devotion.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ent-219080
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 17, 2020 at 11:52 am

Paul Plante says :

Chas says:

We boomers (yes, I am one) have been lied to for the past forty/fifty years about the extent of damage carbons produce in the atmosphere.

Who lied to us?

Exxon, Mobil Oil, British Petroleum and the government.

The World Meteorological Organization (“WMO”) responds:

A breakthrough came in 1997 when John Browne, chief executive of oil giant BP Amoco, declared that global warming really might come to pass, and industry should prepare to deal with it.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ent-219080
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 20, 2020 at 12:01 am

Paul Plante says :

As to NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, being compromised as a serious scientific enterprise, as opposed to what it is, a political tool of the IPCC, as we saw in the December 1, 2019 Cape Charles Mirror thread titled “Opinion: On NOAA, Contrived Science and the IPCC” http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... -the-ipcc/ NOAA is compromised precisely because its Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research Ko Barrett, where she supervises daily operations and administration of NOAA’s research enterprise, is at the same time a vice chair of the IPCC, where for over 15 years, she has represented the United States on delegations charged with negotiating and adopting scientific assessments undertaken by the IPCC, and she has also served for over a decade as a lead negotiator for the United States on the United Nations treaty on climate change.

So, where does her loyalty really lie then, given that the IPCC is in essence an independent, autonomous government structure separate from the government of the United States of America?

So talk about a serious conflict of interest, there it is in plain sight.

As to getting buried in bull**** in here, which we certainly are by the climate crisis crowd, and the “hockey stick” graph, a website calling itself “Skeptical Science” has an article entitled “How reliable are CO2 measurements?” where the following statement is made, to wit:

Mauna Loa is often used as an example of rising carbon dioxide levels because its the longest, continuous series of directly measured atmospheric CO2.

The reason why it’s acceptable to use Mauna Loa as a proxy for global CO2 levels is because CO2 mixes well throughout the atmosphere.

Consequently, the trend in Mauna Loa CO2 (1.64 ppm per year) is statistically indistinguishable from the trend in global CO2 levels (1.66 ppm per year).

If global CO2 was used in Figure 1 above, the result “hockey stick” shape would be identical.

end quotes

Except as we can clearly see from the EarthSky article “6 things to know about carbon dioxide” posted July 2, 2019, CO2 is not evenly distributed, to wit:

CO2 is not evenly distributed.

Satellite observations show carbon dioxide in the air can be somewhat patchy, with high concentrations in some places and lower concentrations in others.

For instance, the map below shows carbon dioxide levels for May 2013 in the mid-troposphere, the part of the atmosphere where most weather occurs.

At the time there was more carbon dioxide in the northern hemisphere because crops, grasses, and trees hadn’t greened up yet and absorbed some of the gas.

The transport and distribution of CO2 throughout the atmosphere is controlled by the jet stream, large weather systems, and other large-scale atmospheric circulations.

This patchiness has raised interesting questions about how carbon dioxide is transported from one part of the atmosphere to another – both horizontally and vertically.

end quotes

In fact, as we can see from the article “NASA Releases New CO2 Data, Refutes Conventional Wisdom” by Ucilia Wang on December 15, 2009, that information has been known for some time, but since it goes against the grain of the propaganda being put out by the climate crisis crowd, it is ignored, to wit:

SAN FRANCISCO — NASA has released the first-ever set of carbon dioxide data based only on daily observations by a satellite instrument, a new tool that will help researchers study climate change and improve weather predictions.

The data came from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) that NASA launched aboard its Aqua spacecraft in 2002.

Since then, AIRS has amassed information about carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, water vapor, methane and temperatures in the mid-troposphere.

The mid-troposphere is about three to seven miles above the Earth’s surface.

For carbon dioxide, AIRS measures and tracks its concentration and movement as it moves across the globe.

Observation data is critical for scientists to validate their models or adjust them to better predict the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on the weather and climate.

The data have already refuted a long-held belief that carbon dioxide is evenly distributed and do so fairly quickly in the atmosphere once it rises from the ground, said Moustafa Chahine, the science team leader of the AIRS project at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in San Francisco Tuesday.

“Contrary to the prevailing wisdom, carbon dioxide is not well mixed in the mid-troposphere,” Chahine said.

“You can see the jet stream splitting the carbon dioxide clump.”

AIRS data shows instead that carbon dioxide, which has seen its rate of increase accelerating from 1 part per million in 1955 to 2 parts per million today, would require about two to three years before it blends in, he said.

The atmosphere currently has about 400 parts per million.

How well and how quickly carbon dioxide blends in is important for understanding how much and how long carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere and affects the climate before some of it is scooped up by Earth’s natural scrubbers, such as the ocean.

