Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on December 3, 2016
Scientists have long feared this ‘feedback’ to the climate system. Now they say it’s happening
At a time when a huge pulse of uncertainty has been injected into the global project to stop the planet’s warming, scientists have just raised the stakes even further.
In a massive new study published Wednesday in the influential journal Nature, no less than 50 authors from around the world document a so-called climate system “feedback” that, they say, could make global warming considerably worse over the coming decades.
That feedback involves the planet’s soils, which are a massive repository of carbon due to the plants and roots that have grown and died in them, in many cases over vast time periods (plants pull in carbon from the air through photosynthesis and use it to fuel their growth). It has long been feared that as warming increases, the microorganisms living in these soils would respond by very naturally upping their rate of respiration, a process that in turn releases carbon dioxide or methane, leading greenhouse gases.
It’s this concern that the new study validates. “Our analysis provides empirical support for the long-held concern that rising temperatures stimulate the loss of soil C to the atmosphere, driving a positive land C–climate feedback that could accelerate planetary warming over the twenty-first century,” the paper reports.
This, in turn, may mean that even humans’ best efforts to cut their emissions could fall short, simply because there’s another source of emissions all around us. The very Earth itself.
“By taking this global perspective, we’re able to see that there is a feedback, and it’s actually going to be massive,” said Thomas Crowther, a researcher with the Netherlands Institute of Ecology who led the research published Wednesday.
The new study is actually a compilation of 49 empirical studies, examining soil carbon emissions from research plots around the globe. The different studies produced variable results, including some cases in which soils actually pulled carbon from the air rather than releasing it. However, the researchers insist there was a pattern globally that was “predictable”: Soil carbon losses generally tended to track how much warming a region had seen, and how thick the upper soil layer was.
The paper therefore found that the biggest losses were in Arctic regions, where soils are warming rapidly and also where they are quite thick — but also that well down through the mid-latitudes, soils were also losing carbon. And the net result for the research plots as a whole was a loss of soil carbon.
The paper then extrapolated these findings for the globe, finding that by the year 2050, the planet could see 55 billion tons of carbon (which converts to 200 billion tons of carbon dioxide, were it all to be released in this form) released from soils. That’s if we continue on with a “business as usual” scenario of global greenhouse gas emissions and accompanying warming.
“It’s of the same order of magnitude as having an extra U.S. on the planet,” said Crowther. The world has less than 1,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide remaining to emit in order to preserve a reasonable chance of holding the planet’s warming below 2 degrees Celsius, a widely embraced target, so soil emissions could help to bust the carbon budget.
Crowther argues that until now, the science community has often left this potential carbon feedback from planetary soils out of its calculations because it wasn’t well enough understood. “The entire magnitude of this feedback was removed from several of the earth system models, the models that inform [the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], because of its massive uncertainty,” he says.
Moreover, he adds that while the study did heavily consider the Arctic and thus, regions of permafrost soil (a huge repository of planetary carbon), it only took into account emissions from the upper layer of soil, about 10 centimeters thick. So if warming liberates carbon from deeper permafrost layers too — a major fear — then the numbers presented above for soil emissions could be too small.
There is, of course, one potential offset to this — even as the Earth’s surface is losing carbon from soils, it also appears to be putting at least some back again due to an increased growth in vegetation, which is being fertilized by more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, in tern enhancing plant photosynthesis. However, Crowther does not believe this will suffice to offset soil carbon losses.
A recent study found that in the past decade or more, plant growth had indeed been sequestering more carbon dioxide — but as the lead author told the Post, “It’s good news for now. We can’t expect it to continue.”
Another researcher who focuses on Arctic soils and reviewed the study for the Post, permafrost expert Ted Schuur of Northern Arizona University, agreed with Crowther on plant growth, suggesting that even if models predict it may offset soil loses, field studies like the ones summarized here don’t support that.
“This impressive work again highlights the largest losses of soil C from high latitudes, which agrees with field measurement and incubations that we’ve summarized in our work,” said Schuur. “These losses offset gains that are predicted in soil C in other temperature and subtropical ecosystems.” Schur added that since the study only considers the first 10 centimeters of soil in the Arctic, “we might consider that a minimum loss since there is a lot of soil C beneath that.”
