[JuanP]

Personally, I would start at the beginning of the end which is now, being one that sounds the alarm.

The beginning of the end is how I refer to this historical moment for humanity. The end of the beginning is over. The transition from one to the other probably occurred a handful of decades ago, the moment hugely disruptive Global Warming and Climate Change became unavoidable.

[AdamB]

Ok, it does sound reasonable if you follow the corporate media and a large part of the alternative.

The scientific work by NIST is neither. Do realize that some of us don't do alternate realities.

To come back at 911, a line or even but a word in the book of life, the final chapter now.
A direct result of this ancient war between homo sapiens and say dark flyers, freaky inorganics.

Can I proof this? No but you can, just by shutting up your internal dialogue. Takes energy and discipline.

Good thing NIST can prove what they wrote, you know, math and science and stuff. I don't even know what whack-a-doodle idea is contained with "dark flyers", what are those, African Americans flying for the US Air Force?

And I've got no internal dialogue on this one, sorry WhiteFang, I don't hear voices in my head that you appear to indicate might afflict you.

[Doly]

To come back at 911, a line or even but a word in the book of life, the final chapter now.

I gather that was a very long-winded way of saying: Since the 911 hijackers were Saudis, and Saudi Arabia has the largest oilfields, there could be some peak oil connection there. And you think there is some sort of chance of getting some more information about the whole business by occult means.

Sorry, but the only thing my mind brings up with your whole tirade is the memory that Beatle Paul was an eyewitness to the event (which is neither here nor there and certainly not related to oil), because "Doggerland" reminds me of the really bad joke: "What do you call a dog with Wings? Linda McCartney."

[Whitefang]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVpB6AomQJE

That Guy in his own words, a scientist speaking out.
https://guymcpherson.com/
Be your own superhero! Be bold.

Thing is we are stuck in here, everything you have a word for, what you call the universe is not at all everything that exists.
The tool to challenge this world is to break your perception by silencing your inner dialogue that you have learned when growing up.
That voice you hear in your head, what you name thought is fake, a person that is not you.
That personality will be based on self pity and thus give rise to pseudo problems and feelings that drain your energy. The only thing you need to do is learn to save up personal power, all else will follow.

There is your way out, to grow, be aware and dethrone that internal idiot telling you what to do, who to be etcetera.
Turns out you have lived two lives simultaneously, a silent real one directly based on energetic facts and the social one, scientific or not, being able to read or not, it does not matter.
Tons of people have hinted at this in our history and before that with story telling....Atlantis.

Breaking your perception is very much like dying, to have a peak outside this bubble.
Abrupt CC will likely break up the perception of everybody.
You cannot keep yourself together without preparation, experience with the unknown.
The trick is to enlarge your perception within your lifespan.
Therefore you need to ditch your inner dialogue at will, fear will be your first enemy.
Be fearfull, yet go on, a feeling that will pass someday, sometime.

Maybe I am wrong, my mind, reason telling me this game is over, a terrible situation and yet......
Maybe some wonder will save us, at least a part of our species.
Magical luminous beings is what we are, in a luminous world.
It is a mystery, you are a mystery.
To bridge the terror and wonder of being alive.

[FamousDrScanlon]

It's catastrophic runaway climate change time kids. Earth get ready for yet another hot house mass extinction. The humans will not be around to usher in 2100.


Humans will be extinct in 100 years says eminent scientist

"(PhysOrg.com) -- Eminent Australian scientist Professor Frank Fenner, who helped to wipe out smallpox, predicts humans will probably be extinct within 100 years, because of overpopulation, environmental destruction and climate change.

Fenner, who is emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, said homo sapiens will not be able to survive the population explosion and “unbridled consumption,” and will become extinct, perhaps within a century, along with many other species."

https://phys.org/news/2010-06-humans-ex ... ntist.html

I generally concur with Frank < 100 years and the human's civilization won't last half that long with the evil US empire and home nation being among the first to go. C'mon, you can't even call the US a civilized nation anymore. Not for some time. If you look at US news it's just one act of barbarism and celebratory ignorance after another.....this while you burn and/or drown....


Unforgiving heat wave in Texas and Southern Plains to worsen next week
Some areas already seeing their hottest summer on record are about to get hotter, with highs climbing to 102 to 110 degrees


https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- ... ve-plains/


After hottest June on record, Houston is also on pace to set a July heat record

https://spacecityweather.com/after-hott ... at-record/

Climate change is making flooding worse: 3 reasons the world is seeing more record-breaking deluges and flash floods

https://theconversation.com/climate-cha ... ods-185364


The West just experienced an aspect of the climate crisis that scientists have warned of for years

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/16/us/south ... index.html

Every day now and it's going to get much much worse. Eventually the humans will no longer be able to repair and rebuild their smashed to hell infrastructure.