And by extension, that knowledge would be crucial in determining what humans must do to minimize their emissions or use technologies to capture and sequester their carbon dioxide pollution before it escapes into the atmosphere.

Chahine said several climate models have assumed an even distribution because researchers didn’t have adequate data to show how the carbon dioxide is vertically transported through the atmosphere.

“The data we have now will help researchers improve their models’ vertical transport,” Chahine said.

Although scientists knew that carbon dioxide doesn’t stay in one location – winds blow pollution from Asia across the Pacific to reach the United States – their models largely showed a smaller amount of the emission move from the north to the south than what data from AIRS have demonstrated.

end quotes

And if CO2 is not evenly distributed, then the greenhouse gas models being used to make us feel panic because Greta Thunberg is scared are not accurate, plain and simple.

Will NOAA come clean and tell us that?

Frankly, based on my conversations with that agency, I frankly doubt it, because it needs this climate crisis to secure future funding for itself and the IPCC.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/e ... ent-220526
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 18, 2020 at 7:42 pm

Paul Plante says:

And as an example of just how absolutely looney, zany and stupidly insane this “climate change” dialogue has become, we need go no further than this following from the VOX article entitled “21 kids sued the government over climate change. A federal court dismissed the case. Plaintiffs in the Juliana v. US lawsuit alleged the government violated the rights of young people to a safe climate” by Umair Irfan on Jan. 17, 2020, to wit:

Climate litigation has also emerged as an issue in the 2020 campaign for president.

Many of the Democratic contenders have called for fossil fuel companies to be held liable for climate damages and for sowing disinformation.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has gone as far as to call for criminal prosecution of greenhouse gas emitters.

end quotes

Yo! Yo! You Go, Bernie!

And since you are a prodigious greenhouse gas emitter yourself, what with both copious amounts of carbon dioxide from yourself and your staff and your political campaign, coupled with all that methane you personally are a big emitter of, make a good example for the rest of us and bring yourself on criminal charges first, and get yourself prosecuted to the fullest degree of the law to show us just how serious you really are.

Everybody who strikes a match is a greenhouse gas emitter.

All those people with their lit Bic lighters at Bernie Sanders Revival Rallies swaying back and forth in ecstasy as Bernie croons to them in dulcet tones are greenhouse gas emitters, because ALL combustion emits greenhouse gasses, including your gas grill or charcoal grill to cook you Mahi-Mahi steaks on.

Dare to combust anything, and you’ll end up doing hard time in Bernie’s world where emitting greenhouse gases, including farts, is a criminal offense.

And what a truly stupid statement that is, people, from somebody who wants to get into the White House to get his socialistic/communistic hands on $16.3 TRILLION in taxpayer funds that he can then squander in the name of climate justice, a contrived term with whatever meaning of the moment grasping hack politicians like Bernie Sanders can give to it.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ent-212459
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 20, 2020 at 11:56 pm

Paul Plante says :

With respect to “global average temperature” supposedly sky-rocketing upward because of carbon dioxide, if one were to bother to consult “WORLDS IN THE MAKING – THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSE” by Svante Arrhenius, Director of the Physico-Chemical Nobel Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, published March, 1908, one would find this following data point, to wit:

The actual mean temperature of the surface of the earth is 16 Cent. (61 F.).

end quotes

Now, fast-forward to our times today, some one hundred twelve years later, where we have as follows with respect to global average temperature:

GISS data show global average temperatures in 2017 rose 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) above the 1951-1980 mean.

According to GISS, the global mean surface air temperature for that period was estimated to be 57 F (14 C).

That would put the planet’s average surface temperature in 2017 at 58.62 F (14.9 C).

end quotes

So, hmmmm, the global average temperature in 1908 as reported by Arrhenius, an acknowledged expert in the field of science, was 16 degrees C, and the global average temperature in 2017 was 14.9 degrees C, which is a degree C BELOW the global average temperature one hundred nine years earlier.

So, is the global average temperature really warming?

But what am I saying, it must be because the IPCC and NOAA say it is so, and who are we to challenge anything NOAA says, even if it is not true?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/e ... ent-220526
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 56846
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: ON ENVIRONMENTAL HYSTERIA-MONGERING

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR January 21, 2020 at 10:46 pm

Paul Plante says :

And speaking of the insanity not only not being over, but instead being accelerated at what might be blinding speed which is going to further warp and twist the minds of America’s youth who are already suffering psychological problems because of all the hype and hysteria about “climate change,” and the end of the world coming, we have this addition to the hysteria from the January 17, 2020 dissent in Juliana v USA of Josephine Laura Staton, a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California who obtained a Juris Doctor in 1986 from Harvard Law School and who on February 4, 2010, was nominated to the federal bench by Hussein Obama, a chief defendant in Juliana, to wit:

In these proceedings, the government accepts as fact that the United States has reached a tipping point crying out for a concerted response — yet presses ahead toward calamity.