Two other outside experts contacted by the Post took a similar tack.
“The authors correctly point out the lack of information from tropical ecosystems, in fact the southern hemisphere is not represented. Thus we need more data,” said Charles Rice, a soil microbiology professor at Kansas State University who pointed out several limitations in the paper. But Rice nonetheless concluded that “the high latitudes are particularly vulnerable and a large source of CO2 back to the atmosphere. This highlights the need to do early action.”
The study gives “strong support to the hypothesis that soils will release a substantial amount of carbon in response to rising air temperatures,” added Jonathan Sanderman, a scientist with the Woods Hole Research Center who studies soil changes under climate change. “This is really critical, because if the additional release of carbon is not counterbalanced by new uptake of carbon by plants then it’s going to exacerbate climate change and increases the urgency to immediately reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
But Sanderman also noted studies have suggested that better management of agricultural soils could sequester large amounts of carbon, perhaps enough to offset the losses projected in the new study.
“While this paper shows how soils are part of the problem, it’s important to note that soils can also be part of the solution,” Sanderman continued.
82 Comments on "Scientists have long feared this ‘feedback’ to the climate system. Now they say it’s happening"
makati1 on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 8:30 pm
Ap, right up your alley! Feedback loops are FINALLY coming to the surface in the news, even if it is WaPo.
Love the unicorn… “IF” … at the end of the article. Trying to make it sound ‘controlable’. LOL
Cloggie on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:06 pm
Climate change: the gist that keeps on giving.
Wonder what is more lucrative for the global scientist community: nuclear fusion or climate change.
Finally we have got ‘m: the mother of all feedback loops… soil carbon! Harmless for 300 Kelvin, but add 2 degrees more and… poof! says the planet.
Funds please!
Cloggie on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:06 pm
gist = gift
Plantagenet on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:25 pm
Too bad obama derailed the planned signing of a binding climate treaty at the 2009 UN Climate meeting in Copenhagen. We really need a binding climate treaty that requires reductions in CO2 emissions, instead of the voluntary Paris Accords that Obama promoted that actually don’t reduce human CO2 emissions.
Cheers!
Apneaman on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:30 pm
Old dutch way the fuck out of your league. What’s your explanation for the spread of global drought, sea level rise, mega wildfires and a fire season over 2 months longer that pre 1990s? What about the increase in billion dollar disasters? Melting glaciers planet wide? American SE on fire in December? And on and on with the consequences that real people are suffering. You have no answers because you are a clueless fucking moron. Yep, yet another conspiracy for something that don’t fit with the Dutch Alex Jones’s narrative. You are completely disconnected from reality old man. Just like the human species, you are past the point of no return.
Apneaman on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:33 pm
Mak, many feedbacks have been underway for sometime. Wadda expect? The global press is always two steps behind Ole Apneaman.
Apneaman on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 9:40 pm
Positive outlook: Svalbard’s average temperature for year may be above freezing for first time ever
“It’s not quite as mind blowing as the North Pole being 20 degrees Celsius above normal this fall, but the freakish temperatures that have caused so many problems in Svalbard this year may result an annual average temperature above freezing for the first time in the archipelago’s history, scientists said Friday.”
“The normal yearly average at Svalbard Airport is minus 6.7 degrees Celsius, said Ketil Isaksen of the Norwegian Meterological Institute. The warmest year until now was 2006, when the average temperature was minus 1.8 degrees, but he predicts this year’s average will be about zero degrees.
“This is a little bit shocking,” Isaksen said in a prepared statement. “If you had asked me five or 10 years ago, I could not have imagined such numbers in 2016.”
“Svalbard is a very good spot to show what’s happening in the Arctic at the moment,” he said, noting that each of the past 73 months has been warmer than average.”
http://icepeople.net/2016/11/26/positive-outlook-svalbards-average-temperature-for-year-may-be-above-freezing-for-first-time-ever/
GregT on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 11:21 pm
“Too bad obama derailed the planned signing of a binding climate treaty at the 2009 UN Climate meeting in Copenhagen. We really need a binding climate treaty that requires reductions in CO2 emissions, instead of the voluntary Paris Accords that Obama promoted that actually don’t reduce human CO2 emissions.”
