The great global warming scam, worth a listen I think.

[Steel]

Volcanos are rarely mentioned. Currently 4 eruptions are happening in South Asia. One in New Guinea, 2 in Indonesia and one in the
Philippines. These are getting very little media attention.
Will there be any effect if there is a major eruption. I think our effect on carbon levels could make very little difference in the long term, compared to natural events.

 

[wilber]

Volcanos are rarely mentioned. Currently 4 eruptions are happening in South Asia. One in New Guinea, 2 in Indonesia and one in the
Philippines. These are getting very little media attention.
Will there be any effect if there is a major eruption. I think our effect on carbon levels could make very little difference in the long term, compared to natural events.

 

[Steel]

View attachment 622994

The main effect of volcanos have nothing to do with carbon. One big eruption can surround the earth in ash and block the suns heat causing colder conditions. It’s been a long time since we had a huge weather changing eruption causing worldwide crop failures. But it has happened in the past when we had a much smaller world population with catastrophic results.

 

[Steel]

Colder conditions are much more catastrophic than warmer conditions. Warmer conditions actually expand the area crops can be grown. Colder conditions take a lot of very productive land especially in the northern hemisphere out of production.

 

[linga]

The main effect of volcanos have nothing to do with carbon. One big eruption can surround the earth in ash and block the suns heat causing colder conditions. It’s been a long time since we had a huge weather changing eruption causing worldwide crop failures. But it has happened in the past when we had a much smaller world population with catastrophic results.

http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_349414_en.html

This is a paper about geo-engineering considering the effect of using aerosols to reduce warming and concluding that the process could potentially cause very serious problems in certain areas but of particular note is the excerpt below and note the last two words !

"Angus, who has recently joined the University of Exeter’s Mathematics department in the College of Mathematics, Engineering and Physical Sciences, said: “To reduce global temperatures enough to counter effects of global warming would require a massive injection of aerosol – the small particles that reflect sunlight back into space. This would be equivalent to a volcanic eruption five times the size of that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 every year."

 

[Timmy_45]

Thing is the climate chan

Colder conditions are much more catastrophic than warmer conditions. Warmer conditions actually expand the area crops can be grown. Colder conditions take a lot of very productive land especially in the northern hemisphere out of production.

Yep. Oddly the fact that the climate has changed constantly, and would carry on doing so even if humanity had never existed doesn't seem to occur to them. Imagine the panic if the Thames froze solid for weeks on end like it did in the 1700's.

 

[Timmy_45]

Imagine Londoners reaction if the Thames froze up for a month,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Thames_frost_fairs

In no time at all it would be "Man made global cooling".....being blamed

 

[Bury the Trash]

Proff. P. Stott. been on the news .... yer up against it now @banjo

 

[jendan]

http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_349414_en.html

This is a paper about geo-engineering considering the effect of using aerosols to reduce warming and concluding that the process could potentially cause very serious problems in certain areas but of particular note is the excerpt below and note the last two words !

"Angus, who has recently joined the University of Exeter’s Mathematics department in the College of Mathematics, Engineering and Physical Sciences, said: “To reduce global temperatures enough to counter effects of global warming would require a massive injection of aerosol – the small particles that reflect sunlight back into space. This would be equivalent to a volcanic eruption five times the size of that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 every year."

How large was Krakotoa then,compared to that one,and what was its effect on the following 2 to 3 years climate?

 

[linga]

How large was Krakotoa then,compared to that one,and what was its effect on the following 2 to 3 years climate?

I believe Krakotoa dumped about two and a half times the amount of ash into the atmosphere than Pinatubo and they both reduced temperatures around the globe. Krakotoa more so.
But they both produced a relatively short lived effects and really only mask the relentless rise in global temperatures.