Oh and all this was predicted decades ago with the only thing they got wrong being the timing - FASTER THAN EXPECTED. Looks like those who made their bed will have to sleep in it after all.

[FamousDrScanlon]

As drought shrivels Lake Powell, millions face power crisis

With water levels falling ‘lower than thought possible’ at Glen Canyon dam, energy production could halt as soon as July 2023

Lake Powell, a reservoir created by flooding the Colorado River, in the 22nd year of a mega drought

Bob Martin, the deputy power manager at the Glen Canyon dam, gestures at the band of whitish, chalky residue running along the steep canyon walls towering above the Colorado River.

“That’s where the water level used to be,” says Martin. “It’s fallen lower than even the lowest end of the scale thought possible when the dam was constructed.”

The miles-long “bathtub ring,” bleached white by water over years, is a glaring symbol of the crisis unfolding at the Colorado River basin, which is suffering its driest period for more than 12 centuries.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... lectricity


How climate change is worsening drought

After the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season produced a record number of named storms and record-breaking wildfires ravaged the Western U.S., vulnerable communities are bracing for more. However, another extreme weather event linked to climate change has been quietly afflicting the U.S. year-round with no signs of letting up and at risk of becoming permanent – widespread drought.

Just as climate change has worsened many extreme weather events, it has also impacted droughts. The excess heat now trapped in the climate system draws out more moisture from soils, thereby worsening drought conditions. Reduced snowpack volumes, earlier snowmelt, and changing precipitation patterns – also linked to climate change – exacerbate the water stress induced by droughts. And for numerous individual events across the world, scientists have attributed the increased likelihood and severity of droughts to human-driven climate change.

https://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2021/0 ... g-drought/

....



Drought and Climate Change

Climate change increases the odds of worsening drought in many parts of the United States and the world. Regions such as the U.S. Southwest, where droughts are expected to get more frequent, intense, and longer lasting, are at particular risk.

How climate change contributes to drought:


Warmer temperatures enhance evaporation, which reduces surface water and dries out soils and vegetation. This makes periods with low precipitation drier than they would be in cooler conditions.

Climate change is also altering the timing of water availability.

Warmer winter temperatures are causing less precipitation to fall as snow in the Northern Hemisphere, including in key regions like the Sierra Nevada of California.

Decreased snowpack can be a problem, even if the total annual precipitation remains the same. This is because many water management systems rely on spring snowpack melt . Likewise, certain ecosystems also depend on snowmelt, which supplies cold water for species like salmon. Because snow acts as a reflective surface, decreasing snow area also increases surface temperatures, further exacerbating drought.

Some climate models find that warming increases precipitation variability, meaning there will be more periods of both extreme precipitation and drought. This creates the need for expanded water storage during drought years and increased risk of flooding and dam failure during periods of extreme precipitation.

Climate change is making certain regions drier

For example, the Southwestern United States has already seen a decrease in annual precipitation since the beginning of the 20th century, and that trend is expected to continue.

Estimates of future changes in seasonal or annual precipitation in a particular location are less certain than estimates of future warming, and are active areas of research. However, at the global scale, scientists are confident that relatively wet places, such as the tropics and higher latitudes, will get wetter, while relatively dry places in the subtropics (where most of the world’s deserts are located) will become drier.

In some areas, droughts can persist through a vicious cycle, in which very dry soils and diminished plant cover absorb more solar radiation and heat up, encouraging the formation of high pressure systems that further suppress rainfall, leading an already dry area to become even drier.

Recent U.S. droughts have been the most expansive in decades. At the peak of the 2012 drought, the most extensive drought since the 1930s, an astounding 81 percent of the contiguous United States was under at least abnormally dry conditions.

https://www.c2es.org/content/drought-an ... te-change/


Now you know.

[Outcast_Searcher]

It's catastrophic runaway climate change time kids. Earth get ready for yet another hot house mass extinction. The humans will not be around to usher in 2100.

Let's avoid calling doom until there is a FIRM scientific consensus, vs. one scientist who has an opinion.

The future is HARD to predict.

Like for example, a new CO2 battery idea looking promising which doesn't need any expensive metals, etc. and actually removes CO2 from the atmosphere while providing significant energy as a backup source, including for wind and solar, per the well regarded Electric Viking on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1AM6SOmd2E

There is both good and bad news in the world, re even climate change.