Poor lil’ planter. Less than 7 weeks remaining until her entire raison d’être disintegrates before her very eyes.
C’est dommage.
Anonymous on Sat, 3rd Dec 2016 11:47 pm
Its ok, plantatard can report details to us on obombers every single book signing, speaking appearance, movie deal, and honorary degree\ambassador\spokesman gig he picks up in his post-figurehead life.
In truth Greg, I dont think the lack of an actual ‘obama’ or ‘obama administration’ will slow or bother plantatard all that much. The moron will just shift blaming all present and FUTURE problems the uS creates, onto this ‘obama’ person, retroactively.
See?, all mapped out for you plantatard. Now you can keep blaming this ‘obama’ for *everything* from now till the collapse. Dont let the lack of an actual ‘obama’ being around to pin the blame on for for well, everything slow you in any way.
peakyeast on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 4:50 am
Too bad that the responsible leaders will have died from old age when their true legacy arrives.
Cloggie on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 5:00 am
The global press is always two steps behind Ole Apneaman.
Climate change & peak oil… the ideal opportunity for ordinary people who are yearning for their minute of fame and to sex up their average lives by broadcasting spectacular stories about impending doom. Pass the popcorn. Doomers… your typical birthday party terrorists.
Sorry for being so sarcastic, but I have been burned myself by prematurely embracing excessive bleak stories. When I joined this board in January 2012, five years ago as ‘Arthur’ I was myself completely “into Heinberg”, convinced that the “party was over”. Heinberg had popularized the work of old conventional oil people like Colin Campbell and Jean Laherrère, who, inspired by Hubbert, had dutifully made an inventory of the remaining oil reserves and came to the (correct) conclusion that peak conventional oil was immanent.
But just like fish conclude that there is nothing outside the aquarium, the peak oil crowd concluded that the industrial age was over because there would be no longer oil available to keep it going. They were unable to “think outside of the box”.
In reality there are signs that the earth’s crust is loaded with carbon and that fracking is only the beginning and that technologies like underground coal gasification have gigantic potential. And no Richard, the God-Emperor is not making a fool of himself by claiming that there is 1000 years more worth of “clean” coal.
The fossil fuel depletion problem is essentially solved, because it didn’t exist in the first place.
The real issue in 2016 is not depletion, but the limited capacity of the atmosphere to deal with fumes.
Bye-bye peak oil, enter climate change.
Despite the ramblings of our local climate change Heinberg-wannabee Friday, who wants to interpret his own bed wetting local flooding as a clear sign of immanent climate catastrophe, an event he desperately wants to see happening (just like makati), as a sort of spectacular Grand Finale of their somewhat uneventful, little bit boring lives. It is out of the same motivation why people go to the cinema and watch James Bond movies: sensation.
To sum up what we should do: climate change could very well be real, but there is also the possibility of natural variability. We are living in a solar system with a giant nuclear fusion reactor at its core, that dwarfs the impact of a few hundred million of car exhausts and other civilizational goodies. The consensus seems to be that if we manage to stop using carbon fuel we can limit global warming (if any) with 2 degrees Celsius. Well, let’s go for it then and march towards the renewable energy Nirvana and learn to live with the climate change (if any) as the result of our past carbon sins.
makati1 on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 6:14 am
Peaky, there are a few old bastards that have worked for most of their lives, out of hate, to have revenge on some nation. Soros, Brzezinski, Kissinger and more that do not come to mind at the moment.
Soros – Hungarian Jew (86)
Brzezinski – Polish Jew (88)
Kissinger – German Jew (93)
See any similarities? LOL
Cloggie on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 6:32 am
Brzezinski is a Pole with aristocratic background.
