Conquer Club

Internet fun time!!!

go to your respective internet search provider & type in " Warming Twice As Fast".. and scroll through the results..

it would seem that everywhere is warming twice as fast as everywhere else..

here are some search results:

- Canada warming at twice the global rate, climate report … ( the Guardian.com )
- The World is Warming Twice as Fast as the World - David … ( medium.com )
- The Arctic Is Warming Twice as Fast as the Rest of the Globe ( futurism.com )
- Mountains Are Warming Twice as Fast as the Rest of the … ( psmag.com )
- Report: Alaska warming twice as fast as global average ( ktuu.com )
- National Parks Warming Twice as Fast | The Weather Channel ( weather.com )
- New Report Warns Planet May Be Warming Twice as Fast as … ( planettruth.org )
- Deep Gulf of Maine has been warming twice as fast as the … ( bangordailynews.com )
- NASA - What's causing the poles to warm faster than the … ( nasa.com )
- Finland is warming twice as fast than the rest of the planet ( zmescience.com)
- North Sea warming twice as fast as world′s oceans | News … ( dw.com )
- The land is warming twice as fast as the oceans - Blogger ( robinwestenra.blogspot.com )
- Ireland warming twice as fast as rest of world, report finds ( theirishtimes.com )
- Russia warming '2.5 times quicker' than global average … ( news.yahoo.com )
- Northern Hemisphere Warming Twice as Fast as South - ENN ( enn.com )
-

sure seems like it...

in other news...

--> Blackfeet Reservation Rides Out Record-setting Fall Blizzard

Preliminary data show that 52 inches fell in Browning over the weekend

By PATRICK REILLY of the Missoulian // Oct 1, 2019

https://flatheadbeacon.com/2019/10/01/blackfeet-reservation-rides-record-setting-fall-blizzard/

We have had worse storms but I still did not love the portion of that one on our side of the border.

They definately got the brunt of it.

They also have a plastic shopping bag problem. You can tell you're getting within walking distance from Browning from the sudden increase in litter.

Nation Burger is pretty good, I love that place.

NomadPatriot wrote:in other news...

--> Blackfeet Reservation Rides Out Record-setting Fall Blizzard

Preliminary data show that 52 inches fell in Browning over the weekend

By PATRICK REILLY of the Missoulian // Oct 1, 2019

https://flatheadbeacon.com/2019/10/01/blackfeet-reservation-rides-record-setting-fall-blizzard/

Tons of snow? Flake news!

Did MADp notice that most of the warming occurs he cites) in the Northern Hemisphere? I wonder why? Could it be that more people are there and that there is more cars and more industrialization (and thus more use of fossil fuels) there?

NAW, MADp WOULD NEVER figure that out. He would prefer to post more drivel and stay on his course for Sophie's Tree by way of Obfuscation. He would claim that his posts signify something more than Sound and Fury.

“To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.”

― William Shakespeare, Macbeth

jonesthecurl wrote:

NomadPatriot wrote:in other news...

--> Blackfeet Reservation Rides Out Record-setting Fall Blizzard

Preliminary data show that 52 inches fell in Browning over the weekend

By PATRICK REILLY of the Missoulian // Oct 1, 2019

https://flatheadbeacon.com/2019/10/01/blackfeet-reservation-rides-record-setting-fall-blizzard/

Tons of snow? Flake news!

yes very Flake News..

+1 for Jonesy

And MADp continues to ignore data and instead posts worthless drivel about minutia.

I will gives Jones credit for a decent joke, however. Keep the FUN going, Jones.

JP4Fun

jusplay4fun wrote:Did MADp notice that most of the warming occurs he cites) in the Northern Hemisphere? I wonder why? Could it be that more people are there and that there is more cars and more industrialization (and thus more use of fossil fuels) there?

NAW, MADp WOULD NEVER figure that out.

I didn't realize GLOBAL WARMING only occurs in the northern hemisphere.....
I never would have figured that out...

jusplay4fun wrote:Did MADp notice that most of the warming occurs he cites in the Northern Hemisphere?

That's because it's only people in the Northern Hemisphere that are sensitive to warming.
In Australia, you don't get "Is it me or is this hellishly hot summer day slightly warmer than last year?"
Most people in the southern areas of Africa and South America have more pressing issues to worry about.
And most of the people in Antarctica live indoors all season long.

And those who live on small islands all over the world do not notice the impacts?