It is as if an asteroid were barreling toward Earth and the government decided to shut down our only defenses.

Seeking to quash this suit, the government bluntly insists that it has the absolute and unreviewable power to destroy the Nation.

end quotes

When she refers to the “government” there, she is referring to Hussein Obama.

Continuing on with the hysteria that is destroying the minds of America’s children, she states:

My colleagues throw up their hands, concluding that this case presents nothing fit for the Judiciary.

On a fundamental point, we agree: No case can singlehandedly prevent the catastrophic effects of climate change predicted by the government and scientists.

But a federal court need not manage all of the delicate foreign relations and regulatory minutiae implicated by climate change to offer real relief, and the mere fact that this suit cannot alone halt climate change does not mean that it presents no claim suitable for judicial resolution.

Plaintiffs bring suit to enforce the most basic structural principle embedded in our system of ordered liberty: that the Constitution does not condone the Nation’s willful destruction.

So viewed, plaintiffs’ claims adhere to a judicially administrable standard.

end quotes

There is where we are, people – it is now a matter of the willful destruction of the United States itself, and nothing less, as we can see by returning to that dissent as follows:

And considering plaintiffs seek no less than to forestall the Nation’s demise, even a partial and temporary reprieve would constitute meaningful redress.

Such relief, much like the desegregation orders and statewide prison injunctions the Supreme Court has sanctioned, would vindicate plaintiffs’ constitutional rights without exceeding the Judiciary’s province.

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

I. As the majority recognizes, and the government does not contest, carbon dioxide (“CO2”) and other greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions created by burning fossil fuels are devastating the planet. Maj. Op. at 14–15.

end quotes

Now, right there, we in here in the Cape Charles Mirror who are daring to disbelieve any of this, and to question it, have just been made into heretics there, with that statement by this federal judge that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) and other greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions created by burning fossil fuels are devastating the planet.

Whether that is true or not, by judicial decree, it is now true, and woe to us who think or can prove otherwise.

Getting back to that dissent:

According to one of plaintiffs’ experts, the inevitable result, absent immediate action, is “an inhospitable future . . . marked by rising seas, coastal city functionality loss, mass migrations, resource wars, food shortages, heat waves, mega-storms, soil depletion and desiccation, freshwater shortage, public health system collapse, and the extinction of increasing numbers of species.”

Even government scientists project that, given current warming trends, sea levels will rise two feet by 2050, nearly four feet by 2070, over eight feet by 2100, 18 feet by 2150, and over 31 feet by 2200.

To put that in perspective, a three-foot sea level rise will make two million American homes uninhabitable; a rise of approximately 20 feet will result in the total loss of Miami, New Orleans, and other coastal cities.

So, as described by plaintiffs’ experts, the injuries experienced by plaintiffs are the first small wave in an oncoming tsunami — now visible on the horizon of the not-so-distant future — that will destroy the United States as we currently know it.

end quotes

So, are we who dare to question then next going to be accused of being for the destruction of the United States as we currently know it?

Will that require us to be punished for thinking heretical thoughts along the lines of that is unscientific bull****?

Will we need re-education at hard labor to correct our flawed thinking?

Getting back to the dissent:

What sets this harm apart from all others is not just its magnitude, but its irreversibility.

The devastation might look and feel somewhat different if future generations could simply pick up the pieces and restore the Nation.

But plaintiffs’ experts speak of a certain level of global warming as “locking in” this catastrophic damage.

Put more starkly by plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. Harold R. Wanless, “(a)tmospheric warming will continue for some 30 years after we stop putting more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.”

“But that warmed atmosphere will continue warming the ocean for centuries, and the accumulating heat in the oceans will persist for millennia” (emphasis added).

Indeed, another of plaintiffs’ experts echoes, “(t)he fact that GHGs dissipate very slowly from the atmosphere . . . and that the costs of taking CO2 out of the atmosphere through non-biological carbon capture and storage are very high means that the consequences of GHG emissions should be viewed as effectively irreversible” (emphasis added).

In other words, “(g)iven the self-reinforcing nature of climate change,” the tipping point may well have arrived, and we may be rapidly approaching the point of no return.

Despite countless studies over the last half century warning of the catastrophic consequences of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, many of which the government conducted, the government not only failed to act but also “affirmatively promote(d) fossil fuel use in a host of ways.” Maj. Op. at 15.

According to plaintiffs’ evidence, our nation is crumbling — at our government’s own hand — into a wasteland.

In short, the government has directly facilitated an existential crisis to the country’s perpetuity.

end quotes

So, I guess afterall the Guardian was really right – the world is ending.

And the hype and hysteria beat goes on!

Incredible is all I can say.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/c ... ent-221236
Post Reply