The State Department was alarmed by Brzezinski’s support for East German dissidents and objected to his suggestion that Carter’s first overseas visit be to Poland. He visited Warsaw, met with Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski (against the objection of the U.S. Ambassador to Poland), recognizing the Roman Catholic Church as the legitimate opposition to communist rule in Poland
Nowhere is the US more popular in Europe than in Poland (well, after Holland). Reason: they see in the US a protector from being swallowed by Germany and Russia, which happened three times. The US deep state cynically exploited this circumstance by using the Poles as the useful idiot to get the war started in Europe in 1939, while pretending to “stand-up for the Poles”, which encouraged the Poles to begin the ethnic cleansing of Poland from Germans, which triggered the German invasion, in the Western world nowadays also smugly known as “Germany starting WW2”.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2012/01/23/brzezinski-tells-salon-those-rich-jews-control-congress/
But he is nevertheless a loyal supporter of the “Anglo-Zionist” network for global conquest.
Until he wasn’t, because he understood that “America’s calling” is going to be missed (thank God)…
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/25/the-broken-chessboard-brzezinski-gives-up-on-empire/
…thanks to the rise of China and rebirth of sorts of Russia, as well as the rise of the European Right.
Davy on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 6:42 am
The world is unable to “think outside of the box” with the reality of real demand destruction and peak oil. Peak oil is more than our traditional peak oil story. It is also a story of the economy and a relationship with a dysfunctional decade of repression and manufactured liquidity. Depletion is alive and well with conventional sources of high quality low cost oil. There is no argument there. The dysfunctional decade of debt creation through repression was not productive stimulus it was malinvestment that must be realized eventually in a decline cycle. A decline cycle that will likely be the end of growth. Much of the analysis today on peak oil leaves the economy as a constant. Peak oil is a reality and the glut is not a repudiation of the peak oil phenomenon it represent the dysfunctional relationship of the economy and oil.
The most recent glut was driven by economics stimulating technological innovation of an old technology. It happened along with and intimately with the economics of repression and excessive liquidity. It happened because China chose to do a massive debt fueled infrastructure policy the likes of the world has never seen. That was a decadal event. These two forces allowed a wealth effect of an assets market bubble. This supported malinvestment into the fracking bubble and other nonconventionals like tar sands. All of this is stalling now.
The thinking outside the box is that alternative oil sources can and will be produced because of technology. The thinking outside the box discounts the economic effect of what the global world has been doing economically for the past decade. We are digging a hole of malinvestment of massive amounts of debt. Debt is not a physical but represent an abstract systematic element. It may seem unreal when it is created, extended, and pretended away but that doesn’t make it unreal systematically.
These systematic incongruities have real implications in the very sensitive nature of growth to the global economy. Interest rates have been so repressed as to not be a factor in oil production for years but they once represented a huge factor in production. Now it is all about price. You can repress rates but like squeezing a balloon the effects show up elsewhere. The effects have been with the inability of global growth to be stimulated into a breakout of real growth instead we have asset market levitation and commodity bubbles. The macro commodity bubble deflated but it is still being maintained from a free fall by asset market levitation. Stocks are still strong.
What has happened instead is negative rates with hidden inflation. What we have now is stagflation developing. When will this destroy the vital bond market? We are currently seeing issues there. Global trade is clearly in decline but this is masked by the increase in many other areas like asset prices. We are seeing hidden inflation in foods, medicine, and education. It is a dysfunctional price spectrum caused by unnatural economic relationships. At some point maybe slowly or quickly we are going to see this economic aspect underlying peak oil accelerate in oil demand destruction. This is the demand destruction aspect found in the price ceiling to oil. This price ceiling prevents oil from being in a proper range for healthy growth in production. This represents a range bound demand destruction. We can’t break through this price ceiling and support healthy oil production investment because the economy is in stagflation.
We are seeing the beginning of this with a peak demand narrative. The status quo narrative is peak demand is being caused by technology and efficiency. The status quo refuses to point to economic growth as the culprit at all. Demand is being destroyed in a dysfunctional way and a way that is easy to discount because global economics now is not normal. We do not have normal price discovery. Economic relationships are out of balance because of repression. Peak oil is alive and well within this economic dysfunction only it is hidden in the malinvestment of an oil glut caused from declining real global growth over multiple years at the same time oil production increases where created by malinvestment from an asset and commodity bubble.