Islands impacted by Rising Sea Levels (3 articles and links)

#1
Rising seas give island nation a stark choice: relocate or elevate

Climate change means the low-lying Marshall Islands must consider drastic measures, including building new artificial islands.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/11/rising-seas-force-marshall-islands-relocate-elevate-artificial-islands/#close

#2
11 Islands That Will Vanish When Sea Levels Rise
https://www.businessinsider.com/islands-threatened-by-climate-change-2012-10
Randy Astaiza

Oct 12, 2012, 12:03 AM

As the climate warms, sea ice and the ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctic continue to melt. These and other factors lead to increases in sea level and further warming of the Earth. Climate change will manifest in many many ways, including changes in weather patterns and more extreme weather events.
For some, though, rising sea levels may leave them underwater, Michael Mann said in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month.

According to the EPA, global sea level has risen by eight inches since 1870. This change is already affecting many low lying islands that have had to adapt. Some populations are moving to higher areas, or are trying to buy land from other countries to migrate its citizens, and some have even developed new ways of farming to protect their agriculture.

#3
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/three-islands-disappeared-past-year-climate-change-blame-ncna1015316%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20June%209,%202019


Three islands disappeared in the past year. Is climate change to blame?
The same forces that sunk the remote islands could put
coastlines around the world at risk, scientists say.

Anote Tong can remember when Tebunginako, on the central Pacific island nation of Kiribati, was a thriving village.
But beginning in the 1970s, the tide started inching closer to the houses in the village. Over the years, as strong winds whipped up monster waves and climate change caused sea levels to rise, water inundated the island, overwhelming a seawall that had been built to protect the community.
Barely anything remains of the village today.
“It’s no longer there,” Tong said. “What we do have is a church sitting in the middle of the sea when the tide comes in.”

JP4Fun

tzor wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:Did MADp notice that most of the warming occurs he cites in the Northern Hemisphere?

That's because it's only people in the Northern Hemisphere that are sensitive to warming.
In Australia, you don't get "Is it me or is this hellishly hot summer day slightly warmer than last year?"
Most people in the southern areas of Africa and South America have more pressing issues to worry about.
And most of the people in Antarctica live indoors all season long.

jusplay4fun wrote:And those who live on small islands all over the world do not notice the impacts?

Islands impacted by Rising Sea Levels (3 articles and links)

#1
Rising seas give island nation a stark choice: relocate or elevate

Climate change means the low-lying Marshall Islands must consider drastic measures, including building new artificial islands.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/11/rising-seas-force-marshall-islands-relocate-elevate-artificial-islands/#close

#2
11 Islands That Will Vanish When Sea Levels Rise
https://www.businessinsider.com/islands-threatened-by-climate-change-2012-10
Randy Astaiza

Oct 12, 2012, 12:03 AM

As the climate warms, sea ice and the ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctic continue to melt. These and other factors lead to increases in sea level and further warming of the Earth. Climate change will manifest in many many ways, including changes in weather patterns and more extreme weather events.
For some, though, rising sea levels may leave them underwater, Michael Mann said in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month.

According to the EPA, global sea level has risen by eight inches since 1870. This change is already affecting many low lying islands that have had to adapt. Some populations are moving to higher areas, or are trying to buy land from other countries to migrate its citizens, and some have even developed new ways of farming to protect their agriculture.

#3
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/three-islands-disappeared-past-year-climate-change-blame-ncna1015316%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20June%209,%202019


Three islands disappeared in the past year. Is climate change to blame?
The same forces that sunk the remote islands could put
coastlines around the world at risk, scientists say.

Anote Tong can remember when Tebunginako, on the central Pacific island nation of Kiribati, was a thriving village.
But beginning in the 1970s, the tide started inching closer to the houses in the village. Over the years, as strong winds whipped up monster waves and climate change caused sea levels to rise, water inundated the island, overwhelming a seawall that had been built to protect the community.
Barely anything remains of the village today.
“It’s no longer there,” Tong said. “What we do have is a church sitting in the middle of the sea when the tide comes in.”

JP4Fun

tzor wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:Did MADp notice that most of the warming occurs he cites in the Northern Hemisphere?

That's because it's only people in the Northern Hemisphere that are sensitive to warming.
In Australia, you don't get "Is it me or is this hellishly hot summer day slightly warmer than last year?"
Most people in the southern areas of Africa and South America have more pressing issues to worry about.
And most of the people in Antarctica live indoors all season long.

this thread isn't about Rising Sea Levels. . .it's about temperature..

you posted this in the wrong thread ..

jusplay4fun wrote:And those who live on small islands all over the world do not notice the impacts?