[Tanada]

A big part of me wishes climate change were a hoax, because if it were a hoax we could keep burning cheap coal for another couple centuries and live a cheap high energy lifestyle.

Unfortunately the dozens of climate studies I have read over say it isn't a hoax and I for one believe the scientific method is valid for studying the physical universe and understanding it.

[mousepad]

Unfortunately the dozens of climate studies I have read over say it isn't a hoax.

I think the discussion should be more around the consequences. It is still not clear to me what global warming means.
I little hotter? A few more storms? Growing moves a little further north? It easy to claim it's going to be 2K hotter on average. But consequences are hard to grasp for me.

[Plantagenet]

Unfortunately the dozens of climate studies I have read over say it isn't a hoax.

I think the discussion should be more around the consequences. It is still not clear to me what global warming means.
I little hotter? A few more storms? Growing moves a little further north? It easy to claim it's going to be 2K hotter on average. But consequences are hard to grasp for me.

Just watch the news. You can see the news stories detailing the consequences of the little bit of global warming the planet has had so far just about every day.

For instance, just this week London declared its first ever "heat emergency" and the next day Paris also declared a heat emergency.



The news is reporting that London and southern England are set to hit all time temperature records this week of over 100 degrees. Simultaneously, heat and drought are causing forest fires in Portugal, Spain, France and Italy.

And these high temperatures are causing thousands of deaths in western Europe --- people are dying because they don't have air conditioning and buildings don't have air conditioning because its never been this hot before.

And in five years we'll be looking back at this as being the good old days back before it got REALLY hot.

Cheers!

[mousepad]

And these high temperatures are causing thousands of deaths in western Europe

Yes, 1000s of death out of a population of 800M. It doesn't seem that problematic.
And once the forest is burned, some other vegetation (or desert) takes over. It doesn't seem that problematic, either.

With peakoil it is easy for me to understand the catastrophic consequences for humans. With GW, not so much. Can you explain in more details what the consequences are and why they are such a problem?

[jedrider]

And these high temperatures are causing thousands of deaths in western Europe

Yes, 1000s of death out of a population of 800M. It doesn't seem that problematic.
And once the forest is burned, some other vegetation (or desert) takes over. It doesn't seem that problematic, either.

With peakoil it is easy for me to understand the catastrophic consequences for humans. With GW, not so much. Can you explain in more details what the consequences are and why they are such a problem?

1,000 deaths is nothing really. That's just the canary in the coal mine, but a canary nevertheless.

[JuanP]

And these high temperatures are causing thousands of deaths in western Europe

Yes, 1000s of death out of a population of 800M. It doesn't seem that problematic.
And once the forest is burned, some other vegetation (or desert) takes over. It doesn't seem that problematic, either.

With peakoil it is easy for me to understand the catastrophic consequences for humans. With GW, not so much. Can you explain in more details what the consequences are and why they are such a problem?

Well, mousepad, I have had you on my ignore list for a long time now, but every now and then somebody quotes one of your comments and I glance through it, like I did with this one. [b]Why would anybody on this Earth bother to explain anything to you in more detail when you obviously lack the intellectual capacity to understand the explanation?[/b]

[Doly]

Why would anybody on this Earth bother to explain anything to you in more detail when you obviously lack the intellectual capacity to understand the explanation?

Because there are always other people lurking? Because maybe bots can be trained? Because the particular game you are playing in this forum includes explaining things to mousepad? Because you miss the old forum so much that you are willing to reply to pretty much anyone that says anything that you feel able to reply coherently to?
All those sound like possible reasons to me.

[mousepad]

I have had you on my ignore list for a long time now,

Thanks Juanito. I take that as a compliment.

obviously lack the intellectual capacity

try me, Juanito, try me.

[JuanP]

Why would anybody on this Earth bother to explain anything to you in more detail when you obviously lack the intellectual capacity to understand the explanation?

Because there are always other people lurking? Because maybe bots can be trained? Because the particular game you are playing in this forum includes explaining things to mousepad? Because you miss the old forum so much that you are willing to reply to pretty much anyone that says anything that you feel able to reply coherently to?
All those sound like possible reasons to me.

Knock yourself out!

[Tanada]

And these high temperatures are causing thousands of deaths in western Europe

Yes, 1000s of death out of a population of 800M. It doesn't seem that problematic.
And once the forest is burned, some other vegetation (or desert) takes over. It doesn't seem that problematic, either.

With peakoil it is easy for me to understand the catastrophic consequences for humans. With GW, not so much. Can you explain in more details what the consequences are and why they are such a problem?