The fed printed the money and China built the cities. This once in a lifetime combination is over. Soon the economics of repression and artificial monetary liquidity will have little force to move the economy. Reality says the effects of limits and diminishing returns will always eventually deflate bubbles in a finite world. This is plain as day with the repression of the economic cycle. The status quo narrative is we are still in a growth cycle and they claim nearly the longest in history. China is no longer building ghost cities. It is now playing a debt bubble game. The Fed is no longer growing its balance sheet as it once did and is now struggling to normalize.
Oil is stuck in a malinvestment of sources and dysfunctional oil producer economies. Peak oil will be manifest in shrinking supply along with a declining economy. Both are in a stall of momentum. It is not negative yet but the compounding of a growing growth is stalling. The minimum operating levels of the global economy cannot stall without destroying demand especially when debt must realize a return eventually. Only so much extending and rehypothecation can occur. Now we also have economic nationalism entering the picture which is a whole other systematic disturbance to the force of the global economy. It too will destroy demand.
jabbadonut on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 6:48 am
I call people who are afraid of “climate change”: FOCC’ers. (FOCC stands for “Fear Of Climate Change”). They cite recent weather events, droughts, and things like wildfires as proof of the “horror” of global warming. They apparently don’t understand that all of the weather events that are happening today have been happening as far back as human history goes. The ONLY difference is now there are people living in areas that were once devoid of human habitation. We have more people, thus more people get effected by things like weather.
The climate change propaganda machine continues its assault on reason, and continues to use emotion invoking words like “catastrophic” and “terrifying” when describing ongoing climate research results. None of those results should invoke the kind of fear the FOCC’ers want us to feel. There is a real agenda surrounding climate change. It has nothing to do with helping the environment and everything to do with attempting to redistribute the wealth of the West into the third world, thus effectively ending Western civilization and creating a new world order more closely related to communism than anything else. Just wait, watch, and see, as the government slowly begins to take over your day to day lives using “climate change” as their excuse. I feel so sorry for the children of today (who are being brainwashed to soften them up for what is coming) of who are going to be growing up in an America that is no longer anything more than a memory.
Davy on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 6:59 am
More demand destructive revolting that surely will depress global growth more.
“After Trump, Brexit… December 4 is the Next Flashpoint in the Global Populist Revolution”
http://tinyurl.com/hxr3vvq
“Tomorrow, December 4, Italy is holding a referendum that will determine the fate of the entire European Union. Donald Trump’s victory—which shocked Europe’s political and media elite—gives the populists backing the “No” side of Italy’s referendum the political rocket fuel they need for a virtually guaranteed win. That momentum will be all but impossible to reverse. Anti-elite sentiment is rising on both sides of the Atlantic. And I bet the global populist revolution will continue. If Italians buck the establishment—and it looks like they will—it will clear a path for a populist party to take power and for Italy to exit the euro. If that happens, the fallout will be catastrophic for global markets. The Financial Times recently put it this way:
An Italian exit from the single currency would trigger the total collapse of the eurozone within a very short period. It would probably lead to the most violent economic shock in history, dwarfing the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy in 2008 and the 1929 Wall Street crash.”
“Trump’s win has been a double whammy for Italy’s pro-EU establishment. First, it emboldens the populist forces fighting the referendum. Second, it humiliates and politically castrates Matteo Renzi, the current Italian prime minister. Renzi took a rare step when he openly endorsed Hillary Clinton. He was the only European leader to do so. As one of Renzi’s rivals said after Trump’s victory, “Matteo Renzi is politically finished from today, he’s a dead man walking.” Other Italian politicians are furious that he weakened Italy’s standing with the new Trump administration. It’s hard to see how Renzi could get himself out of the hole he’s dug.”