They notice the impacts, just not the change to the temperature. And to be honest, temperature is the least of their problems. Most "small islands" are surrounded by coral reefs who have been impacted more by the acidification caused by CO2 absorption in the ocean waters than by the rise of atmospheric temperature. Damage to the reefs actually cause more damage to the island than small changes to the ocean levels because they mitigate large ocean waves whose crests are far greater than the increase due to melting ice.

What is causing acidification of oceans? Release of CO2 by burning Fossil Fuels. I have previously cited this evidence before from NASA. Yes, coral reef loss hurts these islands; so does the rising ocean levels.

QED.

Overall impacts are now becoming very significant, and not JUS in temperature changes, as you yourself have stated, Tzor.

Ocean Acidification

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.13,14 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

JP4Fun

tzor wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:And those who live on small islands all over the world do not notice the impacts?

They notice the impacts, just not the change to the temperature. And to be honest, temperature is the least of their problems. Most "small islands" are surrounded by coral reefs who have been impacted more by the acidification caused by CO2 absorption in the ocean waters than by the rise of atmospheric temperature. Damage to the reefs actually cause more damage to the island than small changes to the ocean levels because they mitigate large ocean waves whose crests are far greater than the increase due to melting ice.

not sure these anti-fossil fuel people want humanity to survive without burning fossil fuels to stay warm & eat...

Natural Gas Consumption overcasts Oil & Coal in every category...
https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels

there is no feasible way to create electricity in enough abundant supply to power the planet without using fossil fuels to create the electricity in the 1st place.

jusplay4fun wrote:What is causing acidification of oceans? Release of CO2 by burning Fossil Fuels. I have previously cited this evidence before from NASA. Yes, coral reef loss hurts these islands; so does the rising ocean levels.

But CO2 increases in the ocean is neither "global warming" nor "climate change."

However it's a lot more complicated than you might think. You see, in theory, all of this CO2 should be generating a mega ton of algae growth which in turn should dump a ton of oxygen into the atmosphere. But there has been a 40% decline in phytoplankton since 1950, particularly the Northern Hemisphere.

I'm tempted to say that phytoplankton could be so sensitive to acid that any increase would cause their collapse; in which case they should win a Darwin award for being killed by ones own food supply. Clearly climate change alarmists would insist on this. But my gut tells me that it has to do with all the other pollutants that ships passing the northern oceans are dumping into the waters. We already know that a significant amount of ocean plastic is coming from ocean going vessels, mostly from China. What about waste oil and other things those ships dump into the oceans constantly?

tzor wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:What is causing acidification of oceans? Release of CO2 by burning Fossil Fuels. I have previously cited this evidence before from NASA. Yes, coral reef loss hurts these islands; so does the rising ocean levels.

But CO2 increases in the ocean is neither "global warming" nor "climate change."

However it's a lot more complicated than you might think. You see, in theory, all of this CO2 should be generating a mega ton of algae growth which in turn should dump a ton of oxygen into the atmosphere. But there has been a 40% decline in phytoplankton since 1950, particularly the Northern Hemisphere.

I'm tempted to say that phytoplankton could be so sensitive to acid that any increase would cause their collapse; in which case they should win a Darwin award for being killed by ones own food supply. Clearly climate change alarmists would insist on this. But my gut tells me that it has to do with all the other pollutants that ships passing the northern oceans are dumping into the waters. We already know that a significant amount of ocean plastic is coming from ocean going vessels, mostly from China. What about waste oil and other things those ships dump into the oceans constantly?

Fukashima really helped out that scenario... gotta love that safe , clean Nuclear Energy... it's not like the entire Pacific Ocean is now Radioactive...

There is a direct link of CO2 to Global Warming. That is why CO2 is called a Greenhouse Gas. That is clearly established as the mechanism of the cause and is clearly established by the evidence, cited already. And Global Warming = Climate Change.

The decline of phytoplankton has not even been raised until now. The cause of decline of phytoplankton has not been established and ideas presented here are mere speculations. The link of CO2 to Global Warming is on solid ground. i am tempted to say that Tzor is wrong.

The link of acidification of oceans to increased levels of atmospheric CO2 is also clear. That issue has been largely ignore here in the CC Forum discussions I have been involved with, so that link is not as clearly established and supported by cited evidence. I am tempted to say that such evidence is available to make that argument cogent. Let's start with Chemistry and keep it simple.

Simple Chemistry: CO2 + H2O ---> H2CO3 (an acid) to keep this very simple*; more CO2 causes production of more acid.

(* I was about to use the word basic, but that would be obfuscation.)

a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.

The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.

A stronger greenhouse effect will warm the oceans and partially melt glaciers and other ice, increasing sea level. Ocean water also will expand if it warms, contributing further to sea level rise.