In one way you are totally correct, the climate will change and the natural ecosystem will change right along with it. There was a time when the northern half of South Dakota and most of North Dakota was what most people think of as a great sandy desert. Huge sand dunes roamed back and forth over the landscape preventing even desert capable plants from taking root and reproducing and humpless American camels roamed free from one oasis to the next. Then the climate shifted just a little and grass was able to take root and stabilize the soil and humans never noticed until the mid 19th century when the farmers plowing the Sand Hills region managed to break through the sod into the desert sands below.

There are two other distinct sand hill regions in the USA today, a good size sandy desert in Colorado where the mountain rain shadow keeps rain from falling, and the eastern coastline of Lake Michigan where the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore and Warren Dunes State Park both sit in Michigan. Fortunately even if the Great Lakes do eventually dry up or substantially shrink the process will be slower than people expect because the bodies of water are so very massive.

On the other side of the coin back about 27,000 ybp the region around Arizona and New Mexico got regular rain storms and were frequently cloudy because the westerly winds of the more recent era were tilted much more into a south westerly direction of origin and the moisture was carried north to the east side of the Rockies in California. Baja California and the Sonoran Desert that take up a big chunk of Northern Mexico and Arizona was a lush southern pine forest region and if the First Peoples had managed to get to the continent early enough they would have found it much like modern Georgia climate wise with palm trees lining the rivers and lob-lolly pines further inland. Clouds mean the nights do not cool down nearly as much, water vapor is a greenhouse gas and as the air cools you get warm fogs and heavy dews' which also benefit tropical plants.

In the eastern states the area from Kentucky south to the Gulf coast was little changed because the weather patterns that support the ecosystem there were little changed. California on the other hand had a great many "ark storms" where rain laden clouds would get trapped between the Rockies and the Sierra Nevada and Coastal Range mountains and dump flooding rains into the central valley. Back then it didn't need irrigation, most of it was a big natural swamp because the Sacramento River couldn't drain all the rain out through the Golden Gate fast enough.

North Africa could go two ways, if the warming is limited the north Africa coast will shift from the current pleasant climate to dry desert as will Spain and Italy but the southern edge of the Sahara Desert will shift north equally so that ancient Lake Chad will refill from the increased rainfall in that region. If the warming goes all the way yo northern hothouse the entire Sahara will return to being tropical forest as it once was and the moisture from the Med sea will keep Europe mostly wet enough for common crop farming.

[Whitefang]

It's catastrophic runaway climate change time kids. Earth get ready for yet another hot house mass extinction. The humans will not be around to usher in 2100.

Let's avoid calling doom until there is a FIRM scientific consensus, vs. one scientist who has an opinion.

The future is HARD to predict.

Like for example, a new CO2 battery idea looking promising which doesn't need any expensive metals, etc. and actually removes CO2 from the atmosphere while providing significant energy as a backup source, including for wind and solar, per the well regarded Electric Viking on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1AM6SOmd2E

There is both good and bad news in the world, re even climate change.

https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/

GENEVA, Aug 9 – Scientists are observing changes in the Earth’s climate in every region and across the whole climate system, according to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report, released today. Many of the changes observed in the climate are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years, and some of the changes already set in motion—such as continued sea level rise—are irreversible over hundreds to thousands of years.

https://guymcpherson.com/
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/

https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/pre-industrial.html

The Paris Agreement called for a special report by the IPCC on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. In the report, the IPCC first defines pre-industrial as "the multi-century period prior to the onset of large-scale industrial activity around 1750". Yet, the IPCC then proceeds to use the period 1850-1900 to "approximate" pre-industrial. This raises the questions, has the IPCC been downplaying the temperature rise and is this continuing?

Even the many scientists working on IPCC reports reached a consensus on irreversible abrupt climate change, yet they hold on to the magic of being saved by the bell, lowering our carbon footprint by means of war, corona on humanity.
Result is the loss of our dirty shield and the acceleration of the process to a hothouse, no ice on mother Earth. Like abruptly closing agriculture and then hoping we slaves can and will all eat bugs, a hunger games society.

A collective suicide that started prehistory, before the flood, the biblical one.
Mass psychosis leading to insanity now turned against us, mass extinction by consumption.
That is why I only see one way out, break your perception and see for yourself.

The period from 1750 to the early 1900s
Another 0.3°C could be added for the rise for the period from 1750 to the early 1900s. The fact that humans did cause substantial warming between 1800 and 1900 is illustrated by the image on the right, from a post by Michael Mann, who adds that some 0.3°C greenhouse warming had already taken place between the year 1800 and the year 1900.