“Grillo recently wrote:
It’s crazy. This is the explosion of an era. It’s the apocalypse of the media, TV, the big newspapers, the intellectuals, the journalists… This is a wide-ranging F*** off. Trump has pulled off an incredible V-Day… There are similarities between this American story and the Movement.”
makati1 on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:01 am
jab, denial does not change reality…
makati1 on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:02 am
Jab, are you a Bot? Computer generated red herring? Sounds like it. You only pop up here on the weekends with the other Bots..
Davy on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:39 am
“Tornado Swarms Are On the Rise—but Don’t Blame Climate Change”
http://tinyurl.com/h8d93f6
“Global warming isn’t in doubt, but scientists are stumped about increasingly violent storms.”
“As the planet warms, scientists foresee an increase in energy and moisture near the ground, something meteorologists call “convective available potential energy” or CAPE. Think of it as storm fuel. Greenhouse gases trap more energy in the atmosphere, which heats things up, which allows air to hold exponentially more water for every degree rise in temperature. Researchers generally expect that CAPE may mean more extreme storms. The other major ingredient in these violent storms is vertical wind shear, the phenomenon of wind direction and intensity shifting with altitude. Unlike CAPE, shear hasn’t been projected to change much with global warming. “
“What they found—“the wrinkle,” as lead author Michael Tippett put it—was that wind shear tracked the tornado-outbreak trends more closely than CAPE. “Who do I blame for the trend? Is it the CAPE or is it the wind shear? I think a lot of people, including us, would have expected CAPE. That’s not what we see. So that’s why it’s a wrinkle.” Tippett, an applied mathematician at Columbia University, offered a couple of hypotheses. One is that the tornado-outbreak trend may not be related to climate change, “or it’s climate change, but we don’t understand it,” he said.”
Davy on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:44 am
“Hawaii snowfall: Parts of state receive weather warning”
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38199730
“Parts of the US state of Hawaii have received a winter weather warning, with up to three feet (90cm) of snow over the past few days. Weather experts say that it is not unusual for snow to fall in tropical Hawaii, but rarely has it fallen so heavily at such low altitudes.”
JOHN on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:48 am
Ah, the arrogance of Man: So, the climate is changing… it HAS ALWAYS BEEN in a state of change and it will continue to change, long after Man can be found here. It’s a natural process of our planet… and any impact caused by Man will, in the end, be little more than a “burp” in the fossil record of the future. To think that these processes take centuries (or millennia) is ridiculous, as under the right circumstances, a mountain range could rise in a day. So, get over yourselves…
Ken on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 7:57 am
Peak Oil? Please. How is it that discredited theories and the people who promote them just keep circulating?
Davy on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:15 am
Funny how people with no standing try to promote their contra-theories with one liners. Who are you Ken? A dumbass that keeps circulating?
Apneaman on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:16 am
Ah, the arrogance of Retards: To think the humans can pump 40 billion tons of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere every year, thus radically altering the chemistry, and think it will have no effect.
Owen Parker Jr. on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:52 am
Here are some facts that can easily be looked up and verified or disproven.
1- In 2014 there was record sea ice in Antarctica. The Great Lakes had record ice. Lake Superior only had 3 ice free months.
2- 2014 saw record snowfall in the U.S.
3- New cold records were set . .remember the Polar Vortex?
4- Oceans are rising much less than predicted . . some tidal records show no rise at all. .totally different than the 20 ft. rise predicted by Al Gore.
5- Animal scientists now say Polar Bears are thriving.
6- Moose are making a comeback . .at first global warming was pushed as the reason for the decline in Moose herds . .later research found it was wolves causing the decline. After wolf hunting permits were issued, Moose herds have rebounded.
7- 99% of scientist do not believe in Catastrophic Man Made Global Warming. Just the opposite of what your article implies.
8- Nature produces much more CO2 than man . .one volcano puts out more CO2 in one year than all humans produce in 50 years and there are more than 100 volcano’s. The Amazon rain forest puts out more CO2 than all industrialized countries including China combined.
9- Temperature records from Medeviel times prove the earth was once several degrees hotter than it is now. There were many fewer humans on the earth, and certainly no factories burning coal for energy. There has been virtually no increase in temperature in the last 100 years.
10- The sun and it’s radiation emissions have more to do with our weather and Global warming than anything else.