The amount of solar energy that Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly. It is therefore extremely unlikely that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

If the warming were caused by a more active Sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases

.


https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/ for the above quotes

tzor wrote:

jusplay4fun wrote:What is causing acidification of oceans? Release of CO2 by burning Fossil Fuels. I have previously cited this evidence before from NASA. Yes, coral reef loss hurts these islands; so does the rising ocean levels.

But CO2 increases in the ocean is neither "global warming" nor "climate change."

However it's a lot more complicated than you might think. You see, in theory, all of this CO2 should be generating a mega ton of algae growth which in turn should dump a ton of oxygen into the atmosphere. But there has been a 40% decline in phytoplankton since 1950, particularly the Northern Hemisphere.

I'm tempted to say that phytoplankton could be so sensitive to acid that any increase would cause their collapse; in which case they should win a Darwin award for being killed by ones own food supply. Clearly climate change alarmists would insist on this. But my gut tells me that it has to do with all the other pollutants that ships passing the northern oceans are dumping into the waters. We already know that a significant amount of ocean plastic is coming from ocean going vessels, mostly from China. What about waste oil and other things those ships dump into the oceans constantly?

jusplay4fun wrote:There is a direct link of CO2 to Global Warming. That is why CO2 is called a Greenhouse Gas.

No there is not and that's half of the problem. You can't even link up scientific arguments in a straight line.
CO2 is a Greenhouse Gas because it influences global temperatures.
(And not because they tend to pump it into greenhouses to help the plants grow.)
But there are a lot of "Greenhouse Gasses" and a lot of other factors that impact global temperatures.

By saying "direct link" you are effectively saying that all the other factors are insignificant, which would really tick off the people who protest methane from cows, it would annoy the people who decades ago managed to eliminate aerosols from the atmosphere which generally had a global cooling effect in the atmosphere (but also killed the ozone layer and thus were "bad") and so on and so forth.

By saying "direct link" you are effectively implying that a reduction of one would result in the reduction of the other. That too is not the case. It could result in a decrease in the current rate of increase (even if we had the pie in the sky notion that China and India would actually reduce CO2 emissions), but we are not going to get Global Cooling if the world went Cold Turkey tomorrow.

tzor wrote:By saying "direct link" you are effectively saying that all the other factors are insignificant,

I don't think that's true.

There can be a direct link between a cause and effect without ruling out other causes.

There's a direct link between lung cancer and smoking, but that doesn't mean that other causes of lung cancer are insignificant.

There's a direct link between education and income, but that doesn't prevent some really uneducated people from getting a high income.

I could go on, but I think that's enough to make the point. Cause and effect can be strongly linked while still allowing for other causes and other effects to play through.

Dukasaur wrote:There's a direct link between lung cancer and smoking, but that doesn't mean that other causes of lung cancer are insignificant.

First of all, it's not just "lung cancer." "Almost half the deaths (48.5%) from 12 different types of cancer combined are attributable to cigarette smoking, according to a study by researchers from the American Cancer Society and colleagues." SOURCE It's really a solid cause and effect correlation. It's really to collect the data points. It's really easy to model the results. It's solid science.

Yes there are other mitigating factors, including genetics, but in general, the quantity of smoking outweighs the mitigating factors. If we only had examples of people who worked in a bingo parlor once a month the direct link may not be possible to establish.

Global warming is not solid science. It is based on guesses and models that tend to never make any accurate predictions. More importantly, unlike cancer, we only have one "patient" to study. It's not like we can sample all the earth worlds with varying levels of CO2. If we had a few hundred earths that well died of global warming I could see an argument for saying it's a direct link. But we don't.

I think a better example is sleeping and weight loss. Yes you should get a good eight hours of sleep, but I don't see my scale go down when I don't have meetings that make me fall asleep at 11PM at night.

have you tried eating less? perhaps a bit of exercise?

riskllama wrote:have you tried eating less? perhaps a bit of exercise?

Case in point. How much you eat certainly has an effect, but it turns out that WHAT you eat is actually more important that the absolute quantity. Even WHEN you eat seems to have a stronger effect than how much you eat.

The link is very clear:

a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.

The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.

I think Tzor ignores the evidence. 95% is a very high probability. The amount of atmospheric CO2 above 400 ppm is also very compelling and cogent and further supports this idea. Again, Tzor ignores the evidence.

And 1,300 independent scientific experts very clearly agrees with this conclusion. I would argue most of these scientists knows more about science and the atmosphere and about climate that any of us who have posted here. We, as intelligent and thinking individuals, can clearly look at and examine the evidence and draw similar conclusions.

JP4Fun