Rise from 1520 to 1750
That still leaves the rise over the period from 1520 to 1750, for which another 0.2°C could be added. Remember that the IPCC defines the pre-industrial baseline as the multi-century period prior to 1750, i.e. as a period, and not as the endpoint of this period. So, how many centuries did the pre-industrial period cover? How much is multi? Is it 8, or perhaps 18? Merely going back about 2.3 centuries from 1750 to 1520 wouldn't do justice to the word 'multi' in multi-century. So, how much further should we go back than 1520?

3480 BC to 1520
As discussed at the top, the rise from 3480 BC to 1520 is 0.29°C. The most significant marker in the pre-industrial period is the year 3480 BC, since emissions by people from that time have been higher than the amount to negate the natural trend for the temperature to fall. From 3480 BC, agricultural forcing gets stronger than the natural fall in temperature that would have eventuated in the absence of modern agriculture. This makes the year 3480 BC most significant as a climate marker, so it makes sense to regard this as the base year for pre-industrial.

Total rise from pre-industrial to 2020
Adding up the different elements thus gives a total rise from pre-industrial that could be as high as 1.30°C + 0.1°C + 0.1°C + 0.3°C + 0.2°C + 0.29°C = 2.29°C.
Full impact of human emissions and the rise to come

This 2.29°C is the observed temperature rise from pre-industrial (∆O), i.e. when extending pre-industrial back to 3480 BC. This ∆O is only part of the full impact of human activities. Without emissions by humans, temperatures would have fallen since 3480 BC, and they would have kept falling in line with the natural fall in Summer insolation on the Northern Hemisphere. The heating needed to negate or overcome this natural fall from 3480 BC could be symbolized as ∆N. Accordingly, the full heating impact due to human emissions from pre-industrial is ∆E = ∆O + ∆N.

Part of global warming caused by people is currently masked (∆M) due to aerosols, mainly sulfates from burning of fossil fuel. There's no doubt that such emissions should be reduced, but the point is that the temperature rise looks set to increase substantially as this masking effect disappears. The unmasked rise (∆U) is the temperature rise that we face as the necessary transition to clean, renewable energy take place, and it is the sum of the observed rise and the rise that is currently masked, i.e. ∆U = ∆O + ∆M.

The temperature rise that occurs as sulfate cooling falls away is only part of the rise to come in the relatively near future (∆F). Black carbon aerosols have a net heating effect and they could increase as people start burning more wood and as forest fires increase. The impact of CO₂ emissions reaches its peak only a decade after emission. Some changes can over time become more manifest, such as decline of the snow and ice cover. There could be non-linear changes due to feedbacks that are only now starting to kick in. Each of these elements can contribute significantly to the future temperature rise (∆F). In other words, ∆O + ∆F may well exceed 3°C soon.

Conclusion

For thousands of years, people have been causing emissions that made the temperature rise. From 3480 BC, the forcing of these emissions became even stronger than the natural trend for temperatures to come down, in line with decreasing Summer insolation on the Northern Hemisphere. The term "natural" can be ambiguous, as forest fires and albedo changes are often regarded as "natural forcing", but of course the deliberate acts of peat burning and cutting down trees can hardly be regarded as 'natural'.

Anyway, the net effect was that the temperature started to rise from 3480 BC, so it makes sense to calculate temperature anomalies versus that year as pre-industrial base The rise from pre-industrial to 2020 could thus be as much as 2.29°C, which would mean that the thresholds set at the Paris Agreement have already been crossed and the rise from pre-industrial may well exceed 3°C soon, in turn effectively making 3°C the (new) threshold that should not be crossed, the more so since humans will likely go extinct with a 3°C rise.

[AdamB]

https://guymcpherson.com/
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/

I mean really, two turds in the punchbowl at the same time? Why don't you just slip another one in there about the alien energy weapons that brought down the Twin Towers while you are at it?

[Doly]

Like abruptly closing agriculture and then hoping we slaves can and will all eat bugs, a hunger games society.

Agriculture isn't going to close abruptly. It make take one harsh crop season for some idiots at the top to realise that food isn't optional, but once they get it, they aren't going to forget, and those that don't get it aren't going to stay at the top. Some staple crops can be grown rather intensively, so feeding everyone is quite possible.

That is why I only see one way out, break your perception and see for yourself.

Some people see some things, other people see other things. There are always people that see things correctly enough to survive the times they live in. As for myself, I don't think I was ever wrong about anything major, but I can only prove it by staying alive. It's a lot of other people who are wrong, but that's mostly their problem. I'm happy to explain things to people, but if they don't want to listen, they don't want to listen.