11- The biggest proponents of this false theory are the biggest sinners. Al Gore’s mansion and his airplanes leave a bigger carbon footprint than ten typical American families leave.. If he believes the phony baloney he puts out, why doesn’t he eliminate his own extra large footprint?
There are many more things that prove this is a scam, such as so called “scientific” climate models proven to be skewed to produce the desired data.
DrPF on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:53 am
Funny how those paid by obuttstains scam corp never mention the negative feedback that has kept things in order for billions of years…
Owen Parker Jr. on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:54 am
Good thing we have newspapers to report information we would not have known if it weren’t for them.
The Washington Post: The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.
Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
* * * * * * * * *
I must apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post –almost 93 years ago.
Owen Parker Jr. on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 8:56 am
For nearly thirty years climate activist have been warning us the we have just five years to act. Think about that for a minute.
Mr H on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:09 am
Those who deny climate change,must hate their grandchildren, for what we sow, they will reap.
They have been sold, that all scientists are corrupt and we should not listen to their warnings.
I despise the deniers, many who do it for money, since my grandchildren will suffer along with theirs.
John on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:21 am
For more than a century scientists have known that Earth’s ice ages are caused by the wobbling of the planet’s orbit, which changes its orientation to the Sun and affects the amount of sunlight reaching higher latitudes, particularly the polar regions.
The Northern Hemisphere’s last ice age ended about 20,000 years ago, and most evidence has indicated that the ice age in the Southern Hemisphere ended about 2,000 years later, suggesting that the south was responding to warming in the north.
– See more at: http://www.astrobio.net/also-in-news/ice-ages-and-earths-wobble/#sthash.ahe15O0D.dpuf
James from Maine on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:28 am
Owen Parker, The moose population is in severe decline caused by moose ticks I have seen young moose covered with ticks drained of blood. You do not know what you are talking about. Do me a favour and drop dead.
peakyeast on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:34 am
Humanity has finally flowered and is blooming. Now is the time to send out the pollen, the seeds, the spores, everything just as hapless and random as the ordinary flowers – and just before the winter sets in..
Jim Doyle on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:41 am
Has the planet been much colder than now?
Yes. Has the planet been much warmer than now? Yes. What did man do to cause the last ice age? What did man do to cause the previous warm period? Nothing. You take measurements from a spec in time and call it a trend. That’s like saying because you yelled at your spouse once you are forever a bully. Exactly when has the climate not changed over a period of hundreds of thousands of years? I got sea shells on the top of my 2 mile high mountain here in the high desert that says the climate was different. The earth moved. The earth wobbled, plates shifted and voila change.
Stop burning fossil fuels. Really spend the time looking at dominant energy devices. There are patents. There are working prototypes. There is a concerted effort by the energy companies to quash such devices because as JP Morgan asked Tesla “where do you put the meter?” Ask ol Al if he’d do us all a favor and help with the problem and not charge for brokering “carbon credits”.
The world has been duped for a long time.
Look up WITTS ministries.
Ben Joseph on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:44 am
Wait! Let me guess!
In order to make sure this is correct, you need A LOT OF GRANT MONEY!
Am I right?
Rob on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:52 am
Wow. I would not have thought that the nation’s teabillies would be posting to this site so early on a Sunday morning. I love how the “American” teabilly posits that scientists making $80 thou a year are more likely to lie for gain than are oil and gas wildcatters who are making a million a month, but hey! . . maybe you guys are the oil and gas wildcatters!
PETER BAILEY on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:54 am
The journal Nature, the term empirical, and concepts like feedback are unknown or confusing to climate change & science deniers.
bob on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 9:57 am
Republicans : live for today; ruin the planet; make the rich richer; follow Trump…..
Rob on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:06 am
Today’s GOP: Billionaires contributing to millionaires to convince the stupid to hate the poor.