I should say that the paper I quoted was primarily concerned with "Weakened tropical circulation and reduced precipitation in response to geoengineering" to give it its title and not with global warming per se. The paper can be read using the link below

http://www.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs/Climatechange/Stratospherics/Ferraro weakend circulation.pdf

 

[wilber]

Thing is the climate chan


Yep. Oddly the fact that the climate has changed constantly, and would carry on doing so even if humanity had never existed doesn't seem to occur to them. Imagine the panic if the Thames froze solid for weeks on end like it did in the 1700's.

I dont quite know how you come to that conclusion. No one doubts the climate has changed before it's the rate at which it is happening that is the problem.

 

[Timmy_45]

I dont quite know how you come to that conclusion. No one doubts the climate has changed before it's the rate at which it is happening that is the problem.

Really, in that case relax, because the evidence is that climate has changed extremely rapidly in the recent past under natural processes. The last major ice age seems to have ended over a period as short as 50 years. Hence the massive flooding, breaking ice dams etc that left the world with some amazing landscapes. Closer to home the little ice age in the 17th century. Then of course we have the Great Storm of 1703, which inconveniently happened before industrialisation.

 

[banjo]

The BBC is currently pushing global warming again, idiots!
The spike in heat during 2017 was the huge mega earth facing explosion on the sun that I put on here months ago before the storms earlier in the year, we are in fact colder and the BBC chart actualy showed it, but they ignored it as usual.
Next week we are in for some very extreem snow and rain leading into Feb, so look out!
5 mins in he shows the uk weather aswel as Europe, it's not good.

 

[linga]

The BBC is currently pushing global warming again, idiots!
The spike in heat during 2017 was the huge mega earth facing explosion on the sun that I put on here months ago before the storms earlier in the year, we are in fact colder and the BBC chart actualy showed it, but they ignored it as usual.
Next week we are in for some very extreem snow and rain leading into Feb, so look out!
5 mins in he shows the uk weather aswel as Europe, it's not good.

Colder than what?
Care to put the whole chart up from 1850?

 

[Dave645]

 

[wilber]

Really, in that case relax, because the evidence is that climate has changed extremely rapidly in the recent past under natural processes. The last major ice age seems to have ended over a period as short as 50 years. Hence the massive flooding, breaking ice dams etc that left the world with some amazing landscapes. Closer to home the little ice age in the 17th century. Then of course we have the Great Storm of 1703, which inconveniently happened before industrialisation.

Could you provide data/evidence to back this up please.

 

[Tom_o_m]

Volcanos are rarely mentioned. Currently 4 eruptions are happening in South Asia. One in New Guinea, 2 in Indonesia and one in the
Philippines. These are getting very little media attention.
Will there be any effect if there is a major eruption. I think our effect on carbon levels could make very little difference in the long term, compared to natural events.

Based on what? What figures have you used to evidence this sweeping statement that human impact is negligible? A hunch?

 

[Tom_o_m]

Colder conditions are much more catastrophic than warmer conditions. Warmer conditions actually expand the area crops can be grown. Colder conditions take a lot of very productive land especially in the northern hemisphere out of production.

Erm, what about water levels? Whole countries would disappear. What about drought? What about wild fires? What about actually think this through...

 

[Timmy_45]

Could you provide data/evidence to back this up please.

Rapid de-glaciation, help yourself. https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_vis=1&q=rapid+quaternary+deglaciation&btnG=

The Great Storm of 1703 and the Little Ice Age. There are masses about both to be found on Google.

But of course you may choose to belief as the BBC apparently do that climate has only ever changed since 1850 ( which just happens to have followed a cold period ).

 

[Bury the Trash]

Rapid de-glaciation, help yourself. https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&as_vis=1&q=rapid+quaternary+deglaciation&btnG=

The Great Storm of 1703 and the Little Ice Age. There are masses about both to be found on Google.

But of course you may choose to belief as the BBC apparently do that climate has only ever changed since 1850 ( which just happens to have followed a cold period ).

See #1305 btw. ..... never mind the BBC ..........