Ray Allen on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:28 am
Leaving all political issues aside, Do you like to breath clean air? Do you like to drink clean water? You are not supposed to see the air you breathe or taste the water you drink. you all concern yourself with whether climate change is real or not. Do you believe that breathing in the smog is healthy? Do you believe that CO2 rise causes extra heating to the planet, no matter where it comes from? Forget whether Climate Change is real or not, if you fix the clean air problem by planting special developed trees, which are the natural air filters put on this planet to keep us alive, you solve the climate change issue anyway. China, Vietnam, and Cambodia are doing that right now. How do I know? I am the person helping them plant these trees, by the millions. It is a simple equation. 4 times the amount of CO2 sequestered per tree and 4 times the amount of oxygen emission per tree.
Climate change if it is the result of too high percentages of CO2, all we have to do is sequester and emit No rocket science.
Spec on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:29 am
If global warming is true….
The only real solution answer to global warming is to reduce the worlds population.
Anything else is really just a delay.
Rob on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:35 am
There’s no “if,” and the point of the article is that the “when” is coming sooner than we think. Baby Boomers like me were angry at our parents for raising us under the Cold War’s threat of nuclear annihilation, but we’re leaving our kids with more than a threat. We’re bequeathing them with a much more dangerous and inhospitable planet. Hundreds of millions of people live in the coastal areas threatened by climate change. Where are they going to go? I recommend lodging on the capacious compounds of our oil and gas executives.
SensibleSolutions on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:53 am
Whenever a climate change alarmist brings the cost of natural disasters up, it is a sure sign that they are striving for panic, rather than rational thought. Today’s natural disasters (hurricanes, floods, wildfires, etc.) are no worse, and no better, than they have ever been. The only differences are where people choose to live and the cost of the homes they build.
When the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 hit South Florida, it was far stronger than Katrina. However, there was only about 5% as many homes near the water as there is today, and each home was only worth about 5% of what they are worth today. Hence the damage value is 400X what it was in 1935.
This sort of hyperbole makes one question how much more of their “scientific findings” are equally exagerated.
Paul on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 10:57 am
You guys and your global warming and stuff like that. It makes me laugh. Do you really think all this really matters? Don’t you realize that the world isn’t going to die off because of global warming? It’s going to die off because of religion. Most of you for all I know could be atheists. Don’t you ever pick up the Bible to see what is happening is nothing compared to what is going to happen in the near future? We don’t have time to worry about crap like this. We are living in the end of days and religion will be our downfall. Christ will be returning soon. Then, trouble like we have never seen will come. All this will seem like peanuts after that. Don’t be afraid. Look for yourselves in Revelations. Try not to die when you read it. Surely, most of you will really be sick then.
Richard Eklund on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:04 am
What century will this all happen in, if it happens? Yet another cry of “Wolf!”? Y’all have to stop beating this dead horse.
peakyeast on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:05 am
@Paul: Crist has returned many times. Each time he is killed or drugged up in an insane asylum – Next time will be no different.
and yes Paul: We are indeed sick of fairy tales that only provide the brain-dead with any real value – and mostly to make them easily controlled by those who claim to be able to understand gibberish with divine clarity.
– Yes, priests and similar job profiles attract the very sickest people that society can produce – and you suck up to them and their control instrument.
Paul on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:11 am
The biggest fear of scientist is that people will quit sending them money
rand49er on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:22 am
If we could get the alt leftists out of the climate debate, it would be a huge benefit. Problem is there wouldn’t be that many people remaining.
dissident on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:23 am
It’s a bot discussion club. Repeating meme electronic circle jerk. LOL.
Gary Neidhardt on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:26 am
Must be a time to ask for more money in their budget.
penury on Sun, 4th Dec 2016 11:50 am
There are those who believe that “climate change” is real and is happening. There are those who cannot accept the changes and so get lost in denial. Yes global warming has happened in the past. Yes global ice ages have happened in the past. And it is true that each of these periods have attracted a plethora of researchers who have “determined” the cause of the change. This time it is the turn of the humans. Are they correct? right or wrong? Check back when the history is studied and a definitive answer is available. For now, all we can show is that by-products of human existence are contributing to a large extent to the warming of the atmosphere. And it does not matter what your opinion is, the truth is “climate change” is real and one of the causes is human discharge into the bio-sphere.